IV. The quotations in the New Testament prove that it refers to the Messiah. They go to demonstrate at the same time two points. First, that such was the prevailing mode 01 interpretation at that time, otherwise the passage would not have been quoted as proof that Jesus was the Messiah; a; a secondly, that such is the correct mode of interpretation. The places where it is quoted are.he lillowing: (t.) John xii. 37, 38. " Hut though he had done so many miracles bc:o>e them, yet they believed not on him; that the saying of E>aias the prophet might, be lultilled which he spake, Lord. who hath believed our report) And to whom hath the arm o; the Ltrd been revealed?" In this passage Isaiah liii. 1, is quoted to explain the unbelief of the Jewish people in the timeol the Saviour, with the formula i a tt,\t).'••rJ<; " that it might be fulfilled," the usual formula in quoting a pas: age from the Old Testament which is fulfilled in the New. No one can doubt t hat John meant to be understood as affirming that the pa-sage in Isaiah hid a designed applicability to the person and the times of the Redeemer. The same passage is quoted by Paul in Rom. x. 16: " But they have not uL obeyed the Gospel. For L.-aias ruth, Lord, who hath believed our report?" (2.) The passage in Lukexxii 37, is stiil more decisive " For I say un'o you, that tins that is written must yet be accomplished in me. And he was reckoned among the trans.- rt s ors: ior the things concerning me have an end," i e. a completion, a fulfilment Mete Isa Iii. 12, is expressly and directly applied by th" Saviour himself to his own suffering." and death. No one can doubt that he meant to -ay that it ha«. original reference to him, and would be fulfilled it i him, 'I he same passage is applied, and in the same se:se, by Mark (ch. xv. 'JS). to the sufferings and death of the Redeemer. (:•.) in Acts viii. 35, Isa. liii. 7, 8, is apt led by Philip the Evangelist io the K< deemer; and is e.\| lain, d as having a reference to him. (1) In Matt. v;ii 17, the declaration of Isaiah (liii A), " Himsell took our infirmities, and bore our sicknesses, " is applied expressly to the Messiah. These i as.-ages directly quoting Isaiah and applying them to the Messiah, demonstrate that in view of the writers of the New Testament and of the Saviour himself, Isaiah had reference to the Messiah. To those who admit the inspiration and the divine authority of the New Testament, these prcoisare sufficient demonstration of the position.
V. This view is enforced by another consideration. It is, that not only is the passage expressly quoted in the New Testament, but it is alluded to in connection with the death of the Redeemer as an atoning sacrifice for sin, in such a manner as to show that it was regarded by the Sacred Writers as having reference to the Messiah. It is sufficient here to refer to the following places, l Pet. ii. 21— '25, Mark ix. 12, Rom. iv. 25, 1 Cor. xv. 3, 2 Cor. v. 21, John iii. 5. 1 Let. i. 19. A carelul examination of these passages would convince any one, that the writers of the New Testament were accustomed to regard the passage in Isaiah as having undoubted reference to the Messiah, arid that this was so universally the interpretation ol'the passage in their times, as to make it proper simply to refer to it without formally quoting it. It may be added here, that it accords with the current and uniform statement in tha New Testament about the design of the death of the Redeemer.
VI. One other argument may he here referred to, which I propose to state more at length when lha exposition of the lilt, chapter shall have been made. It arises from the exact correspondence between the passage and the events in the life, the sufferings, and the death of the Redeemer— a correspondence so minute that it cannot be the result of accident: so much depending on external circumstances and on the agency of others, that it could not have been produced by the effort of an impostor. and so peculiar that it can be found in no other person but the Messiah. We shall be better able to appreciate the torce of this argument when we have the correct exposition of the passage before us.
To the view which has thus been taken of the design of this portion of Isaiah, there occurs one objection, ofren marie by infidels, which I deem it important here to notice. It is, that the transactions h<*re referred to are represented as past, and that it must be supposed to refer to some event which had occurred before the t me when this was written. This ground has also been taken by Gesenius in proof that it cannot refer to the Messiah: "The suffering, contempt, and death," says he, " of the servant of God. are here represented throughout as past, since all in ch. liii. 1—10, is in the Fraeter. Only the glorification is future, and is represented in the luture tense " In reply to this, we may observe, (l) that the transactions referred to are not all represented as past. The glorification ofths psrsDii referred to is described in the future tense, and of course as a future event, ch. Iii. 13—15.iii. I!, 12. It may be added also here, that those who will examine the Hebrew, will perceive that not every thing in regard to his sufferings is represented as past. See vs. 7, 8, 10. But (2) the true answer to this objection is to he found in a correct view of the nature of prophecy; and the objection has been supposed to have force only because the true character of prop'hecy has not been "apprehended. It is a feature of the true nature of prophecy that the prophet is placed in vision in ths midst of the scenes which he describes as future. He describes the events as if they were actually passing before his eyes. See this view of prophecy explained in the Introduction. § 7. According to this, Isaiah is to be regarded as placed in rision amidst the scenes which he describes He looks" on the suffering Redeemer. He describes his humiliation, his rejection, his trial, his death, and the feelings of those who rejected him, as if it actually occurred before his eyes. He sees him now rejected by men and put to death; but he also casts his eye into the future and sees him exalted, and riis religion spreading into all the world. Though, therefore, the events which ha describe were U occur several hundred years afterwards, yet they are portrayed, as his other propfacies are as paasinj *efive his eyes, and as events which he was permitted i? vision to see.
In ch. li:. 13— 15. JEHOVAH s.Jeaks of his servant the M«f?ii;ih nnn n jsenbes the shit; of hia humiliation, and cf his subsequent exaltation. These verses contain in fact an epio" e of what is en larged u|)on in the next chapter. The sum of it is, that his servant should be, on the whole, prospered and exalted (ver. 1.1); yet he would he subjected to the deepest trial uiu\ humiliation (ver. H) j but as the result of this, he would redeem the nations of the earth, and their kings and rulers would regard him with profound reverence (vet. 15). A display of the divine perfections would accompany the work of the servant of JEHOVAH such as they had never beheld, and they would be called on to contemplate wonder? of which they had not before heard.
Ch. liii. contains a more minute explanation and statement of what is sain m general in ch. Iii. 13—15. For convenience, it may be regarded as divided into the following portions:
I. An expression of amazement and lamentation at the fict that so tew had embraced the annunciation respecting the Messiah, and had been properly affected by the important statements respecting his sufferings, his death, and his jdorification, ver. l.
II. A description of his rejection, his sufferings, his death, ys. 2—10. Here the prophet describes the scene as actually passing before his eyes. He steaks as if he himself wore one of the Jewish nation who had rejected him, and who had procured his death. He describes the misapprehension under which it was done, and the depth of the sorrow to which the Messiah was subjected, and the design which JEHOVAH had in view in these sufferings.
