Notes on the Old and New Testaments

is expressly so called in vs. 5, 8, 11. (2.) It is equally clear from the New Testament that Isaiah saw The Messiah. John quotes the words in this chapter, ver. 10, as applicable to Jesus Christ, and then adds (John xii. 41), '* these things said Esaias when he saw his glory and spake of him." An inspired man has thus settled this as referring to the Messiah, and thus has established the propriety of applying to him the name Jehovah, i. e. has affirmed that the Lord Jesus is divine. Jerome says, that this vision was designed to represent the doctrine of the Trinity. — In John i. 18, it is said, "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.** In Ex. xxxiii. 20, God says, " Thou canst not see my face, for there shall no man see me and live." See also 1 Tim. vi. 16. These passages may be reconciled with what is here said by Isaiah in the following manner: (1.) Isaiah does not say that he saw the divine essence, and all that his words fairly imply is, that he saw a manifestation,or vision of jEr'OVAH — some sriking symbolical representation of him. (2.) It was the manifestation of Jehovah in the person of the Messiah, of the " only begotten Son who hath revealed or declared him," that he saw. Such manifestations of God have been made often, and all that the declaration oi Isaiah implies, of necessity, is, that he had a vision of God incarnate seated irk glory, from whom he now received a new commission to go out and proclaim the truth to that wicked and rebellioua generation. IT Sitting upon a throne. God is thus often represented as a kingi sitting on a throne. 1 Kings xxii. 19. Ezek. xliii. 7. Jer. xvii. 12. IT High dmrcb ofjfsus Christ of latier-day Sain

2 A.bove it stood the sera- phims: each one had six wings •,

and lifted up. That is, the throne; an indication of state and majesty. IT And his train. The word train, I'^^IW, properly signifies the skirt of a garment, or a robe. Ex. xxviii. 33, 34. Here it is evidently designed as a representation of a large, flowmg robe, that filled all the most holy part of the temple. The Orientals regarded such large robes as indicative of grandeur and state. The Messiah was seen seated on a throne as a king; clothed in a large, loose, flowing robe, in the manner of Oriental monarchs, and surrounded by his ministers. The design of this magnificent vision was not only to impress the prophet with a sense of the holiness of God, but also to give additional weight to his commission as having been derived immediately from the divine majesty. Comp vs. 9, 10. It is remarkable that Isaiah attempts no representation of Jehovah himself. He mentions his robes; the throne; the Seraphim; but mentions no form or appearance of God himself. In this there is great sublimity. There is enough mentioned to fill the mind with awe; there is enough concealed to impress as deeply with a sense of the divine majesty. It is remarkable, also, that it is not the Usual appearance of God in the temple to which he refers. That was the Shekinah or visible symbol o." God. That was on the mercy-seat, this was on a throne; that was a cloud, of this no form is mentioned; over that the Cherubims stretched forth their wings, over this stood the Seraphim; that had no clothing, this was clad in a full flowing robe. IT Filled the temple. Probably the most holy place only is intended. The large, full, magnificent robe seemed to fill up the entire holy of holies. Some have supposed that this vision v/as represented as appearing in the heavens. But tlie expression here evidently implies that it was seen in the temple at Jerusalem.

2. Above it. Either above the throne, or above him. The LXX render it To^nd about him, /cv^Xy dvTov, The

Chaldee, * the holy ministers stood on high in his presence.' H The Seror phims. The verb 51*1^ sdrdph, from which this word is derived, is uniformly translated to burn, and is used frequently. See Taylor. The noun C]7^ denotes, according to Bochart, the chersydros, a serpent that lives in lakes and moist places, but when those places are dried up it becomes a land serpent, and then its bite is very fierce, and is attended with a most dreadful inflammaton all over the body. Rabbi Solomon saya that " serpents are called seraphim because they burn men with the poison of their teeth," perhaps because the ider of heat and poison were connected The word is applied to the fiery flying serpents which bit the children of Israel and in imitation of which a brazen serpent was erected on a pole by Moses It is translated " a fiery serpent" in Num. xxi. 8, Isa. xiv. 29, xxx. 6; in Deut. viii. 15, Num. xxi. 6, it is rendered " fiery," and in the passage before us seraphims. The word ^2'^^ often occurs in the sense of burning. Deut. xxix. 23. 2 Chron. xvi 14, xxi. 19, &c. The LXX render it seraphim, aspacplfi; SO the Vulgate, and the Syriac. The Chaldee, " his holy ministers." Probably it is now impossible to tell why this name was given to the repre • sentations that appeared to Isaiah. Perhaps it may have been fr<ftn their burning ardour and zeal in the service of God; perhaps from the rapidity of their motion in his service — derived from the rapid motion of the serpent. Gesenius supposes that the name wa? derived from a signification of the word denoting noble or excellent, and that it was on this account applied to princes and to celestial beings. Kimchi says, that the name was given with reference to their bright, shming appearance. Comp. Ezek. i. 13. 2 Kings ii. 2, vi. 17. The word is applied to celestial beings nowhere else except in thia chapter. There is no reason to think that the Seraphim descnbed here partook of the form of the serpentj as th«

with twain he covered his face, and with twain^ he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly.

representation seems to be rather that of a man. Thus each one (ver. 2) is represented as covering his face and his jcet with his wings, a description that does not pertain to the serpentine form. God is usually represented as surrounded or encompassed by heavenly beings, as his ministers. Ps. civ. 4. Dan. vii. 10. 1 Kings xxii. 19. Ps. Ixviii. 17. Heb. xii 22. The idea is one of peculiar magnificence and grandeur. It is derived especially from the customs of monarchs, particularly Eastern monarchs, who had numerous princes and nobles to attend them, and to give magnificence to their court. IT T^ach om had six wings. Wings are emblematic of the rapidity of their movement; the number here, perhaps, denoting their celerity and readiness to do the will of God. V With twain he covered his face. This is designed, doubtless, to denote the reverence and awe inspired by the immediate presence of God. Comp. Amos vi. 9, 10. The Chaldee adds, " he covered his fjice so that he could not see." To cover the face in this manner is the natural expression of reverence. Comp. Note on ch. lii. 15. And if the pure and holy Seraphim evinced such reverence in the presence of Jehovah, with what profound awe and veneration should we, polluted and sinful creatures, presume to draw near to him! Assuredly their position should reprove our presumption when we rush thoughtlessly and irreverently into his presence, and should teach us to bow with lowly veneration and deep humility. Comp. Rev iv. 9, 10, 11. IT He covered his feet. In a similar description of the cherubim in Ezek. i. 11, it is said that they covered their bodies. In Isaiah the expression clearly denotes not the feet only, but the lower extremities. Thin was also an expression of reverence drawn from our conceptions of propriety. The Seraphim stood covered, or as if concealing themselves as wuch as possible 7« in token of their nothingness and un» worthiness in the presence of the Holy One. IT He did fixj. He was quick to execute the commands of God. It may be observed, also, that among tha ancients. Mercury, the messenger of Jupiter, was always represented with wings. Milton has copied this description of the Seraphim:

ehadc His hneaments divine the p4 ' that clad Each shoulder broad, came mantling o'er hij breast With regal ornament; the middle pair Girt like a starry zone his waist, and round Skirted his loins and thighs with downy gold, And colours dipt in heaven; the third his feet Shadowed from either heel with feathered mail Sky tinctured grain."

3. And one cried to another. Heb. This cried to this. That is, they cried to each other in alternate responses. One cried " holy;" the second repeated it; then the third; and then they probably united in the grand chorus, " Full is all the earth of his glory." This was an ancient m.ode of singing or recitative among the Hebrews. See Ex. XV. 20, 21, where Miriam is represented as going before in the dance with ft timbrel, and the other feraalea as following her, and answering, or responding to her. Ps.cxxxvi. 1. Comp. Lowth on the sacred poetry of the Hebrews, Lee. xix. IT Holy, holy, holy. The repetition of a name or of an expression three times, was quite common among the Jews. Thus in Jer. vii. 4, the Jews are represented by the prophet as saying, " the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, are these." Thus Jer. xxii. 29: " O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the Lord." Ezek. xxi. 27: " I will overturn, overturn, overturn.*' See also 1 Sam. xviii. 23: "0 my son Absalom! my son, my son." See also the repetition of the form of benediction among the Jews, Nurn. xi, 2^ 25, 26:

Lord of hosts; the * whole earth is full of his glory.

4 And the posts of the 'door moved at the voice of him that

JEHOVAH bless thee and keep thee; JEHOVAH make his face to shine upon thee and be gracious unto thee; JEHOVAH hft up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.

In Hke manner the number seven is used by the Hebrews to denote a great, indefinite number; then a full or complete number; and then perfectness, completion. Thus in Rev. i. 4, iii. 1, iv. 5, the phrase, " the seven spirits of God," occurs as applicable to the Holy Spirit, denoting his fulness, completeness, perfection. The Hebrews usually expressed the superlative degree by the repetition of a word. Thus Gen. xiv. 10: " The vale of Siddim, pits, vits of clay," i. e. was full of pits. See Nordheimer's Heb. Gram. § 822- 824. The form was used therefore among the Jews to denote emphasis; and the expression means in itself no more than " thrice holy;" that is, supremely holy. Most commentators however have supposed that there is here a reference to the doctrine of the Trinity. It is not probable that the Jews so understood it; but applying to the expressions the fuller revelations of the New Testament, it cannot be doubted that the words will express that. Assuming that that doctrine is true, it cannot be doubted, I think, that the Seraphs laid the foundation of their praise in that doctrine. That there was a distinct reference to the second person of the Trinity is clear from what John says, ch. xii. 41. No argument can be drawn directly from this in favour of the doctrine of the Trinity •, for the repetition of such phrases thrice in other places is merely emphatic, denoting the superlative degree. But when the doctrine is proved from other places, it may be presumed that the heavenly beings were apprized of it, and that the founiation of their ascriptions of praise

5 Then said I, Wo is me! for I am * undone; because ''I am a

was laid in that. The Chaldee hat rendered this, " Holy in the highest heavens, the house of his majesty; holy upon the earth, the work of his power; holy for ever, and ever, and ever, is the Lord of hosts." The whole expression is a most sublime ascription of praise to the living God, and should teach us in what manner to approach him. IT The Lord of hosts. See Note ch. i. 9. IT The whole earth. Margin, The earth is the fulness of Ins glory. All things which he has made on the earth express his glory. His wisdom and goodness, his power and holiness, are seen every where. The whole earth with all its mountains, seas, streams, trees, animals and men, lay the foundation of his praise. In accordance with this, the Psalmist in a most beautiful composition, calls upon all thingi to praise him. See Ps. cxlviii.

