Christology of the Old Testament: And a Commentary on the Messianic Predictions Volume Ii Part 13

Here, too, the ant.i.thesis to the worldly conqueror who, without mercy, "Cometh upon princes as mortar, and as a potter treadeth the clay"

(chap. xli. 25), whose mind is bent only upon destroying and cutting off nations not a few (chap. x. 7), who does not give rest until he has fully cast down to the ground the broken power. The Servant of G.o.d, far from breaking the bent reed, shall, on the contrary--this is the positive opposed to the negative--care for, and a.s.sist the wretched with tender love. Just thereby does He accomplish the object of His efforts. The confirmation of the character here a.s.signed to Christ is, by Matthew, found in His healing the sick (?a? ??e??pe?se? a?t???

p??ta?, ver. 15), as prefiguring all that which He, who has declared the object of His coming to be to seek all that which was lost, did and accomplished, in general, for the misery of the human race. There cannot be any doubt that the bent reed and the dimly burning wick are figurative designations [Pg 215] of those who, beaten down by sufferings, feel themselves to be poor and miserable. These the weary and heavy laden, the Servant of G.o.d will not drive to despair by severity, but comfort and refresh by tender love. His conduct towards them is that of a Saviour. As a bent reed, ??? ????, Pharaoh appears on account of his broken power, in chap. x.x.xvi. 6, and in chap. lviii. 6, the ?????? are the oppressed. The fact, that the _wick_ dimly burning and near to being extinguished is an image of exhausted strength, is shown by chap. xliii. 17, where, in reference to the Egyptians carried away by the judgment, it is said: "They are extinct, they are quenched like a wick." In the parallel pa.s.sages which treat of the Servant of G.o.d, the _weary_ in chap. l. 4, and the _broken-hearted_ in chap. lxi.

1, correspond to it. Elsewhere, too, the wretched appear as objects of the loving providence of the Saviour. Thus, in chap. xi. 4: "And He judges in righteousness the low;" in Ps. lxxii. 4: "He shall judge the poor of the people; He shall save the children of the needy, and shall break in pieces the oppressor;" and in vers. 12-14: "For He delivereth the needy when he crieth, and the miserable, and him that hath no deliverer. From oppression and violence He delivereth their soul, and precious is their blood in His sight." Just as, in the pa.s.sage before us, the bringing forth of right appears as a consequence of the loving providence for the bent reed, and the dimly burning wick, so in that Psalm, the great fact: "And all the kings wors.h.i.+p Him, and all the nations serve Him," is traced back to the tender love with which He cares for and helps the poor and needy. In the Sermon on the Mount, the beat.i.tude of the pt????, Matt. v. 3, of the pe?????te?, ver. 4, and in Matt. xi. 28, the invitation of the ??p???te? ?a? pef??t?s????, exactly correspond. The wicked and unG.o.dly, upon whom the judgments of G.o.d have been inflicted, are not included, because they are not wretched in the full sense; for they harden themselves against the suffering, or seek to divert themselves in it; they do not take it fully to heart. The t? p?e?at?, "in their consciousness," which in Matthew is added to the simple pt????, which alone we find in Luke, must be understood as a matter of course. He only is poor in the full sense, who feels and takes to heart his poverty. According to an interpretation widely spread, repenting sinners are designated [Pg 216]

by the bent reed, and dimly burning wick. Thus Luther writes: "That means that the wounded conscience, those who are terrified at the sight of their sins, the weak in life and faith are not cast away by Him, are not oppressed and condemned, but that He cares for them, tends and nurses them, makes them whole and embraces them with love." But repenting sinners do not here come into consideration _per se_, but only as one species of the wretched, inasmuch as, according to Luther's expression, truly to feel sin is a torment beyond all torments.--The last words: "In truth shall He bring forth right" again take up the close of ver. 1, after the means have been stated, in the intervening words, by which He is to bring about the result. The ???? must not be translated: "For truth" (LXX: e?? ????e?a?); for there is a thorough difference between ? and ??; the former does not, like the latter, designate the motion towards some object, but is rather, here also, a preposition signifying "belonging to;" hence ???? means "belonging to truth," "in a true manner," "in truth." By every other mode of dealing, right would be established _in appearance_ and _outwardly_ only.

Matthew renders it: ??? ?? ????? e?? ????? t?? ???s??, "until He has led right to victory." By the addition of ??? he intimates, that the last words state the result which is brought about by the conduct of the Servant of G.o.d described in the preceding words. ??? ????? is a free translation of ????; ???s?? is "right," as in chap. xxiii.

23.--How objectionable and untenable all the non-Messianic explanations are, appears very clearly in this verse. If Israel were the Servant of G.o.d, then the _Gentile world_ must be represented by the bent reed and dimly burning wick. But in that case, we must have recourse to such arbitrary interpretations as, _e.g._, that given by _Koster_: "The weak faith and imperfect knowledge of the Gentiles." No weak faith, no imperfect knowledge, however, is spoken of; but the Servant of G.o.d appears as a Saviour of the poor and afflicted, of those broken by sufferings. Those who, by the Servant of G.o.d, understand the better portion of the people, or the prophetic order, speak of "the meek spirit of the mode of teaching, which does not by any means altogether crush the sinner already brought low, but, in a gentle, affectionate manner, raises him up," (_Umbreit_); or say with _k.n.o.bel_: "These poor and afflicted He does not [Pg 217] humble still more by hard, depressing _words_, but _speaks_ to them in a comforting and encouraging way, raising them up and strengthening them." But in this explanation everything is, without reason, drawn into the territory of speech, while Matthew rightly sees, in the healing of the sick by Christ, a confirmation by deeds of the prophecy before us. In chap.

lxi., also, the Servant of G.o.d does not only bring glad tidings, but _creates_, at the same time, the blessings announced. According to chap. lxi. 3, He gives to them that mourn in Zion beauty for ashes, joy for mourning, garment of praise for a weak (???) spirit. Verse 6 of the chapter before us most clearly indicates how little we are allowed to limit ourselves to mere speaking; for, according to that verse, the Servant of G.o.d is himself the covenant of the people, and the light of the Gentiles, and according to ver. 7, He opens the eyes of the blind, &c.