(«) His appearance and rejection are described, vs. 2, 3. He is as a shrub that grows in a parched?oil without beauty; he is a man of sorrows, instead of being, as they expected, a magnificent prince; he has disappointed their expectations, and there is nothing that corresponded with their anticipations, and nothing, therefore, which should lead them to desire him.
<l) The design for which he endured his sorrows is stated, vs. 4—6. He was thought by the people to be justly put to death, and they judged that God had judicially smitten and afflicted him, ver. 4. But this was not the cause It was because he had borne the sorrows of the nation, and was wounded for their sins, vs. 4, 5. They had all gone astray, but JEHOVAH had caused to meet on him the iniquity of all.
tc) Tiie mvner of his sufferings is described, vs. 7, 8. He was patient as a lamb; was taken from prison, and cut off.
d) The mariner of his burial is described, ver. 9. It was with the rich. The reason why his grave was thus distinguished from that of malefactors was, that in fact he had done no evil. God, the efore, took care that that fact should be marked even in his burial, and though he ial with malefactors, yet, as the purpose of the atonement did not require ignominy after death, he should not be 'uricd with tnem.
\e) The design for which all this was done is stated, ver. 10. It was that his soul might be made an offering for sin, and that it was thus well-pleasing or acceptable to God thai he should suffer and die,..,.,
(a) He would see a numerous spiritual posterity, and be abundantly satisfied for all his pains and sorrows, vs. 10, II.
(b) By the knowledge of him, a great number would be justified and saved, ver 11.
(c) He would be greatly honoured, and proceed to the spir**.ual conquest of all the world, ver. 12.
13 Behold, my servant shall | al ted &nd extolled, and be very 5deal prudently, he shall be ex-
13. Behold, my servant. The word ': behold," indicates here that a new object is pointed out to the view, and that it is one that claims attention on account of its importance. It is designed to direct the mind to the Messiah. The point of view which is here taken, is between his humiliation and his glorification. He sees him as having been humbled and rejected, vs. 14, 15, ch. liii. 2-10, about to be exalted and honoured, vs. 13-15, ch. liii. 10-12. The word " servant" refers to the Messiah. Comp. Notes on ch. xlix. 5, where the. word " servant" is applied also to the Messiah. It means that he would be employed in doing the wili of God, and that he would submit;o him as a servant does to the law of his master. f Shall deal prudently. Marg. prosper. The word ^?W sdkhdl, is used in a two fold signification. It means either to act zoiscly, or to be prosperous. In this Jatter sense it is used in Josh. i. 7, 8, 2 Kings xviii. 7, Jer. x. 21, Piov. xvii. 8. It is not easy to determine what is the meaning here. Jerome renders it, " intelligent," — shell be icise or prudent. The LXX render it avvr\<Tci b rtaXi i^v, tmj servant shall 6c intelligent. The Chaldee renders it, " behold my sen-ant the Messiah shall prosper," (r5!?2£'1.) The Syriac retains the Hebrew word. Jun. and Tremell, render it, H shall prosper;" Castcllio " shall be wise." Lowth renders it, " shall prosper," and in this Gescniua and Noyes concur. Hengstenberg pro poses to unite the two meanings, and U render it, " he shall reign well," as indicate e of the prosperous and wise government of the Messiah. It seems to in? that the parallelism requires us to understand this not of his personal wisdom and prudence, but of the success of his enterprise. — This verse contains a summary statement of what would occur under the Messiah. The general proposition is, that he would be ultimately successful, and to this the prophet comes, ch. liii. 12. He here sees him in affliction, humble, rejected, and despised. But he says that this was not always to be. He would be ultimately exalted. It is on this that he fixes the eye, and it is this which cheers and sustains the prophet in the contemplation of the sufferings of the Messiah. 11 He shall be exalted. In this part of the /erse, the prophet combines the verbs which denote elevation or exaltation. The idea is, that he would be exalted to the highest pitch of honour. The word " exalted," with us, is often synonymous with praise, but here it means, he shall be elevated (*&&), or lifted up. The reference here is, undoubtedly, to the fact that tlie Redeemer would be greatly honoured on earth as the Prince and Saviour of the world (ch. liii. 12), and that in view of the universe he would be elevated to the highest conceivable rank. This is described in the New Testament bv his being placed " at the right hand of God" (Mark 16, 19); by the fact that " angels and authorities and powers are made subject unto him" (1 Pet. iii. 22); by the fact that God has " set him at his own right hand in the heavenly olaces, far above all principality and j/ower, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named" (Eph. i. 20, 21,22); and by the fact that he will return in great glory to judge the world. Matt. xxv. The idea is, that as he was the most despised among men, so he would yet be the most honoured; as he had voluntarily assumed the lowest place (or the redemption of men, so he wculd
more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men;)
14. As many were astonied at. thee. This verse is closely connected with the following, and they should be read together. The sense is, • as many were shocked at him — his form was so disfigured, and his visage so marred — so he shall sprinkle many nations.' That is, the one fact would correspond with the other. The astonishment would be remarkable; the humiliation would be wonderful and fitted to attract the deepest attention; and so his success and his triumph would correspond with the depth of his humiliation and sufferings. As he had in his humiliation been subjected to the lowest condition, so that all despised him — so hereafter the highest possible reverence would be shown him. Kings and nobles would shut their mouths in his presence, and show him the profoundest veneration. A change of person here occurs which is not uncommon in the Hebrew poets. In ver. 13, Jehovah speaks of the Messiah in the third person; here he changes the form of the address, and speaks of him in the second person. In the following verse the mode of address is again changed, and he speaks of him again in the third person. Lowth, however, proposes to read this in the third person, " as many were astonished at him," on the authority of two ancient Heb. MSS. and of the Syriac and Chaldce. But the authority is not sufficient to justify a change in the text, nor is it necessary. In the word rendered " astonied" i. e. astonished (1^^), the primary idea is that of being struck dumb, or put Jo silence from sudden astonishment. Whether the astonishment is from admiration or abhorrence is to be determined by the connection. In the latter sense, it is used in ch. xviii. 16, xix. 8. Here it evidently refers to the fact, that he was disfigured, and destitute of apparent beauty and attractiveness from his abject ^ondition a", d his sufleiing«