Praise the Lord from the earth Ye dragons and ail deeps: Fire?fld hail; snow and vapour; Stormy wind fuifillinff his word: Mountains and all hills; Fruitful trees and all cedars; Beasts and all cattle: Creeping things, and flying fowl.

4. And the posts of the door. Margin, " thresholds" There is some difficulty in the Hebrew here, but the meaning of the expression is sufficiently apparent. It means that there was a tremour, or concussion, as if by awe, or by the sound attending the cry. It is evidently a poetic expression. IT The house. The temple. IT Was filled with smoke. There is here doubtless a reference to the cloud that is so often mentioned in the Old Testament, as the visible symbol of the divinity. See Note Isa. iv. 5. A similar appearance is recorded when Solomon dedicated the temple. 1 Kings viii. 10. 2 Chron. v. 13. Ezek. x. 4.

man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for mine eyes have seen the King, tlie Lord of hosts. 6 Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, 'having a live coal in his hand, which he had

with overwhelming convictions of my own unworthiness, with alarm that I have seen Jehovah. IT For I am undone. Margin, " cut off." Chaldee, " I have sinned." LXX, " I am miserable, I am pierced through." Syriac, ** I am struck dumb." The Hebrew trord may sometimes have this meaning, but it also means to he destroyed, to he ruined, to perish. See Hos. x. 15. Zeph. i. 2. Hos. iv. 6. Isa. xv. 1. This is probably the meaning here, * I shall be ruined, or destroyed.' The reason of this, he immediately states. ^ A man of unclean lips. This expression evidently denotes that he was a sinner, and especially that he was unworthy either to join in the praise of a God so holy, or to deliver a message in his name. The vision; the profound worship of the Seraphim; and the attendant majesty and glory, had deeply impressed him with a sense of the holiness of God, and of his own unfitness either to join in worship so holy, or to deliver the message of so pure a God. A similar effect is recorded in reference to Abraham. Gen. xviii. 27. See also Ex. iv. 10, 12. Jer. i. 6. A deep consciousness of guilt in view of the holiness and majesty of God, is also described by Job:

I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear;

Ai:*! repent in dust and ashes. Job xlii. 5, 6.

Ar effect also remarkably similar is described in reference to the apostle Peter, Luke v. 8: " When Simon Peter Baw it [the miracle which Jesus had wrougl t], he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying, Depait from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord. IT A people of uncUan lips. A people who are un-

taken with the tongs from off the *altar;

7 And he 'laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hat\ touched thy lips, and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged.

worthy to celebrate the praises of a God so pure and exalted. IT Mine eyes have seen. In E.x. xxxiii. 20, it is said: " Thou canst not see my face • for there shall no man see me and live." Comp. John i. 18. 1 Tim. vi. 16. Perhaps it was in recollection of this, that Isaiah said he was undone. It ia not however to be understood that the prophet saw Jehovah himself, but only the symbol of his presence. It was foi this expression, according to the tradition of the Jews, that Manasseh took occasion to put the prophet to death. See the Introduction § 2. IT The Lord of hosts. Jehovah of hosts. John applies this to the Lord Jesus, and this proves that he is divine. See John xii. 41.

6. There flew. Isaiah is represented as standing out of the temple; the Seraphim as in it. IT Having a live coal. The Vulgate renders this * a stone.* This is probably the original meaning of the word. See 1 Kings xix. 6. It at first denoted a hot stone which was used to roast meat upon. It may also mean a coal, from its resemblance to such a stone. IT From the altar. The altar of burnt-offering This stood in the court of the priests, in front of the temple. See Notes on Matt. xxi. 12. The fire on this altar was at first kindled by the Lord, Lev. ix. 24, and was kept continually burning. Lev. vi. 12, 13.

7. And he laid it upon my mouth. Margin, " And he caused it to touch my mouth." This is the more correct rendering. It was a slight, momentary touch, sufficient merely to be a sign oi token that he was cleansed. IT Thin4 iniquity is taken away. That is, what* ever obstacle there existed to youl

8 Also I heard ths voice of the LoKD; saying, Whom shall I send,

communicating the message of God to this people, arising from your own consciousness of unworthiness, is taken away. You are commissioned to bear that message, and your own consciousness of guilt should not be a hinderance. To understand this, it should be remembered that Jire among the Orientals has been always regarded as an emblem of purifying. Thus the Sabeans, the followers of Zoroaster in Persia, worshipped ^re, as the emblem of a pure divinity. See Mai. iii. 2, 3. Comp. P»Iatt. iii. 2. Every minister of the gospel, though conscious of personal unworthiness and unfitness, should yet go freely and cheerfully to his work, if he has evidence that he is called and commissioned by God. IT Is purged. Is purified, is removed — "iBSFTi from ^23 hdphdr to cover, to overlay; then to make an atonement for, to expiate, to cover sin, to pardon it, to effect or to procure forgiveness; and then to purify in general, to make whole. Comp. Note on ch. xliii. 3. This does not mean that the fire from the altar had any physical effect to purify him from sin, but that it was emblematic of such a purifying, and probably also the fact that it was" taken from the altar of sacrifice was to him an indication that he was pardoned through the aioneinent, or expiation there made. The Jews expected pardon in no other mode than by sacrifice; and the offering on their altar pointed to the great sacrifice which was to be made on the cross for the sins of men. There ia here a beautiful union of the truths respecting sacrifice. The great doctrine is presented that it is only by sacrifice that sin can be pardoned; and the Messiah, the sacrifice himself, is exhibited as issuing the commission to Isaiah to go and declare his message to men.

8. The voice of the Lord. Heb. The voice of Jehovah. He had before been jdaressed by one of the Seraphim.

and who will go for us? Then said I,* Here am I; send me.

4 Behold me.

H Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? The change of number here from the singular to the plural is very remarkable. Jerome on this place saya that it indicates the "sacrament" of the Trinity. The LXX render it, "©Whom shall I send, and who will go to this people V The Chaldee, " Whom shall I send to prophesy, and who will go to teach 1" The Syriac, " Whom shall I send, and who will go V The Arabic has followed the LXX. The use of the plural pronouns we and us, as applicable to God, occurs several times in the Old Testament. Thus Gen, i. 26: " And God said. Let ua make man in our image." Gen. xi. 6, 7: " And Jehovah said, Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language." Such a use of the name of God in the plural is very common, but it is not clear that there is a reference to the doctrine of the Trinity In some cases it is evident that it can-, not have such a reference, and that no argument can be drawn from the use of that plural form in favour of such a doctrine. Thus in Isa. xix. 4, the expression " a cruel lord," is in the Hebrew in the plural, yet evidently denoting but one. The expression translated " the most Holy One," or " the Holy," is in the plural in Prov. ix. 10, XXX. 3. In 1 Sam. xix. 13, 16, the plural form is applied to a household god, or an image; and the plural form is applied to God in Job xxxv. 20, "my Makers" (Heb.); Eccl. xn. 1, " thy Creators" (Heb.); Ps. cxxi. 5 " Jehovah is thy keepers" (Heb.). See also Isa. liv. 5, xxii. 2, xliii. 5, Ixii. 5. This is called by grammarians pluralis excellenticB, or the plural form indicating majesty or honour. It is in all countries used in reference to kings and princes; and as God often represents himself as a king in the Soriptures, and speaks in the language that was usually applied to kings in Onen tal countries, no argument can b*

9 And he said, Go and tell this people, Hear ye^ indeed, but understand not; and see ye^ indeed, but perceive not.

10 Make the heart of this drawn from expressions like these in defence of the doctrine of the Trinity. There are unanswerable arguments enough in support of that doctrine, without resorting to those which are of doubtful authority. — The language here indicates the design for which this vision waa shown to Isaiah. It was to commission him to exhibit truth that would be extremely unpleasant to the nation, and that would have the certain effect of hardening their hearts. In view of the nature and effect of this message, God is repre-' Bented as inquiring who would be willing to undertake it 1 Who had courage enough to do it? Who would risk his life ] And it indicates, perhaps, that there were few in the nation who would be willing to do it, and that it was attended v/ith self-denial and danger. IT Here am I. This shows at once his confidence in God, and his zeal. He had been qualified for it by the extraordinary commission, and he was now ready to bear the message to his countrymen. In this attitude we Bhould stand, prompt to deliver any message that God shall intrust to our hands, and to engage in any service that he calls on us to perform.

9. And he said, &c. The expressions which follow are those which denote hardness of heart and blindness of mind. They would hear the words of the prophet, but they would not understand him. They were so obstinately bent on iniquity that they would neither believe nor regard him. — This shows the spirit with which ministers must deliver the message of God. It is their business to deliver the message, though they should know that it will neither be understood nor believed. IT Hear ye indeed. Hebrew, In hearing, hear. This is a mode of expressing emp'iasis. This passage is quoted people fat, and make their eara heavy, and shut their eyes: les) they see with their eyes, and bean with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convei't, and be healed.

in Matt. xiii. 14. See Note on that place.

10. Make the heart. The word heart here is used in the sense of the mind — to denote all their mental powers. It is commonly used in this sense in the Scriptures. IT Fat. Gross, heavy, dull, stupid. That is, go and proclaim such truth to them as shall have this effect — as shall irritate, provoke, enrage them; truth, whose delivery shall be attended, in their grosa and coiTupt hearts, with this blinding and infatuating influence. The effect would be produced by the corrupt state of their hearts, not by any. native tendency of the truth, and still less by an> direct divine influence. * Go, and pro^ claim truth to a corrupt and sensual people, and the re*jult will be that they will not hear; they are so wicked that they will not attend to it; they will become even jnore hardened: yet go and though certain of producing this* effect, still proclaim it.' See this passage explained in the Notes On John xii. 49. IT Their ears heavy. DulK stupid, insensible. IT And shut thei^ eyes. The word here used means to spread over, and then to close. It denotes here the state of mind which is more and more indisposed to attend to the truth. ^ And be healed. Be restored from the malady of sin; be recovered and pardoned. Sin is often represented as a painful, loathsome malady, and forgiveness as restoration from such a malady. Isa. xxx. 26. Pa. ciii., xli. 3, 4. 2 Chron. vii. 14. Jen iii. 23, xvii. 14. We may learn here (1.) That the effect of truth is often to irritate men and make them more wicked. (2.) The truth must nevertheless be proclaimed. This effect is not the fault of the truth; and it is often well that the heart should b"; krif wn. and the true effect shouid Ix vpa.

li Then said I, Lord, how /ong? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be ^utterly de.«aolate;

7 desolate loith desolation.