Ver. 4. "_He shall not fail nor run away until He shall have founded right in the earth, and for His law the isles shall wait._"

On: "He shall not fail," properly, "He shall not become dim," comp.

Deut. x.x.xiv. 7, where it is said of Moses, the servant of G.o.d: "His eye had not become dim, nor had his strength fled." The ?? ???? "He shall not run away" (properly, "He shall not _run_") is qualified and fixed by the parallelism with ?? ???? "He shall not fail." ??? in other pa.s.sages also, several times receives, by the context, the qualified signification "to run away," "to take to flight," "to flee;" comp.

Judges viii. 21; Jer. xlix. 19. The words: "He shall not fail nor run away" imply that, in the carrying out of His vocation, the Servant of G.o.d shall meet with powerful _obstacles_, with obstinate _enemies_, and shall have to endure severe sufferings. That which is here merely hinted at, is carried out and detailed in chap. xlix., l., liii. How near He was to failing and running away (David, too, was obliged to say: "Oh! that I had wings like a dove, then would I fly away and be at rest") is seen from His utterance in Matt. xvii. 17: ? ?e?e?

?p?st?? ?a? d?est?a???, ??? p?te ?s?a? e?' ???; ??? p?te ?????a?

???.--According to the current opinion, ???? is here a.s.sumed to be the Future of ???, for ?????, and that in the appropriate signification: "He shall not be broken." (Thus it was probably [Pg 218] viewed by the Chaldean Paraphrast who renders ?? ???? _non laborabit_; by the LXX., who translate ?? ??a??s?seta?, while _Aquila_ and _Symmachus_, according to the account of _Jerome_, render, _non curret_, thus following the derivation from ???). As ???? points back to ??? in the preceding verse, so, in that case ???? would point back to ???? "He shall not break that which is bent, nor quench that which is dimly burning; but neither shall He himself be broken or quenched." But this explanation is opposed by the circ.u.mstance, that we must make up our minds to admit a double anomaly. The territories of the two verbs ???

and ??? are everywhere else kept distinct, and the former everywhere else means "to break," and not "to be broken." In the only pa.s.sage, Eccl. xii. 6, brought forward in support of this irregularity, ??? "to run," "to flee away," being in parallelism with ???? "to be removed,"

is quite appropriate; just as in the second clause of that verse ???

"to be crushed," is in parallelism with ???? "to be broken."--????

are, in the _usus loquendi_ of Isaiah, not so much the real islands, as rather the islands in the sea of the world, the countries and kingdoms; compare remarks on Rev. vi. 14, and Ps. xcvii. 1 (second Edition). The _law_ for which the islands wait is not so much a ready-made code of laws, as the single decisions of the living Lawgiver, which the Gentiles, with anxious desire, shall receive as their rule in all circ.u.mstances, after they have spontaneously submitted to the dominion of the Servant of G.o.d, having been attracted by His loving dispensations. Several unphilologically translate: "for His _doctrine_," which does not even give a good sense, for it is not the doctrine which is waited for; its value is known only after it has been preached. The Servant of G.o.d appears here as the spiritual Ruler of the nations; and this He becomes by being, in the fullest sense, the Servant of G.o.d, so that His will is not different from the will of G.o.d, nor ???? from that of G.o.d, just as, in a lower territory, even Asaph speaks the bold word: "Hear, my people, my law." "The singer comes forth as one who has full authority, the 'Seer' and 'Prophet' utter _laws_ which leave no alternative between Salvation and destruction."

Parallel is chap. ii. 3, 4, where the nations go up to Zion, in order there to seek laws for the regulation of their practical conduct, and according to which the Lord _judges_ among the nations, and the law goes forth [Pg 219] out of Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. The difference is this only,--that, in that pa.s.sage, the matter is traced back immediately to G.o.d, while here, the Servant of G.o.d is mentioned as the Mediator between Him and the Gentiles. But we must keep in mind that, for chap. ii. also, the parallel pa.s.sages in chap. iv., ix., xi., furnish the supplement. We must, farther, compare also chap. li. 5: "My righteousness is near, my salvation goes forth, _mine arms shall judge the nations_, the isles shall wait for me, and on mine arm shall they hope." The _judging_ in that pa.s.sage does not mean divine punitive judgments; but it is rather thereby intimated that all the nations shall recognise the Lord as their King, to whose government they willingly submit, and with whom they seek the decision of their disputes. Matthew purposely changes it into: "And in _His name_ shall the Gentiles trust." The desire for the commands of the Lord is an effect of the love of His _name_, _i.e._, of Him who is glorified by His deeds. For the name is the product of deeds,--here especially of those designated in ver. 2 and 3. The commands are desired and longed for, only because the person is beloved on account of His deeds. Matthew has only distinctly brought out that which, in the original text, is intimated by the connection with the preceding verses. In consequence of this, His quiet, just, and merciful dispensation, the isles shall wait for His law.

In ver. 5-7 the Lord addresses His Servant, and promises Him that, by His omnipotence, the great work for which He has called Him, shall be carried out and accomplished, viz., that the covenant relation to Israel shall be fully realized, and the darkness of the Gentile world shall be changed into light.