They were struck with amazement that one so abject, and that had so little that was attractive, should presume to layclaim to the character of the Messiah. This idea is more fully expressed in the following chapter. Here it is stated in general that his appearance was such as to excite universal astonishment, and probably to produce universal disgust. They saw no beauty or comeliness in him. See ch. liii. 2. This expression should also be regarded as standing in contrast with what is added in ver. 15. Here it is said they were amazed, astonished, silent, at his appearance of poverty and his humiliation; there it is said, " kings should shut their mouths at him," that is, they would be so deeply impressed with his majesty and glory that they would remain in perfect silence — the silence not of contempt but of profound veneration. IT His visage. (*,"",^,3) This word denotes properly sight, seeing, view; then that which is seen; then appearance, form, looks. Ex. xxiv. 17. Ezek. i. 16-28. Dan. x. 18. Here it means, his appearance, his looks. It does not necessarily refer to his face, but to his general appearance. It was so disfigured by distress as to retain scarcely the appearance of a man. IT Was so marred. (FlljttJ'a.) This word properly means destruction. Here it means defaced, destroyed, disfigured. There was a disfiguration, or defacement of his aspect, more than that of man. IF More than any man. (P^^tt.) This may either mean, more than any other man, or that he no longer retained the appearance of a man. It probably means lhe latter — that his visage was so dis- Sgured that it was no longer the aspect of a man. Castellio renders it, ut non jam sit homo, non sit unus de humano genere. XAnd his form. 0*^*1.) This word denotes a form, or a figure of the body, 1 Sam. xxviii. 14. Here it denotes the figure, or the appearance, reierring not to the countenance, but to the general aspect of the body. IT More than the sons of men. So as to seem Dot to belong to men, or to be one of the auman family. All this evidently refers to the disfiguration which arises from excessive grief and calamity. It meant that he was broken down and distressed that his great sorrows had left their marks on his frame so as to destroy the beautiful symmetry and proportions of the human form. We speak of being crushed with grief; of being borne down with pain; of being laden with sorrow. And we all know the effeet of long continued grief in marring the beauty of the human countenance, and in bowing down the frame. Deep emotion depicts itself on the face, and produces a permanent impression \here. The highest beauty fades under long continued trials, though at first it may seem to be set off to advantage. The rose leaves the cheek, the lustre forsakes the eye, vigour departs from the frame, its erect form ia bowed, and the countenance, once brilliant and beautiful, becomes marked with the deep furrows of care and anxiety. Such seems to be the idea here. It is not indeed said that the sufferer before this had been distinguished for any extraordinary beauty — though this may not be improperly supposed — but that excessive grief had almost obliterated the traces of intelligence from the face, and destroyed the aspect of man. How well this applies to the Lord Jesus, needs not to be said. We have, indeed, no positive information in regard to his personal appearance. We arc not told that he was distinguished for manliness of form, or beauty of countenance. But it is certainly no improbable supposition that when God prepared for him a body (Heb. x. 5) in which the divinity should dwell incarnate, the human form would be rendered as fit as it. could be for the indwelling of the celestial inhabitant. And it is no unwarrantable supposition that perfect truth, benevolence and purity, should depict themselves on the countenance of the Redeemer; as they will be manifested in the very aspect wherever they exist — and render him the most beautiful of men — for the expression of these principles and feelings in the countenance constitutes beauty. Comp. Notes on ch. liii. 2. Nor ia it an improbable supposition, that this beauty was marred by his long cont/nu
15 So shall he sprinkle "many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that
ed and inexpressibly deep sorrows, and that he was so worn down and crushed by the sufferings which he endured as scarcely to have retained the aspect of a man.
15. So. I?. This word answers to "as" ("1'^.^.5) in the former verse. * In like manner as many were astonished or shocked at thee — so shall he sprinkle many nations.' The one is to be in some respects commensurate with th* other. The comparison seems to consist of two points. (1.) In regard to the numbers. Many would be shocked: many would be sprinkled by him. Large numbers would be amazed at the fact of his sorrows; and numbers correspondency large would be sprinkled by him. (2.) In the effects. Many would be struck dumb with amazement at his appearance; and, in like manner, many would be struck dumb with veneration or respect. He would be regarded on the one hand as having scarce the form of a man; on the other, even kings would be silent before him from profound reverence and awe. IT Shall he sprinkle many nations. The word here rendered " sprinkle," l"5?1?, has been very variously rendered. Jerome renders it, asperget — shall sprinkle. The LXX, ' so shall many nations express admiration (9avfi,iaoi/rat) at him.' The Chaldee, ' so shall he scatter, or dissipate (^57) many people.' The Striae readers it, ' thus shall he purity, cicanse,make expiation for |>£?^fi many nations.' The Syriac verb used here means to purify, to cleanse, to make holy, and in aph. to expiate; and the idea of the translator evidently was, that he would purify bj- making expiation. See the Syriac word used in Acts xi. 9, Luke iii. 17, Acts xxiv. 18, Heb. x. 4, ix. 22. Castellio renders it as Jerome does; and Jun. and Tremell.'he shall sprinkle many nations with stu-
which had not been told them shall they see, and that which they had not heard shall fifty consider.