11. How long. The prophet did not dare to pray that this effect should not follow. He asked merely therefore how long this state of things must continue; how long this message was to be delivered, and how long it should be attended with these painful effects. ^ Until the ciiies, <fec. They will remain perverse and obstinate until the land is completely destroyed by divine Judgments. Still the truth is to be \ reclaimed, though it is known it will have no effect in reforming the nation. This refers doubtless to the destruction that was accomplished by the Babylonians. IT The houses without man. This is strong language, denoting the certain and wide-spread desolation that should come upon the nation.

12. And the Lord have removed, &c. The land shall be given up to desolation. The men — the strength of the nation — shall be taken to a distant land. IT And there be a great forsaking. A great desolation; the cities and dwellings shall be abandoned by the inhabitants. Comp. Isa. xvii. 2. Jer. iv. 29. Zeph. ii. 4.

13. But yet, <Slc. The main idea in this verse is plain, though there is much difficulty in the explanation of the particular phrases. The leading thought is, that the land should not be utterly and finally abandoned. There would be the remains of life — as in an oak or terebinth-tree when the tree has fallen. Comp. Notes on ch. xi. 1 '^ A tenth. That is, a tenth of the inhabitants — or a ^ ery small part. Amidst the general desolation a small part should be preserved. This was accomplished in the time of the captivity of the Jews by Nebuchadnezzar. We are not to suppose that literally a tenih part of the {Xalioi? Hrould remain; but a part that

12 And the Lord have re« moved'* men far away, and tkert be a great forsaking in the midst of the land.

13 But yet in it shall he a tenth,* and it shall return, and

h 2 Kings 25. 21. 8 or, when it is returnet and hath been broused.

should bear somewhat the same proportion to the entire nation in strength and resources that a tenth does to the whole. Accordingly in the capt vity by the Babylonians we are told (2 Kings XXV. 12), that " the captain of the giiard left the poor of the land to be vinedressers and husbandmen." Comp. 2 Kings xxiv. 14, where it is said that " Nebuchadnezzar carried away all Jerusalem, and all the princes, and all the mighty men of valour, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and smiths, none remained save the poorer sort of the people of the land.'* Over this remnant Nebuchadnezzar made Gedaliah king. 2 Kings xxv 22. IT And it shall return. This expression can be explained by the history. The prophet mentions the return, but he has omitted the fact that this remnant should go away; and hence all the difficulty which has been experienced in explaining this. The history informs us, 2 Kings xxv. 26, that this remnant, this tenth part, " arose and came to Egypt, for they were afraid of the Chaldees." A part also of the nation was scattered in Moab and Edom, and among the Ammonites. Jer. xl. 2. By connecting this idea with the prophecy, there ia no difficulty in explaining it. It was of the return from Egypt that the prophet here speaks. Comp. Jer. xlii. 4- 7. After this flight to Egypt they returned again to Judea — together with those who were scattered in Moab, and the neighbouring regions..Ter. xl. 11, 12. This remnant thus collected wai what the prophet referred to as returning after it had been scattered in Egypt, and Moab, and Edom, and among the Ammonites. IT And shall he eaten. This is an unhappy translation. It hw

shall be ealen: as a teil-tree, and as an oak, whose* substance

arisen from the difficulty of making sense of the passage, by not taking into consideration the circumstances just adveited to. The word translated ** eaten" means to feed, to graze, to consume by grazing, to consume by fire, to consume or destroy in any way, to remove. Gesenius on the word "^^^ • Here it means that this remnant shall be for destruction; that judgments and punishments shall follow them after heir return from Egypt and Moab. Even this remnant shall be the object of divine displeasure, and shall feel the weight of his indignation. See Jer. xliii. xliv. ^ As a teil-tree. The word teil means the linden, though there is no evidence that the linden is denoted here. The word here

Y^'A oak. It probably denotes the terebinth, or turpentine tree, for a description of which see Notes on ch. i. 29. IT Whose substance. Margin, stock or stem. The margin is the more correct translation. The word usually denotes the upright shaft, stem, or stock of a tree. It means here whose vitality shall remain; i. e. they do not entirely die. IT When they cast their leaves. The words, " their leaves" are not in the origintl, and should not be in the translation. The Hebrew means, •* in their falling" — or when they fall. As the evergreen did not cast its leaves, the reference is to the falling of the body of the tree. The idea is, that when the tree should fall and decay, ftill the life of the tree would remain. In the root there would be life. It would send up new shoots, and thus a new tree would be produced. See Notes on chs. iv. 2, xi. 1. This was particularly the case with the terebinth, us it is with the fir, the chesnut, the oak, the willow, &c. See Job xiv. 7.

is in them when they cast their leaves, so the holy seed shall b6 the substance thereof.

The idea is, that it would be so with the Jews. Though desolate, and though one judgment would follow another, and though even the remnant would be punished, yet the race would not be extinguished. It would spring up again, and survive. This was the case in the captivity oi Babylon; and again the case in the destruction of Jerusalem; and in all their persecutions and trials since, the same has always occurred. They survive; and though scattered in all nations, they still liv«^ as demonstrative of the truth of the divine predictions. Deut. xxviii. IT The holy seed. The few remaining Jews. They shall not be utterly destroyed, but shall be like the life remaining in the root of the tree. No prophecy, perhaps, has been more remarkably fulfilled than that in thia verse. " Though the cities be waste and the land be desolate, it is not from the poverty of the soil that the fields are abandoned by the plough, nor from any diminution of its ancient and natural fertility, that the land has rested for so many generations. Judea was not forced only by artificial means, or from local and temporary causes into a luxuriant cultivation, such as a barren country might have been, concerning which it would not have needed a prophet to tell that, if once devastated and abandoned, it would ultimately revert to its original sterility. Phoenicia at all times held a far different rank among the richest countries of the world; and it was not a bleak and sterile portion of the earth, nor a land which even many ages of desolation and neglect could impoverish, that God gave in possession and by covenant to the seed of Abraham. No longer cultivated as a garden, but left like a wilderness, Judea is indeed greatly changed from what it was; all that human ingenuity and labour did devise, erect, or cultivate, men have laid waste and deso* late; all the ' plenteous gocds' witll which it was enriched, adorned, and blessed, have fallen like seared and withered leaves when their greenness }s gone; and stripped of its * ancient Bplendour,* it is left as an oak whose leaf fadeth: — but its inherent sources of fertility are not dried up; the natural richness of the soil is unblighted: the substance is in //, strong as that of the teil-tree or the solid oak, which retain their substance when they cast their leaves. And as the leafless oak Waits throughout winter for the genial warmth of returning spring, to be clothed with renewed foliage, so the once glorious land of Judea is yet full of latent vigour, or of vegetative power, •trong as ever, ready to shoot forth, even * better than at the beginning, whenever the sun of heaven shall shine on it again, and 'the holy seed' bfl prepared for being finally * the substance thereof The substance that is in it — which alone has here to be proved — is, in few words, thus described by an enemy: * The land in the plains is fat and loamy, and exhibits every sign of the greatest fecundity Were nature assisted by art, the fruit* of the most distant countries might be produced within the distance of twenty leagues.' * Galilee,' says Malte Brun, ' would be a paradise, were it inhabited by an industrious people, under an enlightened government,' "

Probably no portion of the Bible has been regarded as so difficult of interpretation, anr! has given rise to so great a variety of expositions, as the prophecy which is commenced in this chapter, and which is closed in ch. ix. 7. The importance of the prophecy respecting the Messiah (vii. 14, seq. viii. 7, ix. 1—7), IS one reason why interpreters have been so anxious to ascertain the genuine sense; and the difficulties attending the supposition that there is reference to the Messiah, have been among the causes wliy so much anxiety has been folt to ascertain its true sense.

The prophecy which commences at the beginning of this chapter is continued to ch. ix. 7. All this was evidently delivered at the same time, and constitutes a single vision, or oracle. This should have been indicated in the division of the chapters. Great obscurity arises from the arbitrarj' and, in many instances, absurd mode of division into chapters which has been adopted in tlm'Bible.

This chapter, for convenience of illustration, may be regarded as divided into fojif parts.

I. The historical statement with which the whole account is introduced in vs.-i, 2. The principal occurrences referred to in the chapter took place in the time of Ahaz. For an account of his character and reign, soe the Introduction § 3. He was an idolater, and erected the images, and altars, and groves of idolatry every where. He sacritlcod to Baalim, and burned his children in the valley of Hinnom in honour of Moloch, and filled Jerusalem every where with abominations, 2 KTings xvi. 2—4. 2 Chron. xxviii. 1—4. For these abominations, he was delivered into the hand of the king of Syria, and was subjected to calamities from the threatened invasion of the united armies of Syria and Samaria. At this time Rezin was king of Syria, of which Damascus was the capital; and Pekah was king of Israel or Samaria. These kings, during the concluding part of the reign of Jotham, the predecessor of Ahaz, had formed an alliance and had gone up towards Jerusalem to make war upon It, but had not been able to take it. The formation of this confederacy in the time of Jotham is distinctly declared in 2 Kings xv. 37. To this confederacy Isaiah refers in ver. 1, where he says that it occurred in the days of Jotham. The statement is made by Isaiah here, doubtless in order to trace the important matter to which he alludes to its commencement, though what he subsequently says had particular relation to Ahaz. Though the confederacy was formed in the time of Jotham, yet the consequences were of long continuance, and were not terminated until the defeat of Sennacherib in the time of Hezekiah. See ch. xxxvii. I.saiah here, in general, say.« (ver. 1), that they went up against Jerusalem and could not take it. He may refer here to an expedition which they made in the time of Jotham, or he may design this as a general statement, indicating the result of all their tfforts, that they could not take Jerusalem. If the latter is the proper interpretation, then the statement in ver. 1, was made by Isaiah at a subsequent period, and is designed to state all that occurred. It is more natural, however, to suppose that they made an attempt in the time of.lot ham to take Jerusa.em, but that they were unsuccessful. When Ahaz came to the throne, the alliance was continued, and the efibrt was renewed to take Jerusalem. Formidable preparations were made for the war, and an invading army came up upon the land. Many nf the subjects of Ahaz were taken captive knd carried to Damascu'. Pekah slew in one day an hundred and twenty thousand men, and took Iwo hundred thousand captives and carried them towards Samaria. They were released from bond-