Ver. 5. "_Thus saith G.o.d the Lord, who createth the heavens and stretcheth them out; who spreadeth forth the earth and that which cometh out of it; who giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk thereon._"

The Prophet directs attention to the omnipotence of G.o.d, in order to give a firm support to faith in the promise which exceeds all human conception. It is by this that the acc.u.mulation of the predicates is to be accounted for. He who fully realizes what a great thing it is to bring an apostate world back to G.o.d, to that G.o.d who has become a stranger to it, [Pg 220] will surely not explain this acc.u.mulation by a "disposition, on the part of the Prophet, to diffuseness."

Ver. 6. "_I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and I will seize thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for the covenant of the people and, for the Light of the Gentiles._"

It is so obvious that ???? must be translated by "in righteousness,"

that the explanations which disagree with it do not deserve to be even mentioned. The mission of the Servant of G.o.d has its root in the divine _righteousness_, which gives to every one his due,--to the covenant-people, salvation. Even apart from the promise, the appearance of Christ rests on the righteousness of G.o.d. For it is in opposition to the nature and character of a people of G.o.d to be, for any length of time, in misery, and shut up to one corner of the earth. That which is to be accomplished for Israel by the Servant of G.o.d, forms, in the sequel, the first subject of discourse. But even that which He affords to the _Gentiles_ is, at the same time, given to Israel, inasmuch as it is one of their prerogatives that salvation for the Gentiles should go forth from them. As, here, the mission of the Servant of G.o.d, so, in chap. xlv. 13, the appearance of the lower deliverer appears as the work of divine righteousness: "I have raised him up in righteousness, and all his ways I will make straight." Similarly also in chap. xli. 2: "Who raised up from the East him whom righteousness calls wherever he goes," _i.e._, him, all whose steps are determined by G.o.d's righteousness, who, in all his undertakings, is guided by it.--The seizing by the hand, the keeping, &c., are the consequence of His being called, and are equivalent to: just because I have called him, therefore will I, &c. Luther remarks: "Namely, for this reason, that Satan and the world, with all their might and wisdom, will _resist_ thy work." In the words: "For the Covenant of the people, and for the Light of the Gentiles," ?? and ???? form an ant.i.thesis. The absence of the article shows that we ought properly to translate: "For a Covenant of a people, for a Light of Gentiles." It is thus, in the first instance, only said that the Servant of G.o.d should be the personal covenant for a people; but _what_ people that should be, cannot admit of a moment's doubt. To Israel, as such, the name of the _people_ pre-eminently belongs. Israel, in preference to all others, is called ?? (compare _Gesenius'_ [Pg 221] Thesaurus _s.v._ ???), because it is only the people of G.o.d that is a people in the full sense, connected by an internal unity; the Gentiles are ?? ??, _non-people_, according to Deut. x.x.xii. 21, because they lack the only real tie of unity. But what is still more decisive is the mention of the _Covenant_. The covenant can belong to the covenant-people only, ?? a? d?a???a?, Rom. ix.

4,--the old, no less than the new one. The covenant with Abraham is an everlasting covenant of absolute exclusiveness, Gen. xvii. 7. The Servant of G.o.d is called the personal and embodied Covenant, because in His appearance the covenant made with Israel is to find its full truth; and every thing implied in the very idea of a covenant, all the promises flowing from this idea, are to be in Him, Yea and Amen. The Servant of G.o.d is here called the Covenant of Israel, just in the same manner as in Mic. v. 4 (comp. Ephes. ii. 14), it is said of Him: "This (man) is Peace," because in Him, peace, as it were, represents itself personally;--just as in chap. xlix. 6, He is called the _Salvation_ of G.o.d, because this salvation becomes personal in Him, the Saviour,--just as in Gen. xvii. 10, 13, circ.u.mcision is called a covenant, as being the embodied covenant,--just as in Luke xxii. 20, the cup, the blood of Christ, is called the New Covenant, because in it it has its root. The explanation: Mediator of the covenant, d?a????? ??????, is meagre, and weakens the meaning. The circ.u.mstance that the Servant of G.o.d is, without farther qualification, called the Covenant of the people, shows that He stands in a different relation to the covenant from that of Moses, to whom the name of the _Mediator_ of the covenant does not the less belong than to Him. From Jer. x.x.xi. 31, we learn which are the blessings and gifts which the Servant of G.o.d is to bestow, and by which He represents himself as the personal Covenant. They are concentrated in the closest connection to be established by Him between G.o.d and His people: "I will be their G.o.d, and they shall be my people." It is only in the New Covenant, described in that pa.s.sage of Jeremiah, that the Old Covenant attains to its truth. The second destination of the Servant of G.o.d, which, according to the context, here comes into special consideration, is, to be _the Light of the Gentiles_. By the realization of this destination, an important feature in [Pg 222] the former was, at the same time, realized. For it formed part of the promises of the covenant with Israel that, from the midst of them, salvation for all the families of the earth should go forth, as our Saviour says: ? s?t???a ?? t?? ???da??? ?st?? Light is here, according to the common _usus loquendi_ of Scripture, a figurative designation of _salvation_. In the parallel pa.s.sage, chap. xlix. 6, light is at once explained by salvation. The designation proceeds upon the supposition that the Gentiles, not less than Israel, (comp. chap. ix. 1 [2]) shall, until the appearance of the Servant of G.o.d, sit in darkness and in the shadow of death,--that they are in misery, although, in some instances, it may be a _brilliant_ misery. The following verse farther carries out and declares what is implied in the promise: "Light of the Gentiles." Parallel is chap. lx. 3: "And the heathen walk in thy (Zion's) light"--they become partakers of the salvation which s.h.i.+nes for Zion--"and kings in the brightness which riseth to thee."--The supporters of that opinion, which understands Israel by the Servant of G.o.d, are in no small difficulty regarding this verse, and cannot even agree as to the means of escape from that difficulty. Several a.s.sume that ?? is used collectively, and refer it to the Gentile nations. But opposed to this explanation is the evident ant.i.thesis of ?? and ????; and it is entirely overthrown by the parallel pa.s.sage in chap. xlix.