por.' Interpreters have also varied in the simse which they have given to thia word. Its usual and proper meaning i» to sprinkle, and so it has been here commonly interpreted. But Martini, Rosenmiiller and Gesenius suppose that it is derived from an Arabic word meaning to leap, to spring, to spring up, to leap for joy, to exult; and that the idea here is, that he should cause many nations to exult, or leap for joy. Parallel places, says Gesenius, occur in ch. xlix, G, 7 li. 5. Against the common interpretation " to sprinkle " he objects, (1.) That the verb could not be construed without the accusative, and that if it means that he would sprinkle with blood, the word blood would be specified. (2) That the connexion is opposed to the idea of sprinkling, and that the antithesis requires some word that shall correspond with E73'ty, ' shall be astonished,' and that the phrase ' they shall be joyful,' or ' he shall cause them to exult with joy,' denotes such antithesis. To this it may be replied, that the usual, the uni versal signification of the word >^}\ naza in the Old Testament is to sprinkle. The word occurs only in the. following places, and is in all instances translated sprinkle. Lev. vi. 27. Isa. lxiii. 3. 2 Kings ix. 33. Lev. vi. 6-17 v. 9,xiv. 7, 16, 27, 51, xvi. 14, 15, 19. Num. xix. 4, 18, 19. Ex. xxix. 21. Num. xix. 21, viii. 7. Lev. xvi. 14, * iii. 11,30. It is properly applicable to the act of sprinkling blood, or water; and then comes to be used in the sense oi cleansing by the blood that makes expiation for sin, or cf cleansing by water as an emblem of purifying. In Ezek. xxx vi. 25, the practice of sprinkling with consecrated water is referred to as synonymous with purifying — though a different word from this is used, pit " and I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean." If the word used here merns • to sprinkle/;
Lo used m one of the following significations. (1.) To sprinkle with blood in allusion to the Lewitical rite of sprink- »ing the blood of the sacrifice, meaning that in that way sin would be expiated and removed (Lev. xiv. 51, xvi. 14, ileb. ix. 19, x. 22); or (2) by an allusion to the custom of sprinkling with water as emblematic of purity, or cleansing (Num. viii. 7, xix. 18. Ezek. xxxvi. 25). If used in the former sense, it means, that the Redeemer would make expiation for sin, and that his blood of purifying would be sprinkled on the nations. If in the latter, as is most probable, then it means that he would purify them, as objects were cleansed by the sprinkling of water. If in either sense it means substantially the same thing — that the Redeemer would purify, or cleanse many nations, i. e. from their sins, and make them holy. Still there is a difficulty in the passage which does not seem to be solved. This difficulty has been thus expressed by Taylor (Concord.): " It seems here to have a peculiar meaning, which is not exactly collected from tb*; other places where this word is used. The antithesis points to regard, esteem, admiration. * So shall he sprinkle, engage the esteem and admiration of many nations.' But how to deduce this from the sense of the word I know not." It was to meet this difficulty that Martini, Rosenmiiller, and Gesenius, propose the sense of leaping, exulting, filling with joy, from the Arabic. But that signification does not accord with the uniform Hebrew usage, and probably the sense of purifying is to be retained. It maybe remarked that whichever of the above senses is assigned, it furnishes no argument for the practice of sprinkling in baptism. It refers to the fact of his purifying, or cleansing the nations, and not to the ordinance of Christian baptism; nor should it be used as an argument in reference to the mode in which that should be administered. 7 The Icings shall shut their mouths at him. Or rather, kings. It docs not refei to any particular kings; but the idea is, tnat he would be honoured by kings. To shut the mouths here indicates veneration and admiration. Sec Job xxix. 9, 10, where reverence or respect is indicated in the same way:
The princes refrained talking, And laid their hand upon their mouth; The nobles held their peace, And their tongue cleaved to the roof cf their mouth.
See also Micah viii. 16. Comp. Ps. cxlvii. 42. Job v. 16. IT For that which had not been told them. In this part of the verse a reason is given for the veneration which kings would evince. It is, that they should receive intelligence of this wonderful exaltation of the messenger of God which had not before been made known to them as it had been to the Jews. Or, in other words, the great mystery of the incarnation and redemption would contain truths and wonders which they had not contemplated elsewhere. No such events would have occurred within the range of their observation; and the wonders of redemption would stand by themselves as unparalleled in all that they had heard or seen. What is here predicted has been fulfilled. The mystery of the incarnation and the atonement; the sufferings and the death of the Redeemer; his exaltation and his glory, are events which are unparalleled in the history of the world. They are events fitted in their nature to excite the profoundest admiration, and to induce kings and nobles to lay their hand on their mouth in token of veneration. No monarch on earth could have evinced such condescension as did the Son of God; none has been elevated to so high a rank in the universe as the Redeemer. That the Son of God should become a man; that hi3 visage should be so disfigured by grief as to have scarcely the aspect of a human being; that he should suffer and die as he did; and that he should be exalted as he is over this whole world, and have the most elevated place in the universe at the right hand of God, are all events fitted to excite the profoundest ad miration.
1 Who hath believed"' our 6re-
1. TFAo /i</</i believed our report? The main design of the prophet in all this portion of his prophecy is, undoubtedly, to state the fact that the Redeemer would be greatly exalted. See ch. lii. 13, liii. 12. Bat inorder to furnish a fair view of_his exaltation,, it wns necessary alsoto exhibit the depth of his humiliation, andthe intensity of his sorrows, and also the faetrTTVaf, h«> wrmLl be~rejectecT by those to whom, he jwas Bent. He, therefore, in this verse, to use flielanguage of Calvin, breaks in abruptly upon the order of his discourse, and exclaims that what he had sadi, and what he was about to say, would be credited scarcely by no one. Preliminary to his exaltation, and to the honours which would be conferred on him, he would be rejected and despised. The word report, rl^ltttt), denotes properly that which is heard, tidings, message, news. In the margin, it is rendered " hearing, or doctrine." The LXX render it, d*co»} — rumour, message. It refers to the annunciation, message, or communication which had been made respecting the Messiah. The speaker here is Isaiah, and the word " our " refers to the fact that the message of Isaiah and of the other prophets had been alike rejected. He groups himself with the other prophets, and says that the annunciation which they had made of the Redeemer had been disregarded. The interrogative form is often assumed when it is designed to express a truth with emphasis; and the idea is, therefore, that the message in regard to the Messiah had been rejected, and that almost none had credited and embraced it. IT And to whom is the arm of the Lori revealed? The arm is that by which we execute a purpose, and is often used as the emblem of power. See Notes on ch. xxxiii. 2, xl. 10. Here it
port? and to whom *is the arm of the Lord revealed?
denotes the omnipotence or power ot God, which would be exhibited thiough the Messiah. The sense is, 'who has perceived the power evinced in the work of the Redeemer? To whom is that power manifested which is to be put forth through him, and in connection with his work I' It refers not so much, as it seems to me, to his power in working miracles, as to the omnipotence evinced in rescuing sinners from destruction. In the New Testan.ent, the Gospel is not unfrequently called "the power of God" (Rom. i. 16, 1 Cor. i. 18), for it is that by which God j displays his power in saving men,S The idea here is, that comparatively few would be brought under that power, and be benefited by it; that is, in the times, and under the preaching of the Messiah. It is to be remembered that the scene of this vision is laid in the midst of the work of the Redeemer. The prophet sees him a sufferer, despised and rejected. He sees that few come to him, and embrace him as theii Saviour. He recalls the " report " and the announcement which he and other prophets had made respecting him; he remembers the record which had been made centuries before respecting the Messiah; and he asks with deep emotion, as if present when the Redeemer lived and preached, who had credited what he and the other prophets had said of him. The mass had rejected it all. The passage, therefore, had its fulfilment in the events connected with the ministry of the Redeemer, and in the fact that he was rejected by so many. The Redeemer was more successful in his work as a preacher than L> commonly supposed, but still it is true that by the mass of the nation he was despised, and that the announcement which had been made of his true ch.nacter anil work was rejected.