Ige by the solicitation of Oded, a prophet, who represented to them the impropriety of taking theil rethren captive, and they were re-cuuveyed to Jericho. 2 Chron. xxviii. 5—15. At ab( at tlie same f me, the Assyrians took E\ath, and retained it as a city belonging to them. 2 Kings xvi. 6. From tht report ol this strong alliance, and from the ravages which were committed by their united forces, Ahua was alarmed, and trembled for the safety of Jerusalem itself, ver. 3. But instead of looking to God for aid, he formed the purpose of securing the alliance of the king of Assyria, and for this purpose sent messengers to Ticlath-Pileser with professions of deep regard, and with the most costly presents whiclj could be procured by exhausting the Treasury (2 Kings xvi. 7, 8), to secure his friendship and co-ope^ ration. To this the king of Assyria agreed, and entered into the war by making an assault en Damascus. 2 Kings xvi. 9. It was this alliance, and the confidence which Ahaz had m it, that produced h« answer to Isaiah (vii. 12), and his refusal to ask a sign of the Lord; and it was thi? aiiance whi^-h subi«quently involved Jerusalem in so much dilHculty from the invasion of the Assyrians. The Assyrians, as might have been foreseen, consulted their own advantage, and not the benefit of Ahaz. They meant to avail themselves of the opportunity of subduing, if possible, Judea itself; and cuisequently the land was subsequently invaded by them, and Jerusalem itself put in jeopardy. This consequence was distinctly foretold by Isaiah, ch. vii. 17- 25, viii. 7, 8. Yet before the alliance was secured, Ahaa was m d^p consternation and alarm, and it was at this point of time that Isaiah was sent to him, rs. 2, 3. Ilt^ this time of consternation and alarm, Isaiah was sent to Ahaz to assure him that Jerusalem would be safe, and that there was no real cause of alarm, vs. 3—9. His main object was to induce the monarch to repose confidence in Jehovah, and to believe that his kingdom, protected by God, could not be overthrown. Isaiah was directed to take with him his son, whose name (Shear-jashub— //ie remnant shall return) was itself a sign or pledge that the nation should not be utterly destroyed, and that consequently it could not become permanently subject to Syria or Samaria, ver. 3. He went to meet Ahaz at the upper pool, whither probably Ahaz had gone attended by many of the court, to see whether it was practicable to stop the water so as to prevent an enemy from procuring it. Comp. 2 Chron. xxxii. 4. He directed him not to be afraid of the enemies that were coming, for they were like imoking, half-extinguished brands that could do little injury, ver. 4, He assured him that the purpose of the confederated kings should not be accomplished; that Jehovah had said that their design could not be established; and that the limits of their respective kingdoms should be the same that they were then, and should not be enlarged by the conquest and accession of Jerusalem— for that DamasciK should still remain the capital of Syria, and Samaria of Ephraim, and that within sixty-five years the kingdom of Ephraim should be totally destroyed, and of course Jerusalem and Judah could not be permanently added to it. So far from having Jerusalem as a tributary and dependent province as Remaliah had anticipated, his own kingdom was to be completely and finally destroyed, vs. 4—9. The desujjTof all this was to allay the fears of Ahaz, and to induce him to put confidence in God.

Ilrr^eign is promised— a proof or demonstration of the truth of what the prophet had spoken, Ts. 10—17. To the assurance which Isaiah (vs. 4—9) had given of the safety of Jerusalem, Ahaz makes no reply. His whole conduct, however, shows that he is wholly unimpressed and unaflected by w hat he had said, and that he put no confidence in the assurances of the prophet. He was not looking to God for aid, but to the king of Assyria; and he doubtless felt that if his aid was not obtained, his kingdom would be destroyed. He evidently had no belief in God, and no confidence in the prophet. His mind was in a restless, uneasy condition from the impending danger, and from uncertainty whethet the aid of the king of Assyria could be procured. In order to induce him tojurn his attention to God, the only Protector, and to calbi his fears, Ahaz is commanded to ask of Jehovah any sign or miracle which he might desire in order to confirm what the prophet had spoken, vs. 10, 11. This Ahaz refuses, ver. 12. He does it under the semblance of piety, and an unwillingness to appear to tempt Jehovah. But the real cause was, doubtless, that he had no confidence in Jehovah; he had no belief in what he had spoken; and he was secretly depending on the aid of the king of Assyria. His reply was couched in respectful terms, and had the appearance of piety, and was even expressed in language borrowed from the law. Deut. v. 16. Yet important purposes were to be answered by there being a sign or proof that what the prophet had said should take place. It was im portant that Ahaz, as the king of Judah, and as the head of the people, should have evidence thai what was said was true. It was important that a suitable impression should be made on those wht were present, and on the mass of the people, inducing them to put confidence in Jehovah. It wa» important that they should look to future times; to the certain security of the nation, and to the evi dence that the nation must be preserved until the great deliverer should come. A sign is, therefore forced upon the attention of Ahaz. The prophet tells him that however reluctant he may be to seek a sign, or however incredulous he might be, yet that Jehovah would give a token, proof, or demonstration which would be a full confirmation of all that he had said. That Joould he done v^hich could be done only by Jehovah, and which could be known only by him; and that would be the demonstration that Jerusalem would be safe from this impending invasion. A virgin should bear a son, anil before he should arrive at years of discretion, or be able to discern the diflerence between good and evil-;-i. e. in a short space of time, the land would be forsaken of both its kings, vs. 14 — 16. Who this virgin was, and what is the precise meaning of this prediction, has given perhaps more perplexity to commentators than almost any other portion of the Bible. The obvious meaning seems to be this. Some young female, who was then a virgin, and who was unmarried at the time when the prophet spoke, would conceive, and bear a son. 2'o that son a name would be given, or his birth in the circumstances in which it occurred would make such a name proper, as would indicate that God was with them, and would be their protector. Maternal affection would give the child the name Immanuel. The child would be nurtured up in the usual way among the Jews (ver. 15) luitil he would be able to discern between good and evil— i. e. until he should arrive at years of discretion. Between the time which should elapse from the conception of the child, and the time when he should arrive at an age to distinguish good from evil, that is in about three years, the land should be forsaken of the hostile kings, ver. 16. This seems to be the obvious meaning of this passage: and in this way only could thi» be a clear and satisfactory evidence to Ahaz of the certainty that the land would be entirely and per-.inanently free from the invasion. God only could know this; and therefore this was a proof of tht certainty of what Isaiah had said. But though this is the obvious meaning, and though such an eveni only couIq be a sign to Ahaz that the land would be forsaken of both the invading kings, j'et there ii no reason to doubt that the prophet so couched what he said— so expres:«ed this by direction of the Holy Ghost, as to be applicable also to another much more important event whrcn was to be also, and in a much more important sense, a sign of the protection of God— the birth of the Messiah. He therefore selected words which, while they were applicable to the event immediately to occur, would also iover much larger ground, and be descriptive ofmore important events— and events which were inthA te.7ne line and direction with that immediately to come to pass— the certainty of the divine protection, and of ultimate freedom from ail danger. The language, therefore, has at the commencement of the prophecy a fullness of meaning which is not entirely niet by the immcliate event which was to occur ftnd whi(h can be entirely fulfilled only by the great event wiiich Isaiah ever hud in his eye- -t^e birtt

•f the Messiah. The mind of Isaiah would very naturally be canied forward to that future event. I« accordance wilh the laws of what may be called prophetic suggestion or association, see Intro. ^7. iii. (3), and which are constantly exemplified in Isaiah, his mind would fix on better times, and mora happy events. He saw the birth of a child in a future age of which this was but the emblem. That was to be born literally of a virgin. His appropriate name, from his nature, and from his being th« evidence of the divine favour and presence, would be Immanuel — as the appropriate name of this child would be Immanuel because he would be the pledge of the divine protection and presence. The idea is, that there is a fullness of meaning in the words used, which will apply to future eventa more appropriately than to the one immediately before the writer. That there is rapid transition— a sudden carrying the mind forward to rest on a future more important event which has been tuggested by the language used, and ^hich is in the mind of the speaker or writer so much more important than that which was first mentioned, as completely to absorb the attention. The reasons for the vifew here given are detailed at length in the Notes on ch." vii. vs. 14—16.

IV. The prophet had thus far directed all his efforts to convince Ahaz that from the quarter from which they had apprehended danger, nothing was to be feared. He now, however (vs. 17—25), proceeds to assure them that danger would come from the quarter where they least expected it— from the very quarter where Ahaz was seeking aid and deliverance— the kin^ of Assyria. He assures him that the king of Assyria would take advantage of the alliance, and under pretence of aiding him, would tJirn every thing to his own account, and would ultimately bring desolation on the land of Judah. The calamities which would follow from this unhappy alliance, the prophet proceeds to state and un.bid, and with that concludes the chapter.— It is evident from 2 Kings xvi. 7, that the discourse of Isaiah made no impression on the mind of Ahaz. He sent messengers with valuable presents to Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria. Tiglatn-Pileser professedly entered into the views of Ahaz, and promised his aid. He went up acainst Damascus and took it (2 Kings xvi. 9), after Ahaz had suffered a terrible overthrow from the united armies of Rezin and Pekah. The land of Samaria was laid waste by him, and a large part of the inhabitants carried captive to Assyria. 2 Kings xv. 29. Thus the prediction of Isaiah, that the land should be forsaken by two kings (ch. vii. 16), was fulfilled. But this deliverance from their invasion was purchased by Ahaz at a vast price. The real purpose of Tiglath- Pileser was not to aid Ahaz, but to make him and his kingdom dependent and tributary (2 Chron. xxviii. 21); and this alliance was the first in the succession of calamities which came upon Judah and Jerusalem, and which ended only under Hezekiah by the entire destruction of the army of Sennacherib. See ch. xxxvii. During the remainder of the reign of Ahaz, he was tributary to Assyria; and when Hezekiah (2 Kings xvii. 7) endeavoured to throw off the yoke of Assyria, the attempt involved him in war; subjected his kingdom to invasion; and was attended with a loss of no small part of the cities and towns of his kingdom. See 2 Kinjrs xviii. xix. xx. Isa. xxxvi. xxxvii. Comp. Notes on ch, viii. 8, X. 28—32. Thus the second part of this prophecy was fulfil'<id. The fuller statement of these important transactions will be found in the Notes on the various p iss:;ses \vliich relate to these events.