Scripture knows nothing of a covenant with the Gentiles. According to the view of the Old, as well as of the New Testament, the Gentiles are received into the communion of the covenant with Israel. Others (_Hitzig_, _Ewald_) explain: "covenant-people, _i.e._, a mediatorial, connecting people, a bond of union between G.o.d and the nations." But the pa.s.sage, chap. xlix. 8, is most decidedly opposed to this.

_Farther_--The parallelism with ??? ???? shows that ???? ?? is the _status constructus_. But _fdus alicujus_, is, according to the remark of _Gesenius_, _fdus c.u.m aliquo sancitum_. Thus in Lev. xxvi. 45, the covenant of the ancestors is the covenant entered into with the ancestors; Deut. iv. 31; Lev. xxvi. 42 (the covenant of Jacob, the covenant of Isaac, &c.) According to _k.n.o.bel_: "the true theocrats are to become a covenant of the people, the restorers of the Israelitish Theocracy, they themselves having connection and unity by faithfully holding fast by Jehovah, and by representing His cause." This explanation, [Pg 223] also, is opposed to the _usus loquendi_, according to which "covenant of the people" can have the sense only of "covenant with the people," not a covenant among the people. And, _farther_, the parallel pa.s.sage in chap. xlix. 8 is opposed to this interpretation also, inasmuch as, in that pa.s.sage, the Servant of the Lord is called ???? ??, not on account of what He is in himself, but on account of the influence which He exercises upon others, upon the whole of the people: "That thou mayest raise up the land, distribute desolate heritages, that thou mayest say to the prisoners: Go forth," &c. In that pa.s.sage the land, the desolate heritages, the prisoners, &c., evidently correspond to the people. _Finally_--A covenant is a relation between two parties standing opposite one another. "The word is used,"

says _Gesenius_, "of a covenant formed between nations, between private persons, _e.g._, David and Jonathan, between Jehovah and the people of Israel." But here no parties are mentioned to be united by the covenant.

Ver. 7. "_That thou mayest open blind eyes, bring out them that are bound from the prison, and from the house of confinement them that sit in darkness._"

On account of the connection with the "for the Light of the Gentiles,"

which would stand too much isolated, if, in the words immediately following, Israel alone were again the subject of discourse, the activity of G.o.d here mentioned refers, in the first instance, to the _Gentiles_; and the words: "them that sit in darkness," moreover, evidently point back to "for the Light of the Gentiles." But from chap.

xlix. 9, and also from ver. 16 of the chapter before us, where the blindness of Israel is mentioned, it appears that Israel too must not be excluded. Hence, we shall say: It is here more particularly described how the Servant of G.o.d _proves_ himself as the Covenant of the people and the Light of the Gentiles, how He puts an end to the misery under which both equally groan. It will be better to understand _blindness_, in connection with imprisonment, sitting in darkness, as a designation of the need of salvation, than as a designation of spiritual blindness, of the want of the light of knowledge. That is also suggested by the preceding: "for the Light of the Gentiles,"

which, according to the common _usus loquendi_, and according to chap.

ix. 1 (2) is not to be referred to the spiritual illumination especially, [Pg 224] but to the bestowal of salvation. To this view we are likewise led by a comparison of ver. 16: "And I will lead the blind by a way that they knew not, I will lead them in paths that they have not known, I will change the darkness before them into light, the crooked things into straightness." The _blind_ in this verse are those who do not know what to do, and how to help themselves, those who cannot find the way of salvation, the miserable; they are to be led by the Lord on the ways of salvation, which are unknown to them. In a similar sense and connection, the blind are, elsewhere also, spoken of, comp. Remarks on Ps. cxlv. 8.--On the words: "Bring out them that are bound from the prison," _k.n.o.bel_ remarks: "The citizens of Judah were, to a great extent, imprisoned; the Prophet hopes for their deliverance by the theocratic portion of the people." A strange hope! By this coa.r.s.ely literal interpretation, the connection with "for the Light of the Gentiles" is broken up; and this is the less admissible that the words at the close of the verse: "those that sit in darkness," so clearly refer to it. _Imprisonment_ is a figurative designation of the _miserable condition_, not less than, the _darkness_, which, on account of the light contrasted with it, and on account of chap. ix. 1 (2), cannot be understood otherwise than figuratively. Under the image of men bound in dark prisons, the miserable and afflicted appear also in Ps. cvii. 10-16; Job x.x.xvi. 8, where the words, "bound in fetters," are explained by the parallel "holden in the cords of misery." When David, in Ps. cxlii. 8, prays: "Bring my soul out of the prison," he himself explains this in Ps. cxliii. 11 by the parallel: "Thou wilt bring my soul out of _trouble_;" comp. also Ps. xxv. 17: "O bring thou me out of my _distresses_." If we here understand the prison literally, we might, with the same propriety in other pa.s.sages, also, _e.g._, in Ps. lxvi.

11, understand _literally_ the net, the snare, the trap.