2 For ne shall grow up before! him as a tender plant, and as a I root out of a dry ground; he hath! no form nor comeliness; and i
2. For he shall grow up before him. \ In this verse, the prophet describes the j humble appearance of the Messiah, and the fact that there was nothing in his V personal aspect that corresponded to the iexpectations that had been formed of ^him; nothing that should lead them to / desire him as their expected deliverer, ( but every thing that could induce them \_to reject him. He would be of so humble an origin, and with so little that was magnificent in his external appearance, that the nation would despise him. The word rendered " he shall grow up,"
/' 2??5, from «"^, means properly to go [ up, to ascend. Here it evidently ap- \ plies to the Redeemer as growing up in \ the manner of a shoot or sucker that \ springs out of the earth. It means that \ he would start, as it were, from a decayed stock or stump, as a shoot springs lup from a root that is apparently dead, lit does not refer to his manner of life /before his entrance on the public work / of the ministry; not to the mode and / Btyle of his education; but to his start- / ing as it were out of a dry and sterile / soil where any growth could not be exl pected, or from a stump or stock that \^\vas apparently dead. See Notes Th. xi. 1. The phrase "before him," T,:B? f refers to Jehovah. He would be seen and observed by him, although unknown to the world. The eyes of men would not regard him as the Messiah while he was growing up, but Jehovah would, and his eye would be continually upon him. IT As a tender yzi\ajjtv wf iraiShv ivavriov avrov. But what idea they attached to it, it is impossible now to say; and equally so to determine how they came to make such a translation..The Chaldee also, leaving the idea that it refers to the Messiah, renders it, " and the righteous shall be magnified before him as branches which flourish, ai.v.1 as the tree which sends its roots by the ountains of water; thus shall the holy nation be increased in the land." The Syriae translates it, ** he shall grow up before him as an infant." The idea in the passage is plain. It is, that the Messiah would spring up as from an ancient and decayed stock, like a tender shoot or sucker. He would be humble and unpretending in his origin, and would be such that they who had expected a _sp_lendid prince would be led to overlook, and despise him. 1T And as a root..
^T^?"]. The word root here is evi- i dentlyused by synecdoche for the sprout that starts up from a root. See Notes ch. xi. 10, where the word is used in the same sense. IF Out of a dry ground. In a barren waste, or where there is no moisture. Such a sprout or shrub is small, puny, and withered up. Such shrubs spring up in deserts, whero they are stinted for want of moisture, and they are most striking objects to represent that which is humble and un-! attractive in its personal appearance. The idea here is, that the Messiah would spring from an ancient family decayed, but in whose root, so to speak, there would be life, as there is remaining life in the stump of a tree that is fallen down; but that there would be nothing in his external appearance that would attract attention, or meet the expectations of the nation. Even then ha would not be like a plant of vigorous growth supplied with abundant rains, and growing in a rich and fertile soil, but he would be like the stinted growth of the sands of the desert '/an any
Ihing be more strikingly expressive of the actual appearance of the Redeemer ts compared with the expectation of the Jews? Can ther? be found any where a more striking fulfilment of a prophecy than this 1 And row will the infidel answer the argument ihns furnished for the fact that Isaiah was inspired, and.-that his record was true? IT He hath no form. That is, no beauty. He has Z? not the beautiful form Which was anti- / cipated; the external glory which it was supposed he would assume. On the meaning of the word form, see Notes ch. lii. 14. It is several times used in the sense of beautiful form or figure. Gen. xxix. 17, xxxix. 6, xli. 18. Deut. xxi. 11. Esth. ii. 17. Comp. 1 Sam. xvi. 18. Here it means the same as beautiful form or apDearance, andrefers to his stateoT a^sejx^nt rather than to his^qwn personal beautvl There is no evidence" that in person he was in any way deformed or otherwise than beautiful, except as excessive grief may have changed his natural aspect. See Note ch. lii. 14. IT Nor _cmneUness. TJ«1. This word is translated honour^jrlary, majesty, Dan. xi. 'NJ. UeutTxxxiii. 17. P"s7cxlix. 9, xxix 4; excellency, Isa. xxxv. 2; beauty, Prov. xx. 29. Ps. ex. 3. 2 Chron. xx. 21. It may be applied to the countenance, to the general aspect, or to the ornaments or apparel of the person. Here it refers to the appearance of the Messiah, as having nothing that was answerable to their expectations. He had no robes of royalty; no diadem sparkling on his brow; no splendid retinue; no gorgeous array. IT And when we shall sec him. This should be connected with the previous words, and should be translated, " that we should regard him, or attentively look upon him." The idea is, that there was in his external appearance no such beauty as to lead them to look with interest and attention upon him; nothing that should attract them, as men are attracted by the dazzling and splendid objects of this world. — If they Baw him, they immediately looked away from him as if he were unworthy of their regard. IT There is no beauty that we should desire him. He does not appear in the form which we had anticipated. He does not come with the regal pomp and splendour which it was supposed he would assume. He if apparently of humble rank; has h\i attendants, and has disappointed wholly-"-^ the expectation of the nation. In legard to the personal appearance of the j Redeemer, it is remarkable that the New Testament has given us no information. Not a hint is dropped in reference to his height of stature, or his form; respecting the colour of his hair, his eyes, or his complexion. In all this, on which biographers are usually so full and particular, the evangelists are whol-, ly silent. There was evidently design / in this; and the purpose was probably/ to prevent any painting, statuary, or figure of the Redeemer, that would have any claim to being regarded as correct or true. As it stancs in the New Testament, there is just the veil of obscurity thrown over this whole subject which is most favourable for the contemplation of the incarnate Deity. We are told that he was a man; we are told also that he was God. The image to the mind's eye is as obscure in the one case as the other; and in both, we are direct ed to his moral beauty, his holiness and benevolence, as objects of contemplation, rather than to his external appearance or form. It may be added that there is no authentic information in regard to his appearance that has come down to us by tradition. All the works of sculptors and painters in attempting to depict his form are the mere works of fancy, and are undoubtedly as unlike the glorious reality as they are contrary to the spirit and intention of the Bible. There is, indeed, a letter extant which is claimed by some to have been written by Publius Lentulus, to the emperor Tiberius, in the time when the Saviour lived, and which gives a description of his personal appearance. As this is the only legend of antiquity which even claims to be a description of his person, and as it is often printed and is regarded as a curiosity, it may not be improper here to present it Th a note.* This
* " There has a man api>eared here, who u still living named Jesus Christ, whose power ii
3 He is despised and rejected 'of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted "with grief: and 7we
letter is pronounced by Calmet to be spurious, and it has been abundantly proved to be so by Prof. Robinson. See Bib. Repos. Vol. ii. pp. 3G7-393. The main arguments against its authenticity, and which entirely settle the question, are* (1.) The discrepancies and contradictions which exist in the various copies. (2.) The fact that in the time of the Saviour, when the epistle purports to have been written, it can be demonstrated that no such man as Publius Lentulus was governor of Judea, or had any such office there as is claimed for him in the inscriptions to the epistle. (3.) That for fifteen hundred years no such epistle is quoted or referred to by any writer — a fact which could not have occurred if any such epistle had been in existence. (4.) That the style of the epistle is not such as an enlightened Roman would have used, but is such as an ecclesiastic would have employed. (5.) That the contents of the epistle are such as a Roman icould not have used of one who was a Jew. See these arguments presented in detail in the place above referred to.