1 And *it came to pass in.the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and

1. In the days of Ahaz. Ahaz began to reign about 738 years before Christ. By a comparison of 2 Kings xvi. 5, &c., with 2 Chron. xxviii. 5, &c., it will be seen that Judea was twice invaded by Rezin and Pekah in the reign of Ahaz. See the Analysis of the chapter. ^ That Rezin, Sec. This confederacy was formed in the time of Jotham. 2 Kings xv. 37. But it was not carried into execution during his reign. It is evident from this place that it was executed in the early part olthe reign of Ahaz; probably in the first or second year of his reign. IT Syria— tJ*!!!!^, Ardm, so called from Aram (Gen. X. 22, 23), a son of Shem, and who peopled its chief provinces. It comprehended the country lying between the Euphrates east, the Medit<*rranean west, Cilicia north, and Phenicia, Judea and Arabia south. Bee Notes on ch. xvii Syria of the

Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem, to war against it. but c ould not prevail against it.

two rivers is Mesopotamia. Syria of Damascus, so called because Damascus was its capital, extended eastward along Mount Libanus, but its limits varied according to the power of the princes of Damascus, After the reign of the Seleucidae, Syria came to denote the kingdom or region of which Antioch was the capital. Here it denotes the Syria lying around Damascus, and of which Damascus was the capital. Calmet. V King of Israel. Of the ten tribes called the Kingdom of Israel, or Samaria. Note ch. i 1. IT Went up. Jerusalem was situated on hills, and on the highest part of the land. But it is possible that this language is derived from the fact tha; it was the capital. The language is used even when the region from which the trav eller comes does not lie lower than the city Thus it is not uncommon t« speak of going up to liondon, Paris, &c.

2 And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria *is confederate with Ephraim: and his heart was moved and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind.

IT Could not prevail. Heb. " could not fight against it," i. e. with happy result, or with success. He was not able to take it. That the allied kings really besieged Ahaz, is evident from 2 Kings xvi. 5: They " came up to Jerusalem to war, and they besieged Ahaz, but they could not overcome him." The reason why they could not take Jerusalem was probably not only because it was a strong place and well defended, but because there was intelligence that their own dominions were threatened with an invasion by the Assyrians, and they could not protract their siege of Jerusalem long enough to take it.

2. And it was told the house of David. That is, the royal family; or the king and princes; the government. Ahaz was the descendant and successor of David. IT Syria is confederate with Ephraim. Ephraim was one of the tribes of Israel, and the kingdom of Israel was often called Ephraim, or the kingdom of Ephraim; in the same way as the tribes of Judah and Benjamin were called the kingdom of Judah. The phrase " is confederate with," is in Hebrew " resteth on." See margin. The meaning is, that Syria was sjipported by Ephraim, or was allied with Ephraim. The kingdom of Israel or Ephraim was situated between Syria and Jerusalem. Of course, the latter could not be attacked without marching through the former, and without their aid. In this sense it was that Syria, or the Aramaeans, relied or rested on Ephraim. Though Syria was by far the stronger power, yet it was not strong enough to attack Jerusalem had the kingdom of Israel been opposed to it. ^ And his heart. The heart of the king — of Ahaz, IT Was moved as the trees of the wood. This

3 Then said he Lord unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou and *Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool, in the 'highway of the fuller's field;

is a very beautiful and striking image It expresses universal trembling, consternation, and alarm, as the trees are moved together when the wind passes violently over them. A similar expression is found in Ovid. In Canaces, Epist. xi. vs. 76, 77.

Ut quatitur tcpido fraxina virga r< to

Sic mea vibrari patlentia membra videres.

3. Then said the Lord. In regard to the purposes for which Isaiah was sent to meet Ahaz, and the reason why this place was selected, see the Analysis of the chapter. IT Thou and Shearjashuh. The meaning of the name Shear-jashub is, " the remnant shall return." The names which Isaiah gave to his sons were significant or emblematic of some important events which were to occur to the Jews. They were for signs to the people, and had been given in order to keep before the nation the great truth that God was their protector, and that howeve • much they might suffer or be punished, yet the nation would not be totally destroyed until the great Deliverer should come. See Note on ver. 14, and ch. viii. 3. Why this name was given to this son, or on what occasion, is not certainly known. It is probable, however, that it was with reference to the future calamities and captivity of the Jews, denoting that a part of the people would return to the land of their fathers. Comp. ch. x. 21, 22. The name was a remembrancer given by him as a prophet perhaps, some I'Ime before this, that the nation was not t6 be wholly annihilated — a truth which Isaiah every where keeps before them in his prophecies. Comp. Note ch. vi. 13. IVhy Shear-jashub accompanied Isaiah now is not recorded. It mi^hi oe as a pledge to Ahaz of the purpose of the Lord that the people should not be destroyed. Ahaz may have been apprised of the reason why the name was given, and his presence might serve to mitigate his fears. IT At the end of the conduit. A conduit is a pipe, or other conductor of water. The water flowed from a fountain, but was conducted to different receptacles for the supply of the city. IT Of the upper pool. Or the upper receptacle, or pond. Robinson (Bib. Research, i. 483) and Pococke (Descr. of the East, ii. 25,26) suppose that the Upper and Lower Pools referred to by Isaiah were on the west side of the city, the ruins of which now remain. The Upper Pool is now commonly called by the monKS Gihon, and by the natives Birket el Mamilla. It lies in the basin forming the head of the Valley of Hinnom or Gihon, about Beven hundred yards west-northwest from the YSfa Gate, on the west of Jerusalem. The sides of this pool are built of hewn stones laid in cement, with steps at the corners by which to descend into it. The bottom is level. The dimensions are as follows:

There is no water-course, or other visible means, by which water is now brought into this reservoir, but it is probable that it was filled in the rainy seasons by the waters which flowed from the higher ground round about. From this Upper Pool a part of the water was conveyed into the city to the Pool of Hezekiah, lying within the walls and situated some distance to the northeastward of the Yafa Gate. " Hezekiah stopped the upper watercourse of Gihon, and brought it straight down to the west side of the city of David." 2 Chron. xxxii. 30. Comp. Notes on ch. xxii. 9. This Upper Pool had a trench or ' conduit,' and a considerable part of the waters were allowed *,o flow through this to the Lower Pool. The "Lower Pool" is ment'oned in the Old Testament only tnce, and that by Isaiah (ch. xxii. 9), and there without any hint of its lo« rality. There is now a large Lowe; Pool on the western side of Jerusalem^ which is not improbably the one intended, and which stands in contrast with the one here mentioned. Thia pool is called by the Arabs Birket es- Sultdn. There is at present no othej pool in the vicinity of Jerusalem to which the description in Isaiah can be well applied. This reservoir is situated in the Valley of Hinnom or Gihon, southward from the Yafa Gate. Its northern end is nearly upon a line with the southern wall of the city. The pool was formed by throwing strong walls across the bottom of the valley, between which the earth was wholly removed. A road crosses on the causeway at the southern end. The following are the measurements of thia pool:

This reservoir was probably filled from the rains, and from the superfluous waters of the Upper Pool. It is now in ruins. The water from this pooJ would flow off into the valley of Hinnom, and thence into the valley of Jehoshaphat or Kedron, or subsequently into the pool of Hezekiah, situated within the city. See Notes on ch. xxii 9, 11. Why Ahaz was at that place the prophet does not say. It is possible he was examining it to see whethei the fountain could be stopped up, or the water diverted, so that it could nol be used by the enemy, and so that they could be prevented from maintaining a protracted siege. Comp 2 Chron xxxii. 4. It is probable that the king had gone to this place attended by many of his counsellors, and as thia was the main source of the supply of water to the city, a multitude would be there, and Isaiah could have an opportunity not only to deliver his message to Ahaz and his court, but in the presence of a considerable concourse of people, and might thus inspire confidence among the alarmed and dejected inhabitants of the city. IT In thi

4 And say unto him, Take Iieed, and be quiet; fear not, ^neither be faint-hearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah.

5 Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah, have taken evil counsel against thee. Haying,

highway of the fuller's field. In the ^lace occupied as a situation on which Ao spread, or suspend cloth that was Aleached, or dyed. This situation would be chosen because much water was needed in bleachmg or dying cloth. The name '• highway," denotes the public path, or road that led to this field. Probably on one side of this highway was the aqueduct, and on the other the fuller's field. Of the Fuller's Field, Eusebius and Jerome merely say that it was shown in their day in the suburbs of the city. Onom. an. Ager Fullonis.

4. Take heed. Heb., Keep thyself, 4hat is, from fear. IT Neither be fainthearted. Heb. Let not thy heart be tender. That is, let it not be easily moved; be strong, fearless. IT For the tails, &.C. There is much beauty and force in this comparison. The- design of Isaiah is to diminish the fear of Ahaz. Instead therefore of calling them firebrands — burning and setting on fire every thing in their way, he calls them the tails — i. e. the ends, or remains of firebrands — almost consumed themselves, and harmless. And instead of saying that they were burning and blazing, he says that they were rierely smoking — the half-burnt, decaying remains of what might have been encc formidable. The prophet also is just a'oout to announce their approaching destruction by the Assyrians. See ver. 6. He therefore speaks of them as already almost extinguished, and incapable of doing extensive injury. T Son of Remaliah. Pekah. ver. 1. "It

6 Let us go up against Judan, and 'vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and »3t u king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal:

7 Thus saith the Lord God, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.

8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Da-

is by way of contempt that the king of Israel is not called by his own name. The Hebrews and Arabians, when they wish to speak reproachfully of any one, omit his proper name and call him merely the son of this or th£ -/, especially when his father is but little known or respected. So Saul names David in contempt the son of Jesse. 1 Sam. XX. 27, 31." Hengstenberg.

6. And vex it. Margin, or weaken it. Probably the word means to throw into-consternation or fear by besieging it. Gescnius. IT And let us make a breach therein. Let us break down the walls, &c. IT And set a king. Subdue it, and make it tributary to the allied kingdoms of Syria and Ephraim. IT The son of Tabeal. Nothing more is known of this person. He might have been some disaffected member of the royal family of David who had sought the aid of ReziHi and Pekah, and who would be allie 1 to them, or tributary to them. It i»i possible that he had already a party in Jerusalem in his favour. Comp. ch. iriii. 12. Probably the two kings wished to cut olT such portions of the territory of Judah as should be convenient to them, and to set a king over the remainder who should be under their control, or to divide the whole between themselves by setting up a king who would be tributary to both.