Ver. 8: "_I the Lord, that is my name, and my honour I will not give to another, nor my glory to idols._ Ver. 9. _The former_ (things), _behold, they came to pa.s.s, and new_ (things) _do I declare; before they spring forth, I cause you to hear._"

We have here the solemn close and exhortation. At the close of chap.

xli. it had been pointed out, how the prediction of the _Conqueror from the East_ serves for the glory of Jehovah, [Pg 225] who thereby proves himself to be the only true G.o.d. Here the zeal of G.o.d for His glory is indicated as the reason which has brought forth the prediction of the _Servant of G.o.d_ and His glorious work,--a prediction which cannot be accounted for from natural causes. It is thus the object of the prophecy which is here, in the first instance, stated. It is intended to manifest the true G.o.d as such, as a G.o.d who is zealously bent on His glory. But the same attribute of G.o.d which called forth the prophecy, calls forth also the events prophesied, viz., the appearance of the Servant of G.o.d, and the victory over the idols accomplished thereby, the bringing forth of the law of G.o.d over the whole earth through Him, and the full realization of the covenant with Israel. The thought is this:--that a G.o.d who does not manifest and prove himself as such, who is contented with the honour granted to Him without His interference, cannot be a G.o.d; that the true G.o.d must of necessity be filled with the desire of absolute, exclusive dominion, and cannot but manifest and prove this desire. From this thought, the prophecy and that which it promises flow with a like necessity.--According to _Stier_, ??????, "the former (things)" means "the redemption of the exiled by Cyrus,"

which in chaps. xli. xlviii. forms the historico-typical foreground, whose coming is here antic.i.p.ated by the Prophet. But the parallel pa.s.sages, chaps. xli. 22, xliii. 9, xlviii. 3, are conclusive against this view; for, according to these pa.s.sages, it is only the former already fulfilled predictions of the Prophet and his colleagues, from the beginnings of the people, which can be designated by "the former (things)." By "the new (things)" therefore, is to be understood the aggregate of the events which are predicted in the second part, to which belongs the prophecy of the Servant of G.o.d which immediately precedes, and which the Prophet has here as pre-eminently in view (_Michaelis_: _et nova, imprimis de Messia_), as, in the parallel pa.s.sage chap. xli. 22, the announcement of the conqueror from the East.

Both of these verses seem to round off our prophecy, by indicating that such disclosures regarding the Future are not by any means intended to serve for the gratification of idle curiosity, but to advance the same object to which the events prophesied are also subservient, viz., the promotion of G.o.d's glory. The [Pg 226] modern view of Prophetism is irreconcileable with the verses under consideration, which evidently shew, that the prophets themselves were filled with a different consciousness of their mission and position And in like manner it follows from them, that there is no reason to put, by means of a forced interpretation, the prophecy within the horizon of the Prophet's time, seeing that the Prophet himself shows himself to be thoroughly penetrated by its altogether supernatural character.

[Footnote 1: This embarra.s.sment becomes still more obvious in the explanation of _Vatke_, who understands by the Servant of G.o.d, "the harmless ideal abstract of the people;" and that of _Beck_, who understands thereby "the notion of the people."]

[Footnote 2: The Hebrew word is ????, which means "judgment," "right,"

"law." Dr. _Hengstenberg_ has translated it by _Recht_, which is, as nearly as possible, expressed by the English word "right," (_jus_,) as including "law" and "statutes."--_Tr._]

CHAPTER XLIX. 1-9.

The Servant of G.o.d, with whose person the Prophet had. by way of preparation, already made us acquainted in the first book of the second part, in chap. xlii., is here, at the beginning of the second book, at once introduced as speaking, surprising, as it were, the readers. In ver. 1-3, we have the destination and high calling which the Lord a.s.signed to His Servant; in ver. 4, the contrast and contradiction of the result of this mission; the covenant-people, to whom it is, in the first instance, directed, reward with ingrat.i.tude His faithful work. In ver. 5 and 6, we are told what G.o.d does in order to maintain the dignity of His Servant; as a compensation for obstinate, rebellious Israel, He gives Him the _Gentiles_ for an inheritance. From ver. 7 the Prophet takes the word. In ver. 7 the original contempt which, according to the preceding verses, the Servant of G.o.d meets with, especially in _Israel_, is contrasted with the respectful wors.h.i.+p of nations and kings which is to follow after it. Ver. 8 and 9 describe how the Servant of G.o.d proves himself to be the embodied covenant of the people, and form the transition to a general description of the enjoyment of salvation, which, in the Messianic times, shall be bestowed upon the Congregation of the Lord. This description goes on to chap. l. 3, and then, in chap. l. 4 ff., the person of the Servant of the Lord is anew brought before us.

The Messianic explanation of our pa.s.sage is already met with in the New Testament. It is with reference to it that [Pg 227] Simeon, in Luke ii.

30, 31, designates the Saviour as the s?t????? of G.o.d, which He had prepared before the face of all people (comp. ver. 6 of our pa.s.sage: "That thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth"), as the f?? e?? ?p???????? ????? ?a? d??a? ?a?? s?? ?s?a??; comp. again ver. 6, according to which the Servant of G.o.d is to be at the same time, the light of the Gentiles, to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel. Ver. 1: "The Lord hath called me from the womb, from the bowels of my mother hath He made mention of my name," is alluded to in Luke ii. 21: ?a? ?????? t? ???a a?t?? ??s???, t? ??????