extraordinary. He has the title given to him of the great prophet; his disciples call him the Son of God. He raises the dead, and heals all sorts of diseases. He is a tali, well proportioned man; there is an air of serenity in his countenance, which attracts at once the love and reverence of those who see him. His hair is of the colour of new wine; from the roots to his ears, and from thence to the shoulders, it is curled, and falls down to the lowest part of them. Upon the forehead it parts in two, after the manner of the Nazarenes. His forehead is Hat and fair, his face without any defect, and adorned with a very graceful Vermillion; his air is majestic and agreeable. His nose and his mouth are very well proportioned; and his beard is thick and forked, of the colour of his hair; his eyes are gray and extremely lively; in his reproufs he is terrible, bat in his exhortations and instructions amiable fcnd courteous; there is something wonderfully charming ii his face, with a mixture of gravity. lie is never seen to laugh, but he has been observed to weep. He is very straight in stature; ois hands are large and spreading, and his arms rery beautiful. He talks little, but with great fravity, and is the handsomest man in the *r*>rld." Bib. Repos. Vol. ii. p. 338.
hid as it were out faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
7 as an hiding of faces from him, or, fremiti or, he, hid as it ivere his face from us.
It may he added, that this is the onlj prtended account which has come down to us respecting the personal appearance of the Saviour, except the fable that Christ sent his portrait to Abgar king of Edessa in reply to a letter which he had sent requesting him to come and heal him; and the equally fabulous 1c gend that the impression of his countenance was left upon the handkerchiel of the holy Veronica.
3. He is despised. This requires no explanation; and it needs no comment to show that it was fulfilled. The Redeemer was eminently the object of contempt and scorn alike by the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Romans. In his life on earth it was so; in his death it was still so; and since then his name and person have been extensively the object of contempt. Nothing is a more striking fulfilment of this than the conduct of the Jews at the present day. The very name of Jesus of Nazareth excites contempt; and they join with their fathers who rejected him in heaping on him every term indicative of scorn. IT Bejected of men. This phrase is full of meaning, and in three words states the whole history of man in regard to his treatment of the Redeemer. The name " the rejected of men," will express all the melancholy history; — rejected by the Jews; by the rich; the great and the learned; by the mass of men of every grade, and age, and rank. No prophecy was ever more strikingly fulfilled; none could condense more significancy into feAV words. In regard to the exact sense of the phrase, interpreters have varied. Jerome renders it, ' novissimum virorum' — the last of men; i. e. the most abject and contemptible of mankind. The LXX, " his appearance is dishonoured uripov and defective ex\eTvav more than the sons of men." The Chaldee, " he is indeed despised, but he shall take away the glory of all kings; they arc infiim and
Bad, as if exposed to all calamities and sorrows.' Some render it, ' most abject of msn,' and they refer to Job xix. 14, where the same word is used to denote those friends who forsake the unfortunate. The word ^jn, used here, is derived from the verb?T?> which means to cease, to leave off, to desist; derived, says Gesenius (Lex.), from the idea of becoming languid, flaccid; and thence transferred to the act of ceasing from labour. It means usually, to cease, to desist from, to leave, to let alone. See Isa. ii. 22. 1 Kings xxii. 6-15. Job vii. 15, x. 20. According to Gesenius, the word here means to be left, to be destitute, or forsaken; and the idea is, that he was forsaken of men. According to Hengstenberg (Christol.) it means " the most abject of men," — he who ceases from men, who ceases to belong to the number of men; i. e. who is the most abject of men. Castellio renders it, " minus quam homo," less than a man. Jun. and Tremell. " abjectissimus virorum," the most abject of men. Grotius, " rejected of men." Symmachus, tXri^torroj dvtptiv, the least of men. The idea is, undoubtedly, somehow that of ceasing from men, or from being regarded as belonging to men. There was a ceasing, or a withdrawing of that which usually appertains to man, and which belongs to him. And the thought probably is, that he was not only " despised," but that there was an advance on that — there was a censing to treat him as if be-^raihlvurhan feelings; and wa*5~ in any j^y3^nil^_ to human lellowship anoT~sympathy. "It does not refer, therefore, so much to the active means employed to reject him, as to the fact that he was regarded as cut off from man; and the idea is not essentially different from this, trnt he was the most tibject and vile of mortals in the estimation of other?, — so vile as not_to_bedfiejned worthy of the treaTment__du£ to the loivestoTmen. This idea has been substantially expressed in the Syriac translation. IT A man of sorrows. What a beautiful expression! A man who was so sad and sorrowful; whose life was so full of offerings, that it might be said that that was the characteristic of the man. A similar phraseology occurs in Prov. xxix. l,"He that being often reproved," in the margin, " a man of reproofs;" in tha Heb. " a man of chastisements," that is, a man who i3 often chastised. Comp. Dan. x. 11, "O Daniel, a man greatly beloved," Marg. as in Heb. " a man of desires;" i. e. a man greatly desired. Here, the expression means that his life was characterized by sorrows. How remarkably this was fulfilled in the life of the Redeemer, it is not necessary to attempt to show. IT And acquainted with grief — ^Fl ^T^ " and knowing grief." The word rendered " grief," means usually sickness, disease,_Deut. vii. 15, xxvii. 61, Isa. i. 5; but it also means anxiety, affliction. Eccl. v. 16; and then any evil or calamity, Eccl. vi. 2. M my of the old interpreters explain it a9 meaning, that he was known or distinguished by disease; that is, affected by it in a remarkable manner. So Symm. yvu)<TT6s v6<j(o. Jerome (Vulg.) renders it, scientem infirmitatem. The LXX render the whole clause, " a man in afflic, tion, lv nXnyt}, and knowing to bear languor, or disease," tidus tyipuv ndXaxiav. But if the word here means disease, it ig only a figurative designation of severe sufferings both of body and of soul. Hengstenberg, Koppe, and Ammon, suppose that the figure is taken from the leprosy, which was not only one of the most severe of all diseases, but was in a special manner regarded as a divine judgment. They suppose that many of the expressions which follow may be explained with reference to this. Comp Heb. iv. 15. The idea is, that he wag familiar with sorrow and calamity. It does not mean, as it seems to me, that he was to be himself sick and diseased; but that he was to be subject to various kinds of calamity, and that it was to be a characteristic of his life that he wag familiar with it. He was intimate with it. He knew it personally; he knew it in others. He lived in the midst of scenes of sorrow, and he became intimately acquainted with its various forms, and with its evils. There is no evidence that the Redeemer was himself sick at any time — which is remarkable — bul
4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows:
there is evidence in abundance that he was familiar with all kinds of sorrow, unci that his own life was a life of grief. It And wc hid as it were our faces from him. There is here great variety of interpretation and of translation. The margin reads, " as an hiding of faces from him, or from us; or, he hid as it were his face from us." The Hebrew is, literally, " and as the hiding of faces from him, or from it;" and Hengstenberg explains it as meaning, ' he was as an hiding of the face before it;' that is, as a thing or person before whom a man covers his face because he cannot bear ihe disgusting sight. Jerome (Vulg.) renders it, " his face was as it were hidden and despised." The LXX, " for his countenance was turned away," aiTKarpazrai. The Chaldee, " and when he took away his countenance of majesty from us, we were despised and reputed as nothing." Interpreters have explained it in various ways. 1. " He was as one who hides his face before us;" alluding, as they suppose, to the Mosaic law, which required lepers to cover their faces, Lev. iii. 45, or to the custom of covering the face in mourning, or for shame. 2. Others explain it as meaning, " as one before whom is the covering of the face," i. e. before whom a man covers the face from shame or disgust. So Gesenius. 3. Others, " he was as one causing to conceal the face,"; e. he induced others to cover the face before him. His sufferings were so terrible as to induce them to turn away. So J. H. Michaelis. The idea seems to be, that he was as one from whom men hide their faces, or turn away. This might either arise from a sight of his sufferings, as being so offensive tha>; they would turn away in pain — as in the Case of a leper; or it might be, that he was bo much an object of contempt, and so unlike what they expected, thai; they would hide their faces and turn away 2n scorn. This latter 1 s^pose to be lie meaning; and that I.dea is, that
'yet we did esteem him stricken smitten of God, and afflicted.