8. For the head of Syria. The capital. The head is often used in this sense. Ills Damascus. Fcr an account of this city see Notes on chap, xvii. 1. Comp. Notes Acts ix. 2. Th«

masuus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall

sense of this passage is, * Do not be alarmed as if Rezin was about to enlarge his kingdom by taking Judea and making Jerusalem his capital. The revolution which these kings contemplate cannot be accomplished. The kingdoms of Syria and Israel shall not be enlarged by the conquest of Judah. The centre of their power shall remain where it is now, and their dominion shall not be extended by conquest. The capital of Syria is, and shall continue to be, Damascus. The king of Syria shall be confined within his present limits, and Jerusalem therefore shall be safe.* IT The head of Damascus. The ruler, or king of Damascus is Rezin. IT And within threescore and five years. There has been some inquiry why Ephraim is mentioned here, as the prophet in the former part of the verse was speaking of Syria. But it should be remembered that he was speaking of Syria and Ephraim as confederate. It was natural therefore to intimate, in close connection, that no fear was to be apprehended from either of them. — There has been much difficulty experienced in establishing the fact of the exact fulfilment of this, and in fixing the precise event to which it refers. One catastrophe happened to the kingdom of Ephraim or Israel within one or two years of this time, when Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria, invaded the land and carried no small part of the people to Assyria, 2 Kings XV. 29. Another occurred in the next reign, the reign of Hoshea, king of Israel, when Shalmaneser king of Assyria took Samaria, and carried Israel away captive into Assyria, 2 Kings xvii. 1-6. This occurred in the twelfth year of Ahaz. But that the Israelites remained in Samaria, and kept up the forms of a civil community, and were not finally carried away until the time of Esarhaddon is evident. Compare 2 Chron. xxxiv. 6, 7, 33, xxxv. 18. S Kings xxiii. 19,20. Manasseh, king *»f Judah, was taken captive by the

Ephraim be broken, Hhai it b« not a people.

king of Assyria's captahis (2 Cliron. xxxiii. 2) in the twenty-second year of his reign — that is, sixty-five jeari from the second year of Ahaz,?,hen this prophecy is supposed to have been delivered. And it is also supposed that at this time Esarhaddon took away the remains of the people in Samaria, and put an end to the kingdom, and put in their place the people who are mentioned in Ezra iv. 3. Dr. Juhh as quoted by Lowth. The entire extinction of the people of Israel and the kingdom did not take place till Esarhaddon put new colonists from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from Hi math, and from Sepharvaim in the cities of Samaria, instead of the children of Israel. 2 Kings xvii. 24. Comp. Ezra iv. 2, 10. Long before this, indeed, the power of the kingdom had been on the wane; a large portion of the people had been removed (2 Kings xvii. 5, 6, 18); but its entire extinction was not accomplished, and the kingdom utterly destroyed, until this was done. Till this occurred the land might be still regarded as in the possession somewhat of its former people, and all hopes of their rising again to the dignity of a kingdom was no* extinguished. But when foreigners were introduced, and took possession of the land; when all the social organization of the ancient people was dissolved; then it might be said that * Ephraim was for ever broken,' and that it was demonstrated that it * should be no more a people/ Its inhabitants weie transferred to a distant land — no longer to be organized into a peculiar community, but to mingle with other people, and finally all traces of their origin as Jews were to be lost. This event of placing the foreigners in the cities of Samaria occurred just sixty-fve years after it had been predicted by Isaiah. Archbishop Usher.

It may be asked here how the statement of what was to occur at so remote a period as sixty -five years could b«

9 And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah's son. ^If ye

# or, Do yc not believe 1 it is because ye are not stable.

any consolation to Ahaz, or any security that the designs of the kings of Syria and Samaria should then fail of being accomplished 1 To this we may reply, — (1.) It was the assurance that Jerusalem could not be finally and permanently reduced to submission before these dreaded enemies. Their power was to cease, and of course Jerusalem bad nothing ultimately and finally to dread. (2.) The design was to inspire confidence in Jehovah, and to lead Ahaz to look directly to him. If these formidable powers could not ultimately prevail, and if there was a certain prediction that they should be destroyed, then it was possible for God, if Ahaz would look to him, nolo to interpose, and save the city. To inspire that confidence in Jehovah was the leading purpose of Isaiah. (3.) This prediction is in accordance with many which occur in Isaiah, that all the enemies of the people of God would be ultimately defeated, and that God as the head of the theocracy would defend and deliver his people. See Notes on eh. xxxiv. A kingdom that was so soon to be destroyed as Ephraim was, could not be an object of great dread and alarm. — RosenmQller conjectures, that Isaiah refers to some unrecorded prophecy made before his time, that in sixty-five years, Israel would be de- Btroyed; and that he refers here to that orophecy to encourage the heart of Ahaz, and to remind him that a kingdom could not be very formidable that was so soon to come to an end. At all events, there is no contradiction between the prophecy and the fiilfilment, for within the time here mentioned Ep/jraim ceased to be a kingdom. The Ancient Jewish writers, with one conmm Bcnt, say, that Isaiah referred here to ^ the prophecy of Amos who prophesied in the days of Uzziah, and whose predictions relate mainly to the kingdom sf Israel. But as Am- does not spe-

will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.

cify any particular time when the kingdom should be destroyed, it is apparent that Isaiah here could not have referred to any recorded prophec)' of his. IT iJe broken. Its power shall be destroyed; the kingcom,as a kingdom, shall come to an end.

9. And the head of Ephraim. The capital city of Ephraim, or of Israel. IT Is Samaria. This was long the capital of the kingdom of Israel. For a description of this city, see Notes on ch. xxviii. 1. The meaning of the prophet is, that Samaria should continue to be the head of Ephraim; that is,.Terusalem should not be made its capital. ^Ifye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established. There is considerable variety in the interpretation of these words, though the general sense is evident. The Chaldee renders them, " If ye will not believe the words of the prophet, ye shall not remain." It is probable that Ahaz, who was greatly alarmed, and who trembled at the formidable power of Syria and Israel united, received the annunciation of the prophet with much distrust. He was anxious about the means of defence, but did not trust in the promise of God by the prophet. Isaiah, therefore, assures him that if he di^ not believe him; if he did not put Confidence in God, and his promises, he should not be protected from Syria and Ephraim. They would come and destroy his kingdom. * You have no occasion,' is the language of the prophet, * to fear, God has resolved to protect you, and no portion of your land shall be taken by your enemies. Nevertheless, in order that you may obtain deliverance, you must believe his promise, and put your confidence in him, and not in the aid of the Assyrians. If you do this, your mind shall be calm, peaceful, and happy. But if you do not do this; if you rely on the aid of Assvria, you shall be troubled.

11 Ask thee a sign*^ of the Lord thy God: ask® it either

7 And tfie LORD added to tpeak.

Rlarmed, unsuccessful, and bring ruin upon yourself and nation.' This, therefoie, is an exhortation to confide solely in the promises of God; and is one of the instances constantly occurring in the Old Testament and the New, showing that by faith or confidence in God only can the mind be preserved calm when in the midst of dangers.

II. Ask thee. Ask for thyself; ask a sign that shall be convincing to thyself since thou dost not fully credit the words of the prophet. It is evident that the words of the prophet had made no impression on the mind of Ahaz. God, therefore, proposes to him to ask any vroof or demonstration which he might select; any thing that would be an indication of divine power that should put what the prophet had said beyond doubt. Had Ahaz put confidence in God, he would have believed what the prophet said without miraculous proof But he had no such confidence. The prophet, therefore, proposes that he should ask any miraculous demonstration that what he said would come to pass. This proposition was made, probably, not so much from respect to Ahaz as to leave him without excuse, and in order that the people might have the assurance that the city and kingdom were safe. IT A sign. A demonstration that shall confirm the promise now made, and that shall be an evidence that Jerusalem shall be safe. The word used here, and translated sign — rilK oth — means a flag, or standard, Num. ii.: 2; rt memorial or pledge of a covenant. Gen. xvii. II; any pledge, token or proof of a divine mission, Judges vi. 17; or a miracle wrought in attestaiion of a divine promise or message. Thia is its sense here. That which Isaiah had spoken eeemed highly improbable to Ahaz, and he asked him to seek a proof of it, if He doubted, by any prodigy or miracle. it v/as customary for miracles or prodi- £168 to be exhibited on similar occa- in the depth, or m the height above.

sions. See ch. xxxviii. 7, where the shadow on the dial of this same Ahaz was carried backward ten degrees in proof of what the prophet Isaiah had spoken. Comp. 1 Sam. ii. 27-30. 1 Kings xiii. 1-3. Ex. iii. 12. Judg. xliv. 29, 30. That the word here refers to some event which could be brought about only by divine power, is evident from the whole connexion. No mere natural occurrence could have satisfied Ahaz, or convey to the people a demonstration of the truth of what the prophet was saying. And if the prophet had been unable or unwilling to give a miraculous sign, where is the fitness of the answer of Ahaz ] How could he be regarded as in any way tempting God by asking it, unless it was something which God only could do % And how could the prophet bring the charge (ver. 13), that he had not merely oflfended men but God also? It is dear, therefore, that Isaiah was conscious that he was invested by God with the power of working a miracle, and that he proposed to perform any miracle which Ahaz should suggest that would serve to remove his doubts, and lead him to put confidence in God. H Ask it either in the depth, &c. He gave him his choice of a miracle — any sign or wonder in heaven, or on earth — above or below; a miracle in the sky, or from beneath the earth. Many of the versions understand the expression " the depth," as referring to the grave, or to the region of departed souls — -hades. So the Vulgate, Aquila, Symmaehus. The Chaldee reads it, " Seek that there may be a miracle to thee upon the earth, or a sign in the heavens." The literal meaning of the Hebrew is, " make low, ask for;" that is, ask for a sign below; obtain, by asking for thyself, a miracle that shall take place below. It may refer to the earth, or to the region undg^r the earth, since it stands in contrast with that which \a above. If it refers to the region under

12 But Ahoz said, I will not

the earth, it means that Isaiah would raise the dead to life if Ahaz desired it; if to the earth, that any wonder or miracle that should take place in the elements — as a tempest, or earthquake, should be performed. If The height above. The heaven, or the sky. So *he Pharisees desired to see a sign from heaven. Matt. xvi. 1.