?p? t?? ??????? p?? t?? s????f???a? a?t?? ?? t? ?????? (comp. i. 31: s?????? ?? ?ast?? ?a? t??? ???? ?a? ?a??se?? t? ???a a?t?? ??s???) as is sufficiently evident from ?? t? ?????? _sc. matris_, which exactly answers to the ???? in the pa.s.sage before us. In Acts xiii. 46, 47, Paul and Barnabas prove, from the pa.s.sage under review, the destination of Christ to be the Saviour of the Gentiles, and their right to offer to them the salvation despised and rejected by the Jews: ?d??

st?ef?e?a e?? t? ????? ??t? ??? ??t?ta?ta? ??? ? ?????? t??e??? se e?? f?? ????? t?? e??a? se e?? s?t???a? ??? ?s??t?? t?? ??? In the destination which, in Isaiah, the Lord a.s.signs to Christ, Paul and Barnabas recognize an indirect command for his disciples, a rule for their conduct. In 2 Cor. vi. 1, 2, ver. 8 is quoted, and referred to the Messianic time.

It is obvious that the Jews could not be favourable to the Messianic interpretation; but the Christian Church has held fast by it for nearly 1800 years. Even such interpreters as _Theodoret_ and _Clericus_, who are everywhere rather disposed to explain away real Messianic references, than to find the Messiah where He is not presented, consider the Messianic interpretation to be, in this place, beyond all doubt. The former says: "This was said with a view to the Lord Christ, who is the seed of Abraham, through whom the nations received the promise." And when, in our century, men returned to the faith, the Messianic interpretation also returned. If the Church has Christ at all, it is impossible that she should fail to find Him here.

_Gesenius_, and those who have followed him, appeal to the circ.u.mstance, that the Messiah could not well be introduced as speaking, and, least of all, in such a manner, without any introduction [Pg 228] and preparation. But it is difficult to see how this argument can be advanced by those who themselves a.s.sume that a mere personification, the collective body of the prophets, or, as _Beck_ expresses it, the Prophet ?at' ?????? as a general substantial individual, or even the people, can be introduced as speaking. The introduction of persons is a necessary result of the dramatic character of prophetic Speech, comp., _e.g._, chap. xiv., where now the king of Babylon, then the inhabitants of the Sheol, and again Jehovah, are introduced as speaking. The person who is here introduced as speaking is already known from chap. xlii., where _he is spoken of_. The prophecy before us stands to that prophecy in the very same relation as does Ps. ii. 7-9, where the Anointed One suddenly appears as speaking, to the preceding verses, where He was spoken of The Messiah is here so distinctly described, as to His nature and character, that it is impossible not to recognise Him. Who but He should be the Covenant of the people, the Light of the Gentiles, the Saviour for all the ends of the earth? The point which was here concerned was not, first to introduce Him to the knowledge of the people. His image existed there already in sharp outlines, even from and since Gen. xlix. 10, where the Peaceful One meets us, in whom Judah attains to the full height of his destination, and to whom the people adhere. The circ.u.mstance that it is just here that the Messiah appears as speaking, forms the most appropriate introduction to the second book, in which He is the princ.i.p.al figure.--It is by a false literal interpretation only that ver. 8, 9 have been advanced in opposition to the Messianic interpretation.

The arbitrariness of the non-Messianic interpretation manifests itself in this also, that its supporters can, up to this day, not agree as to the subject of the prophecy. 1. According to several interpreters--_Hitzig_, last of all--the Servant of G.o.d is to be _Israel_, and the idea this, that Israel would, at some future period, be the teacher of the Gentiles, and would spread the true religion on earth. It is apparently only that this interpretation receives some countenance from ver. 3, where the Servant of the Lord is called Israel. For this name does not there stand as an ordinary _nomen proprium_, but as an honorary name, to designate the high dignity and destination of the Servant of G.o.d. As this name had pa.s.sed over from [Pg 229] an individual to a people, so it may again be transferred from the people to that person in whom the people attain their destination, in which, up to that time, they had failed But decisive against this explanation, which makes the whole people the subject, is ver. 5, according to which the Servant of G.o.d is destined to lead back to the Lord, Jacob and Israel (in the ordinary sense), who then must be different from Him; ver. 6, according to which He is to raise up the tribes of Jacob; ver. 8, 9, according to which He is to be the Covenant of the people, to deliver the prisoners, &c. (_k.n.o.bel_ remarks on this verse: "Nothing is clearer than that the Servant of G.o.d is not identical with the ma.s.s of the people, but is something different.") Supposing even that the people, destined to be the teachers of the Gentiles, appear here as speaking, it is difficult to see how, in ver.

4, they could say that hitherto they had laboured in vain in their vocation, and seen no fruits, since hitherto the people had made no attempt at all at the conversion of the Gentiles. 2. _Maurer_, _k.n.o.bel_, and others, endeavour to explain it of _the better portion of the people_. But conclusive against this interpretation is ver. 6, according to which the Servant of G.o.d has the destination of restoring the preserved of Israel, and hence must be distinct from the better portion; ver. 8, according to which He is given for a Covenant of the people, from which, according to ver. 4 and 6, the unG.o.dly are excluded; so that the idea of the people is identical with that of the better portion. In general, the contrasting of the better portion of the people with the whole people, Jacob and Israel, the centre and substance of which was formed just by the ??????, can scarcely be thought of, and is without any a.n.a.logy. Nor is the mention of the _womb_. and _bowels of the mother_, in ver. 1, reconcileable with a merely imaginary person, and that, moreover, a person of a character so indistinct and indefinite,--a character which has no definite and palpable historical beginnings. The parallel pa.s.sages, in which the calling from the womb is mentioned, treat of real persons, of individuals.--3. According to several interpreters (_Jarchi_, _Kimchi_, _Abenezra_, _Grotius_, _Steudel_, _Umbreit_, _Hofmann_), the Servant of the Lord is to be none other than _the Prophet himself_. No argument has been adduced in favour of this view, except the use of the first person, ("If here, without introduction and preparation, a discourse begins with the first [Pg 230] person, it refers most naturally to the Prophet, who is the author of the Book"),--an argument of very subordinate significance, and the more so that the person of the Prophet, everywhere else in the second part of Isaiah, steps so entirely into the background behind the great objects with which he is engaged. To follow thus the first appearance may, indeed, be becoming to a eunuch from Ethiopia, but not a Christian expounder of Scripture.