he was s< unlike what they hau expected that tl ey hid their faces in affected or real ccntempt. IT And we esteemed him not. That is, we esteemed him as nothing; we sel_iip value on_him. In order to give greater energy to a declaration, the Hebrews frequently express a thing positively and then negatively. The prophet had said that they held him in positive contempt; he here says that they did not regard him ag worthy of their notice. He here speaks in the name of his nation — as one ol the Jewish people. ' We, the Jews, the nation to whom he was sent, did not esteem him as the Messiah, or a9 worthy of our affection or regard.'
4. Surely. This is an exceedingly important verse, and is one that is attended with considerable difficulty, from the manner in which it is quoted in the New Testament. The general sense, as it stands in the Hebrew, is not indeed difficult. It is immediately connected in signification with the previous verse. The meaning is, that those who had despised and rejected the Messiah, had greatly erred in contemning him on account of his sufferings and humiliation. ' We turned away from him in horror and contempt. We supposed that he was suffering on account of some great sin of his own. But in this we erred. It was not for his sins but for ours. It was not that he was smitten of God for his own sins — as if he had been among the worst of mortals — ■ but it was because he had taken our sins, and was suffering for them. The very thing therefore that gave offence tc us, and which made us turn away from him, constituted the most important part of his work, and was really the occasion of highest gratitude.' It is an acknowledgment that they had erred, and a confession of that portion of the nation which would be made sensible of their error, that they had judged improperly of the character of the sufferer. The word rendered ' surely,
*■?*$> Vulg. vere, is sometimes a particle strongly affirming, meaning truly, of a certain truth. Gen. xxviii. 16. Ex. ii. 14. Jer. viii. 8. Sometimes it is an adversative particle meaning but yet. Ps. xxxi. 23. Isa. xlix. 24. It is probably used in that sense here, meaning, that though he was despised by them, yet he was worthy of their esteem and confidence, for he had borne their griefs. He was not suffering for any sins of his own, but in a cause which, so far from rendering him an object of contempt, made him worthy of their highest regard. IT He hath borne. &^3 ndsa. Vulg. tulit. LXX, (j)iptty he bears-
Chald. "he prayed, ^"^l, far, or on account of our sins." Castellio, ' tulit ac toleravit.' In these versions, the sense is that of sustaining, bearing, upholding, carrying, as when one removes a burden from the shoulders of another and places it on his own. The word K^3 means properly to take up, to lift, to raise. Gen. vii. 17, " The waters increased and lifted up the ark." xxix. 1, " And Jacob lifted up his feet (see the margin) and came." Hence it is applied to lifting up a standard, Jer. iv. 6, 1. 2; to lifting up the hand, Deut. xxxii. 40; to lifting up the head, Job x. 15. 2 Kings xxv. 27; to lifting up the eyes, Gen. xiii. 10, et sacpe; to lifting up the voice, &e. It then means to bear, to carry, as an infant in the arms, Isa. xlvi. 3; as a tree does its fruit, Ezek. xvii. 8, or as a field its produce, Ps. lxx. 3. Gen. xii. 6. Hence to endure, suffer, permit, Job xxi. 3. " Bear with me, suffer me and I will speak." Hence to bear the sin of any one, to take upon one's self the suffering which is due to sin. See Notes on ver. 12 of this chapter. Comp. Ezek. xviii. 19, 20. Lev. v. 1, 17, xvii. 16, xx. 19, xxiv. 15. Num. v. 31, ix. 13, xiv. 34, xxx. 16. Hence to bear chastisement, or punishment, Job. xxxiv. 31. "I have borne chastisement, I will not offend any more." It is also used in the sense of laking away the sin of any one, expiat-.ng, or procuring pardon, Lev. x. 17. Ps xxxiii. 5, lxxxv. 3. Job vii. 21. Gen.