]2. / toill not ask. In this case Ahaz assumed the appearance of piety, or respect tor the command of God. In Deut. vi- 16, it is written, " Thou sLalt not tempt the Lord thy God;" and Ahaz perhaps had this command in his eye. It was a professed reverence for God. But the true reason why he did not seek this sign, was that ne had already entered into a negotiation with the king of Assyria to come and defend him; and that he was even stripping the temple of God of its silver and gold to secure this assistance. 2 Kings xvi. 7, 8. When men are depending on their own devices and resources, they are unwilling to seek aid from God; and it is not uncommon if they excuse their want of trust in him by some appearance of respect for religion. IT Tempt. Try, or do a thing that shall provoke his displeasure, or seek his inierposition in a case where he has not promised it. To tempt God is the same as to put him to the proof; to see whether he is able to perform what he proposed. It is evident, however, that here there would have been no temptation of God, since a sign had been offered him by the prophet in the name of God. " The answer of Ahaz can be regarded either as one of bitter Bcorn, as if he had said, * I will not put ihy God to the proof, in which he will be found wanting. I will not embarrass thee by taking thee at thy word;* or as the language of a hypocrite who assumes the mask of reverence for God and his command " Hengstenberg. Chrysostora and Calvin regard the lat- • ter as the correct interpretation. — If it be asked here why Ahaz did not put [saiah to the test, and secure, if possil»ie, the divine confirmation to the assu- ranee that Jerusalem would be safe, tho following may be regarded as the probable reasons. (1.) He was secretly relying on the aid of Assyria. He believed that he could fortify the city, and distress the enemy by turning away the supply of water so that they could no^ carry on a siege, and that all the further aid which he needed could be derived from the Assyrians. (2.) If the miracle had been really wrought, it would have been a proof that Jehovah was the true God — a proof which Ahaz had no desire of witnessing. He was a gross idolater; and he was not anxious to witness a demonstration which would have convinced him of the folly and sin of his own course of life. (3.) If the miracle could not be wrought, as Ahaz seems to have supposed would be the case, then it would have done much to unsettle the confidence of the people, and to have produced agitation and alarm. It is probable that a considerable portion of the people were worshippers of Jehovah, and were looking to him for aid. The pious, and the great mass of those who conformed to the religion of their fathers, would have been totally disheartened — and this was a result which Ahaz had no desire to produce. (4) Michaelis has suggested another reason drawn from the character of idolatry. According to the prevailing notions at that period, every nation had its own gods. Those of one people were more, and those of another less powerful. See Isa. x. 10, 11, xxxvi. 18-20, xxxvii. 10-13. If a miracle had been performed, Ahaz might have believed that it was performed by the god of the country, who might have had the disposition, but not the power, to defend him. It would have been to the mind of the idolater no proof that the god of Syria or Samaria was not more powerful, and might not have easily overcome him. Ahaz seems to have regarded Jehovah as suc?i a God — as one of the numerous gods which were to be worshipped, and perhaps as not the most powerful of the tutelary divinities of the nations- Thia

13 And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but

was certainly the view of the surrounding idolaters (ch. x. 10, ll,xxxvi. 18- 20); and it is highly probable that this view prevailed among the idolatrous Israelites.

13. 0 house of David (ver. 2). By this is to be understood not only the king himself, but the princes and rulers. Perhaps in addressing him thus, there was implied no small irony and reproach. David confided in God. But Ahaz, his descendant, feared to tempt God! As if God could not aid him! Worthy descendant he of the pious and devoted David!! IT Is it a small thing. You are not satisfied with wearying men, but you would also fatigue and wear out the patience of God. IT Weary. Exhaust their patience; oppose them; prevent their sayings and messages; try their spirits, &,c. IT 31en. Prophets; the men who are sent to instruct, and admonish. IT Will ye weary my God also? Will you refiwe to keep his commands; try his patience; and exhaust his long- BufFering 1 Comp. ch. i. 14. The sense of this passage seems to be this: When Ahaz refused to believe the bare prediction of the prophet, his transgression was the more excusable. He had wearied and provoked him, but Isaiah had as yet given to Ahaz no direct demonstration that he was from God; no outward proof of his divine mission; and the offence of Ahaz might be regarded as in a sense committed against man. It was true, also, that Ahaz had, by his unbelief and idolatry, greatly tried the feelings of the pious, and wearied those who were endeavouring to promote true religion. But now the case was changed. God had offered a sign, and it had been publicly rejected. It was a direct insult to God; and an offence that demanded reproof. Accordingly the manner of Isaiah is at once changed. Soft, and gentle, and mild before, he now became bold, open, fehsment. The honour of God was will ye weary my Grod also?

14 Therefore the Lord him. self shall give you a sign: Be«

concerned; a direct affront had been offered to him by the sovereign of the people of God; and it was proper for the prophet to show that that was an offence which affected the Divine Majesty, and demanded the severest reproof.

14. Therefore. Since you will not ask a pledge that the land shall be safe, Jehovah will furnish one unasked. A sign or proof is desirable in the case, and Jehovah will not withhold it because a proud and contemptuous monarch refuses to seek it. Perhaps there is no prophecy in the Old Testament on which more has been written, and which has produced more perplexity among commentators than this. And after all it still remains, in many respects, very obscure. Its general original meaning is not difficult. It is, that in a short time — within the time when a young woman, then a virgin, should conceive and bring forth a child, and that child should grow old enough to distinguish between good and evilthe calamity which Ahaz feared would be entirely removed. The confederacy would be broken up, and the land forsaken by both those kings. The conception and birth of a child — which could be known only by him who knows all future events — would be the evidence of such a result. His appropriate name would be such as would be a sign, or an indication that Goa was the protector of the nation, or was stili with them. — In the examination of this difficult prophecy, my first object will be to give an explanation of the meaning of the words and phrases as they occur in the passage, and then to show, as far as I may be able, what was the design of the passage, "fi The Lord himself. Heb. Adonai. See this word explained in the Note on ch. i. 24. He will do it without being asked to do it; he will do it though it is rejected and despised; he will do it because it is importanf for the welfare of the nation, and for the confirmation of his religion, to furnish a demonstration to the people that he is the only true God. It is clearly implied here, that the sign should be such as Jehovah alone could give. It would be such as would be a demonstration that he presided over the interests of the people. If this refers to the birth of a child, then, it means that this was an event which could be known only to God, and which could be accomplished only by his agency. If it refers to the miraculous conception and birth of the Messiah, then it means that that was an event which none but God could accomplish. The true meaning I shall endeavour to state in the Notes at the close of ver. 16, T Shall give you. Primarily to the house of David — the king and royal family of Judah. It was especially designed to assure the government that the kingdom would be safe. Doubtless, however, the word " you" is designed to include the nation, or the people of the kingdom of Judah. It would be so public a sign, and so clear a demonstration, as to convince t?iem that their city and land must be ultimately safe. IT A sign. A pledge; a token; an evidence of the fulfilment of what is predicted. The word does not of necessity denote a miracle, though it is often so applied. See Notes on ver. 11. Here it means a proof, a demonstration, a certain indication that what he had said should be fulfilled. As that was to be such a demonstration as to show that he was able to deliver the land, the word here denotes that which was miraculous, or which could be effected only by Jehovah. IT Behold. HSri. This interjection is a very common one in the Old Testament. It is used to arrest attention; to indicate the importance of what was about to b« said. It serves to designate persons &nd things; places and actions. It is used in lively descriptioas, and animated discourse; when any thing unusual was said, or occurred; or any thing which pecu* culiarly demanded attention. Gen. xii. 19, xvi. 16,xviii. 9, i. 29, xl. 9. Ps, cxxxiv. 1. It means here, that an event was to occur which demanded the attention of the unbelieving monarch, and the regard of the people— an event which would be a full demonstration of what the prophet had said, that God would protect and save the nation. IT A virgin. This word pro-,.pcrly means a girl, maiden, virgin, a young woman who is unmarried, and who is of marriageable age. The word n^35, dhnd, is derived from the verb ^c-? » aldm, to conceal, to hide, to cover, The word ClP5>, elem, from the same verb, is applied to a young man in 1 Sam. xvi. 56, xx. 22. The word here translated a virgin is applied to Rebecca, Gen. xxiv. 43, and to Pi'Iiriam, the sister of Moses, Ex. ii. 8. It occurs in only seven places in the Old Testament. Besides those already mentioned it is found in Ps. Ixviii. 25. Cant. i. 3, vi. 8, and Prov. xxx. 19. In all these places, except, perhaps, in Proverbs, it is used in its obvious natural sense to denote a young, unmarried female. In the Syriac the word yiN% alem, means to grow up, juvenis f actus est; juvenescere fecit. Hence the derivatives are applied to youth; to young men; to young women — to those who are growing up, and becoming youths. The etymology of the word requires ua to suppose that it means one who is growing up to a marriageable state, or to the age of puberty. The word maiden, or virgin, expresses the correct idea. Hengstenberg contends that it means one in the unmarried state; Gesenius, that it means simply the being of marriageable age, the age of puberty. The Hebrews usually employed the word ^J^in3 bethuld, to denote a pure virgin (a word which tht Syriac translation uses here); but the word here evidently denotes one whi was then t^nmarried; and thou.|h its primary idea is that of one who is growing up, or in a marriageable slate, yet the whole connection requires us to understand it of one who was not then wMrried, and who was, therefore, regarded and designated as a virgin. The Vulgate renders it " virgo." The LXX Ti7ru(jS£vos,a virgin — a word which they use as a translation of the Hebrew i^b^irn ill Ex. xxii. 16, 17. Lev. xxi. 3,^14. "Deut xxii. 19, 23, 28, xxxii. 25. Judges xix 24, xxi. 12, and in thirtythree other places (See.Trommius' Concord.); of "T^?? nddrd, a girl, in Gen. xxiv. 14,16, 55,xxxiv. 3 (twice), 1 Kings i. 2; and of "^^^^ dhnd only in Gen. xxiv. 43, and in Isa. vii. 14. The word in the view of the LXX translators, therefore, conveyed the proper idea of a virgin. The Chaldee uses substantially the same word as the Hebrew. The idea of a virgin is therefore the most obvious and natural idea in the use of this word. It does not, however, imply that the person spoken of should be a virgin when the child should be born; or that she should ever after be a virgin. It means simply that one who was then a virgin, but who was of marriageable age, should conceive, and bear a son. Whether she was to be a virgin at the time when the child was born, or was to remain such afterwards, are inquiries which cannot be determined by a philological. examination of the word. It is evident, also, that the word is not opposed to either of these ideas.— Why the name which is thus given to an unmarried woman was derived from the verb to hide, to conceal, is not agreed among Lexicographers. The more probable opinion is, that it was because to the time of marriage, the daughter was supposed to be hidden or concealed in the family of the parents; she was kept shut up, as it were, in the paternal dwelling. This idea is given by Jerome, who says, " The name is given to a virgin because she is said to be hidden or secret; because she does not expose herself to the gaze of men, but B kept with great care under the custody of pannts.** The sum of the in quiry here Into the meaning of tha word translated virgin is, that it does not differ from that word as used by us. The expression means no more than that one who was then a virgin should have a son, and that this should be a sign to Ahaz. IT And shall call his name. It was usual for mothers to give names to their children. Gen. iv. 1, xix. 37, xxix. 32, xxx. 18. There is, therefore, no reason to suppose, as many of the older interpreters did, that the fact that it is said the mother should give the name, was a proof that the child should have no human father. Such arguments are unworthy of notice; and only show to what means men have resorted in defending the doctrines, and in interpreting the pages of the Bible. The phrase, " she will name," is moreover the same as * they shall name/ or he shall be named. " We are not then to suppose that the child should actually receive the name Immanuel as a proper name, since according to the usage of the prophet, and especially of Isaiah, that is often ascribed to a person or thing as a name which belongs to him in an eminent degree as an attribute. See ch. ix. 5, Ixi. 6, Ixii. 4." Hengstenherg. The idea is, that that would be a name that might be appropriately given to the child. Another name was also given to this child, expressing substantially the same thing, with a circumstantial difference. See Note on ch. viii. 3. IT Immanuel. Heb. God with us — b5<!l3^5_from ^i< God, and 13^^ with us. The name is designed to denote that God would be with the nation as its protector, and the birth of this child would be a sign or pledge of it. The mere circumstances that this, nanae ia given. However, does not imply any thing in regard to the nature or rank" of the child; for nothing was more common among the Jews than to incorporate the name, or a part of the name of the Deity with the names which they gave to their children. Thus Isaiah denotes the salvation of I Jehovah; Jeremiah, the exaltation of