The contents of the prophecy are decidedly in opposition to this opinion. Even the circ.u.mstance that a single prophet should a.s.sume the name of Israel, ver. 3, appears an intolerable usurpation.

_Farther_--Like all the other prophets, Isaiah was sent to the Jews, and not to the Gentiles; but at the very outset, _the most distant lands and all the distant nations_ are here called upon to hearken. The Lord says to His Servant that the restoration of Israel was too little for Him, that He should be a light and salvation for all the heathen nations from one end of the earth to the other; kings and Princes shall fall down before Him, adoring and wors.h.i.+pping. The Prophet would thus simply have raised himself to be the Saviour. _Umbreit_ expressly acknowledges this: "He is to be the holy pillar of clouds and fire which leads the people back to their native land, after the time of their punishment has expired. But a still more glorious vocation and destination is in store for the prophets; they receive the highest, the Messianic destination." The usurpation of which the Servant of G.o.d would have made himself guilty, appears so much the more clearly, when it is known, that the work of the Servant of G.o.d comprehends even all that also, which is described in ver. 10-23, viz., the blossoming of the Church of G.o.d, her enlargement by the Gentiles, &c. _It is obvious that, if the interpretation which refers this prediction to the prophets were the correct one, the authority of the Old Testament prophecy would be gone; the authority of the Lord himself would be endangered, inasmuch as He always recognizes, in these prophets, organs of divine inspiration and power._ A vain attempt is made at mitigating this usurpation, by imperceptibly subst.i.tuting the collective body of the prophets for the single prophet. This view thus leads to, and interferes with another which we shall immediately examine. But if we would not give up the sole argument by which this [Pg 231] exposition is supported, viz., the use of the first person, everything must, in the first instance, apply to and be fulfilled in Isaiah; and the other prophets can come into consideration only as continuators of his work and ministry. He is ent.i.tled to use the first person in that case only, when he is a perfect manifestation of prophetism.--4. According to _Gesenius_, the Servant of the Lord is to be _the collective body of the prophets_, the prophetic order. In opposition to this view, _Stier_ remarks: "We maintain that, according to history, there did not at that time (the time of the exile, in which _Gesenius_ places this prophecy) exist any prophetic order, or any distinguished blossom of it; that hence it was impossible for any reasonable man to entertain this hope, when viewed in this way, without looking farther and higher." Ver. 1 is decisive against a mere personification. The name of Israel, too, in ver. 3, is very little applicable to the whole prophetic order. This is sufficiently evident from the fact that _Gesenius_, in his Commentary, declared this word to be spurious; and it was at a later period only, when he had become bolder, that he endeavoured to adapt it to his self-chosen subject.

Nowhere in the Old Testament do the prophets appear like the Servant of G.o.d here--as the Covenant of the people, ver. 8, as the Light of the Gentiles, ver. 6.

Ver. 1. "_Listen, O isles, unto me, and hearken ye people from far; the Lord hath called me from the womb, from the bowels of my mother hath He made mention of my name._"

As the stand-point which the Messiah occupies in the vision of the Prophet, we have to conceive of the time, at which He had already entered upon His office, and had already experienced many proofs of the Jews' unbelief and hardness of heart,--an event of the Future, the foresight of which was, even in a human point of view, very readily suggested to the Prophet after the painful experience acquired during his own long ministry; comp. chap. vi. For the fruitlessness of His ministry among the ma.s.s of the covenant-people, ver. 4, as well as the great contempt which the Servant of G.o.d found among them, ver. 7, are represented as having already taken place; [Pg 232] while the enlightenment of the Gentiles, the wors.h.i.+p of the kings, &c., which are to be expected by Him, are represented as being still future. In the same manner, in chap. liii., the humiliation of the Servant of G.o.d appears as past; the glorification, as future, the reason why the _isles_ are addressed (comp. remarks on chap. xlii. 4) appears in ver.

6 only, at the close of the discourse of the Servant of G.o.d, for all that precedes serves as a preparation. In that verse, the Servant of the Lord announces that the Lord had appointed Him to be the Light of the Gentiles; that He should be His salvation unto the ends of the earth. It is very significant that the second book at once begins with an address to the Gentiles, inasmuch us, thus, we are here introduced into the sphere of a redemption which does not refer to a single nation, like that with which the _first_ book is engaged, but to the ends of the earth. At the close of the first book, in chap. xlviii. 20, it was said: "Declare ye, tell this, utter it even to the end of the earth, say ye: The Lord hath redeemed his servant Jacob." The fact that the redemption, in the first instance peculiar to Jacob, is to be proclaimed to all the nations of the earth, leads us to expect that these nations, too, have their portion in the Lord; that at some future period they are to hear a message which concerns them still _more particularly_. This expectation is realized here, at the opening of the second book. The fact that the Gentiles are to listen here, as those who have a personal interest in the message, is proved by the circ.u.mstance, that the words: "Unto the ends of the earth," in ver. 6 of the chapter before us, point back to the same words in chap. xlviii.