15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to

grandeur of Jehovah, each compounded of two words in which the name Jehovah constitues a part. Thus also in Elijah the two names of God are combined, and it meaas literally God the Jehovah. Thus also Cliab, God my father; Eliada, knowledge of God j Eliakim, the resurrection of God; Elihu, he is my God; Elisha, salvation of God. In none of these instances is the fact that the name of God is incorporated with the proper name of the individual any argument in respect to his rank or character. It is true that Matthew, ch. i. 23, uses this name as properly expressing the rank of the Messiah; but all that can be demonstrated from the use of the name by Matthew is, that it properly designated the nature and rank of the Lord Jesus. It was a pledge, then, that God was with his people, and the name designated by the prophet had a complete fulfilment in its use as applied to the Messiah. Whether the Messiah be regarded as himself a pledge and demonstration of the presence and protection of God, or whether the name be regarded as descriptive of his nature and dignity, yet there was an appropriateness in applying it to him. It was fully expressive of the event of the incarnation. Jerome supposes that the name Immanuel denotes nothing more than divine aid and protection. Others have supposed, however, that the name must denote the assumption of our nature by God in the person of the Messiah, i. e. that God became man. So Theodoret, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Lactantius, Chrysostom, Calvin, Rosenmaller, and others. The true interpretation is, that no argument to prove that can be derived from the use of the name; but when the fact of the incarnation has been demonstrated from olher sources, the name is appropriately expressive of that event. So it seems to be used by Matthew.

15. Butter and honey. The word rendered butter d^'^^}^. hemdh), denotes not butter^ but tliick and curdled refuse t le evil, and choo.se the milk. This was the common mode of using milk as an article of food m the East, and is still. In no passage in the Old Testament does butter seem to be meant by the word. Jarchi says. that this circumstance denotes a state of plenty, meaning that the land should yield its usual increase notwitstanding the threatened invasion. Eustatius on this place says, that it denotes delicate food. The more probable interpretation is, that it was the usual food of children, and that it means that the child should be nourished in the customary manner. That this was *he common nourishment of childreii is abundantly proved by Bochart. Hieroz. P. I. lib. 11. ch. 51, p. 630. Barnabas in his epistle says, " the infant is first nourished with honey, and then with milk." This was done usually by the prescription of physicians. Paulus says, " it is fit that the first food given to a child be honey, and then milk." So Aetius, " give to a child as its first food honey." See Bochart. Some have indeed supposed that this refers to the fact that the Messiah should be man as well as God, and that his eating honey and butter was expressive of the fact that he had a human nature I But against this mode of interpretation, it is hoped, it is scarcely needful now to protest. It is fitted to bring the Bible into contempt, and the whole science of exegesis into scorn. The Bible is a book of sense, and it should be interpreted on principles that commend themselves to the sober judgment of mankind. The word rendered honey —

^5*7 — is the same word — dibs — which is now used by the Arabs to denote the syrup or jelly which is made by boiling down wine. This is about the consistence of molasses, and is used as an article of food. Whether it was so employed in the time of Isaiah cannot now be determined, but the word here may be used to denote honey. Comp. Note ver. 22. IT That he may knoio. As this translation now stands, it is aj'

16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that

intelligible. It would seem from this, that his eating butt/*r and honey would contribute to his knowing good and evil. But this cannot be the meaning. It evidently denotes * until he shall know,' or * at his knowing/ Nord. Heb. Gram. § 1026. 3. He shall be nourished in the usual way, until he shall arrive at such a period of life as to know good from evil. The LXX render it npivr) yvujvai avrdv, before he knows. The Chaldee " until he shall know." IT To refuse the evil, &c. Ignorance of good and evil denotes infancy. Thus in Nineveh it is said there were " more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and left hand," commonly supposed to denote infants. Jonah iv. 11. Comp. Deut. i. 39. The meaning is, that he should be nourished in the usual mode in infancy, and be-^ fore he should be able to discern right from wrong, the land should be forsaken of its kings. At what particular period of life this occurs it may not be easy to determine. A capability to determine in some degree between good and evil, or between right and wrong, is usually manifest when the child is two or three years of age. It is evinced when there is a capability of understanding law, and feeling that it is wrong to disobey it. This is certainly shown at a very early period of life; and it is not improper therefore to suppose that here a time was designated which was not more than two or three years.

16. The land that thou ahhorrest. The land concerning which thou art so much alarmed or distressed; that is, the united land of Syria and Ephraim. It is mentioned here as " the land," or as one land, because they were united then in a firm alliance, so as to constitute, in fact, or for the purposes of invasion and conquest, one people or nation. The phrase " which thou ibhorrest,'* means properly, which thou loathest — the primary idea of the word 22^p qutz being to feel a nausea, or ta vomit. It then means, to fear, or to feel alarm; and this probably is the meaning here. Ahaz, however, evidently looked upon the nations of Syria and Samaria with disgust, as well as with alarm. This is the construction which is given of this passage by the Vulgate, Calvin, Grotius, Junius, Gataker, and Piscator, as well as by our common version. Another construction, however, has ieen given of the passage by Vitringa. J. D. Michaeiis, Lowth, Gesenius, RosenmUller, Hengstenberg, and Hendewerk. According to this, the meaning is not that the land should be the object of abhorrence, but that the kings themselves were the object of dislike or dread; and not merely that the two kings should be removed, but that the land itself was threatened with desolation. This construction is free from the objections of an exegetical kind to which the other is open, and agrees better with the idiom of the Hebrew. According to this, the correct translation would be:

" For before the child shall learn to refuse the evil and to choose the good, Desolate shall be the land, before whose two kings thou art in terror."

IT Of both her kings. Ahaz took the silver and gold that was found in the temple, and sent it as a present to the king of Assyria. Induced by this, the king of Assyria marched against Damascus and slew Rezin, 2 Kings xvi 9. This occurred but a short time after the threatened invasion of the land by Rezin and Remaliah, in the third year of the reign of Ahaz, and consequently about one year after this prophecy was delivered. Pekah, the son of Remaliah, was slain by Hoshea, the son of Elah, who conspired against him, slew him, and reigned in his stead. This occurred in the fourth year of the reign of Ahaz, for Pekah reigned twenty years. Ahaz began to reign in th«i

•eventeenth y(far of the reign of Pekah, and as Pekah was slain after he had reigned twenty years, it follows that he was slain in the fourth year of the reign of Ahaz — perhaps not more than two years after this prophecy was delivered. See 2 Kings xv. 27, 30, xvi. 1. We have thus arrived at a knowledge of the time intended by Isaiah in v. 16. The whole space of time was not probably more than two years.

A great variety of opinions have been entertained by interpreters in regard to this passage (vs. 14—16). It may be useful, therefore, to state briefly what those opinions have been, and then what seems to be the true meaning.

1. The first opinion is that which supposes that by the 'virgin* the wife of Ahaz is referred to, and that by the child which should be born, the prophet refers to Hezekiah. This is the opinion of the modern Jewish commentators generally. This interpretation prevailed among the Jews in the time of Justin. But this was easily shown by Jerome to be false. Ahaz reigned in Jerusalem but sixteen years (2 Kin. xvii. 2), and Hezekiah v/as twenty-five years old when he began to reign (2 Kings xviii. 2), and of course was not less than nine years old when this prophecy was delivered. Kimchi and Abarbanel then resorted to the supposition that Ahaz had a second wife, and that this refers to a child that was to be born of her. This supposition cannot be proved to be false, though it is evidently a mere supposition. It has been adopted by the Jews because they were pressed by the passage by the early Christians as constituting an argument for the divinity of Christ. The ancient Jews, it is believed, referred it mainly to the Messiah.

2. Others have supposed that the prophet designated some virgin who was then present when the king and Isaiah held their conference, and that the meaning is, ' as surely as this virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, so Burely shall the land be forsaken of its kings.' Thus Isenbiehl, Bauer, Cube, and Steudel held, as quoted by Hengstenberg, Christol. i. p. 341.

3. Others suppose that the * virgin* was not an actual, but only an ideal virgi J. Thus Michaelis expresses it: " By the time when one who is yet q virgin can bring forth (i. e. in nine months), all will be happily changed, and the present impending danger so completely passed away, that if you were yourself to name the child you would call him Immanuel." Thus Eichhorn, Paulus, Hensler, and Ammon understand it. See Hengstenberg.

4. Others suppose that the ' virgm* was the prophet's wife. Thus Eben Ezra, Jarchi, Faber, and Gesenius. Against this supposition there is only one objection which has been urged that is of real force, and that is that the prophet already had a son, and of course his wife could not be spoken of as a virgin. But this objection is entirely removed by the supposition, which is by no means improbable, that the former wife of the prophet was dead, and that he was about to be united in marriage to another who was a virgin.

In regard to the prophecy itself, there have been three opinions. I. That it refers exclusively to some event in the time of the prophet; to the birth of a child then, either of the wife of Ahaz, or of the prophet, or of some other unmarried female. This would, of course, exclude all reference to the Messiah. This was formerly my opinion; and this opinion I expressed and endeavored to maintain, in the first composition of these Notes. But a more careful examination of the passage has convinced me of its error, and satisfied me that the passage has reference to the Messiah. The reasons for this opinion I shall soon state.