20.--_The Lord had called me from the womb._ It is sufficient to go thus far back in order to repress or refute the idea of His having himself usurped His office, and to furnish a foundation for the expectation that G.o.d would powerfully uphold and protect His Servant in the office which He himself had a.s.signed to Him. Calvin remarks on these words: "They do not indicate the commencement of the time of His vocation, as if G.o.d had, only from the womb, called Him; but it is just as if it were said: Before I came forth from the womb, G.o.d had decreed that I was to undertake this office. In the same manner Paul also says that he had been separated from his mother's womb, although he was chosen before [Pg 233] the foundation of the world." To be called from the womb is, in itself, nothing extraordinary; it is common to all the servants of the Lord. Jeremiah ascribes it to himself in chap. i. 5: "Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee;" and in harmony with this pa.s.sage in Jeremiah--not with that before us--Paul says in Gal. i. 15: ? ?e?? ? ?f???sa? (corresponding to: I have _sanctified_ thee) e ??

?????a? ?t??? ??. But we have here merely the _introduction to what follows_, where the calling, to which the Servant of G.o.d had been destined from the womb appears as quite unique.--_From the bowels of my mother hath He made mention of my name._ The name is here not an ordinary proper name, but _a name descriptive of the nature_,--one by which His office and vocation are designated. This making mention was, in the case of Christ, not a thing concealed; the prophecy before us received its palpable confirmation and fulfilment; inasmuch as, in reference to it, Joseph received, even before His birth, the command to call Him Jesus, Saviour: t??eta? d? ???? ?a? ?a??se?? t? ???a a?t??

??s???? a?t?? ??? s?se? t?? ?a?? a?t?? ?p? t?? ?a?t??? a?t??, Matth.

i. 21, after the same command had previously come to Mary, Luke i. 31; comp. ii. 21, where, as we have already remarked, there is a distinct reference to the pa.s.sage before us.

Ver. 2. "_And He hath made my mouth like a sharp sword, in the shadow of His hand hath He hid me, and He hath made me a sharpened arrow, in His quiver hath He hid me._"

According to the common interpretation, the words: "He hath made my mouth like a sharp sword. He hath made me a sharpened arrow," are to express only such a gift of powerful, impressive speech as is common to all the servants of G.o.d, to all the prophets. But the two subjoined clauses are opposed to that interpretation. The second and fourth clauses state the reason of the first and third, and point to the source from which that emanates which is stated in them. There cannot be any doubt but that in the second and fourth clauses, the Servant of G.o.d indicates that He stands under the protection of divine omnipotence, so that the expression: "Whom I uphold," in chap. xlii. 1, is parallel. The _shadow_ is the ordinary figure of protection. The figure of the sword is dropped in the second clause, and hence the objection, that a drawn sword does not require any protection, is out of place. This will [Pg 234] appear from a comparison of chap. li. 16: "And I put my words in thy mouth, and I cover thee with the shadow of mine hand," where the sword is not mentioned at all, and the shadow belongs simply to the person. The quiver which keeps the arrow is likewise a natural image of divine protection. The two accessory clauses do not suit, if the first and third clauses are referred to the _rhetorical endowment_ of the Servant of G.o.d; _that does not flow from the source of the protecting omnipotence of G.o.d_. These accessory clauses rather suggest the idea that, by the comparison of the _mouth_ with the sharp sword, of the _whole person_ with the sharpened arrow, there is indicated _the absolutely conquering power which, under the protection of omnipotence, adheres to the word and person of the Servant of G.o.d_, so that He will easily put down everything which opposes,--equivalent to: _He has endowed me with His omnipotence, so that my word produces destructive effects, and puts down all opposition, just as does His word_; so that there would be a parallel in chap. xi. 4, where the word of the Servant of G.o.d likewise appears as being borne by omnipotence: "He smiteth the earth with the rod of His mouth, and with the breath of His lips He slayeth the wicked." To the same result we are led also by a comparison of chap. li. 16, where the word of the Lord, which is put into the mouth of the Servant of G.o.d, is so living and powerful, so borne by omnipotence, that thereby the heavens are planted, and the foundations of the earth are laid. But of special importance are those pa.s.sages of Revelation which refer to the verse under consideration. In chap. i. 16, the sharp two-edged sword does not by any means represent the power of the discourse piercing the heart for salvation; but rather the destructive power of the word which is borne by omnipotence. It designates the almighty punitive power of Christ directed against his enemies. "By the circ.u.mstance, that the sword goes out of the mouth of Christ, that destructive power is attributed to His mere word, He appears as partaking of divine omnipotence. For it belongs to G.o.d to slay by the words of His mouth, Hos. vi. 5." The same applies to chap. ii. 16. On Rev. xix. 15: "And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it He should smite the nations," we remarked: "the sharp sword is not that of a teaching king, [Pg 235] but that of omnipotence which speaks and it is done, and slayeth by the breath of the lips. How Christ casts down His enemies by the word of His mouth is seen, in a prophetical instance, John xviii. 6; Acts ix. 4, 5." With the sword, Christ appears even where He does not mean to destroy, but to bring salvation; for, even in those who are to be blessed, hostile powers are to be overcome.

The image, however, is here, in the fundamental pa.s.sage, occasioned by the comparison of the Servant of G.o.d with the conqueror from the East, whose sword, according to chap. xli. 2, the Lord makes as dust, and his bow as the driven stubble. Where the mere _word_ serves as a sword, the effect must be much more powerful. The conquering power throwing down every opposing power, which, in the first clause, is a.s.signed to the mouth, is, in the third clause ("And He hath made _me_ a sharpened arrow"), attributed to the whole person. He, of whom it was already said in Ps. xlv. 6: "Thine arrows are sharp, people fall under thee, they enter into the heart of the king's enemies," is himself to be esteemed as a sharp arrow.

Ver. 3. "_And He said unto me: Thou art my Servant, O Israel, in whom I glorify myself._"