I. 17. In all cases there is the idea of lifting, sustaining, taking up, and conveying away, as by carrying a burden. It is not simply removing, bui it is removing somehow by lifting, or carrying; that is, either by an act of power or by so taking them on one's own self as to sustain and carry them. If applied to sin, it means that a man must bear the burden of the punishment of his own sin, or that the suffering which is due to sin is taken up and borne by another. If applied to diseases, as m Matt. viii. 17, it must mean that he, a? were, lifted them up and bore them away. It cannot mean that the Saviour lite rally took those sicknesses on himsell, and became sick in the place c c the sick, became a leper in the place of he leper, or was himself possessed with an evil spirit in the place of those who were possessed (Matt. viii. 16), but it must mean that he took them away by his power, and, as it were, lifted them up, and removed them. So when it is said (Isa. liii. 12) that he " bare the sins of many," it cannot mean literally that he took those sins on himself in any such sense as that he became a sinner, but only that he so took them upon himself as to remove from the sinner the exposure to punishment, and to bear himscl* whatever was necessary as a proper expression of the evil of sin. Peter undoubtedly makes an allusion to this passage (liii. 12) when he says (1 Pet. ii. 24), " Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." See Notes on ver. 12. Matthew (viii. 17) has translated it by iXafie, he took, a word which does not differ in signification essentially from that used by Isaiah. It is almost exactly the same word which is used by Symmachus, dvcXa.Ss IT Our griefs. The word here used ^H means
" In ninety-three instances " says Dr. Magee (on Atonement and Sacrifice, p. 229, Ed. N. Y. 1813), " in which the word here translated (by the LXX) dfiLtprlai, or its kindred verb is found in the Old Testament in any sense that is not entirely foreign from the passage before us, there occurs but this one in fcmich the word is so rendered; it being in all other cases expressed by acrOweia^ fiaXaxla, or some word denoting bodily disease." " That the Jews," he adds, " considered this passage as referring to bodily diseases appears from Whitby, and Lightfoot. Hor. Heb. on Matt. viii. 17." It is rendered in the Vulgate, " languores" — our infirmities; in the Chaldee, " he prayed for our sins;" Castellio renders it," morbus" — diseases; and so Junius and Tremellius. The LXX have rendered it, in this place, a//uf>riuff, sins; though from what Dr. Kennicott has advanced in his Diss. Gen. § 79, Dr. Magee thinks there can be no doubt that this is a corruption which has crept into the later copies of the Greek. A few Greek MSS. of the Septuagint also read it dzQeveins, and one HaXaxias. Matthew (viii. 17) has rendered it dadeveias — infirmities, and intended no doubt to apply it to the fact that the Lord Jesus healed diseases, and there can be no doubt that Matthew has used the passage, not by way of accommodation, but in the true sens* in which it is used by Isaiah; and that it means that the Messiah would take upon himself the infirmities of men, and would remove their sources of grief. It does not refer here to the fact that he would take their sins. That is stated in other places. Vs. 6, 12. But it means that he was so afflicted, that he seemed to nave taken upon himself the sicknesses and sorrows of the world; and taking them upon himself he would bear them away. I understand this, therefore, as expressing the two-fold idea that he became deeply afflicted for us, and that, being thus afflicted for us, he was able to carry away our sorrow's. In part this would be done by his miraculous power in healing diseases, as mentioned by Matthew; in part by the influence of his religion, in enabling men to bear calamity, and in drying up th: fountain! of sorrow. Matthew, then, it is believed, has quoted this passage exactly in the sense in which it was used by Isaiah; and if so, it should not be adduced to prove that he bore the sins of men — true as is that doctrine, and certainly as it has been affirmed in other parts of this chapter. IT And carried. 52D sabhal. This word means properly to carry as a burden; to be laden with, &c. Isa. xlvi. 4, 7. Gen. xlix. 15. It is applied to carrying burdens, Eccl. xii. 5. 1 Kings v. 15. 2 Chror*. ii. 2. Neh. iv. 10, 17. The verb with jts derivative noun occurs in twenty-six places in the Old Testament, twenty-three of which relate to carrying burdens, two others relate to sins, and the other (Lam. v. 7) is rendered, " We have borne their iniquities." The primary idea is undoubtedly that of carrying a burden; lifting it, and bearing it in this manner. IT Our sorrows. The word used here,
3K29, from ^3 to have pain, sorrow, to grieve, or be sad, means properly pain, sorrow, grief. In the Old Testament it is rendered sorrow and sorroics; Isa. lxv. 14. Eccl. i. 18. Lam. i. 12-18. Jer. xlv. 3, xxx. 15; grief, Job xvi. 6. Ps. lxix. 26. 2 Chron. vi. 29; pain, Jer xv. 18. Job xxxiii. 19. Jer. Ii. 8. Perhaps the proper difference between this word and the word translated griefs is, that this refers to pains of the mind, that of the body; this to anguish, anxiety, or trouble of the soul; that to bodily infirmity and disease. Kennicott affirms that the word here used is to be. regarded as applicable to griefs anj distresses of the mind. " It is evidently so interpreted," says Dr. Magee (p. 220), " Ps. xxxii. 10, Many sorkows shall be to the wicked; and again, Ps. lxix. 29, But I am poor and sorrowful; and again Prov. xiv. 13, The heart is sorrowful; and Eccl. i. 18, He that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow; and so Eccl. ii. 18. Isa. lxv. 14. Jer. xxx. 15." Agreeably to this the word is translated by Lowth, in our coi.imon version, and most of the early English versions, sorrows. The Vulgate renders it dolores / the LXX, 'for ua dSwarat he is in sorrc w,' i. e. is deeply grieved, or afflicted. The phrase, therefore, properly seems to mean that he took upon himself the mental sorrows of men. He not only took their diseases, and bore them away, but he also took or bore their mental griefs. That is, he subjected himself to the kind of mental Borrow which was needful in order to remove them. The word which is used by Matthew (viii. 17), in the translation of this, is v6<tovs. This word (w5<™$) means properly sickness, disease (Matt, iv. 23 24, ix. 35); but it is also used in a metaphorical sense for pain, sorrow, evil. Bob. Lex. In this sense it is probable that it was designed to be used by Matthew. He refers to the general subject of human ills; to the sicknesses, sorrows, pains, and trials of life; and he evidently means, in accordance with Isaiah, that he took them on himself. He was afflicted for them. He undertook the work of removing them. Part he removed by direct miracle — as sickness; — part he removed by removing the cause — by taking away sin by the sacrifice of himself — thus removing the source of all ills; and in regard to all, he furnished the means of removing them by his own example and instructions, and by the great truths which he revealed as topics of consolation and support. On this important passage see Magee on Atonement and Sacrifice, pp. 227-262. 11 Yet we did esteem him stricken. Lowth, " yet we thought him judicially stricken." Noyes, " we esteemed him stricken from above." Jerome (Vulg.), " we thought him to be a leper." The LXX render it, " we considered him being in trouble (or in labour, Iv ttoi/w) and under a stroke (or in a plague or divine jndgment, iv TrXriytj), and in affliction. Chaldee, " we thought him wounded, smitten from >he presence of God, and afflicted." The general idea is, that they tfhought he was subjected to great and revere punishment by God for his sins, cr regarded him as an object of divine disapprobation. They inferred that one who was so abject and so despised; who Buffered so much and so long, must have been abandoned by God to judicial suf- VOL. ii. — 12*
?^3, means properly struck, or smitten. It is applied sometimes to the plague, or the leprosy, as an act by which God smites suddenly, and destroys men. 1 Sam.vi.9. Job xix. 21. Ps. lxxiii. 5. Gen. xii. 17. Ex. xi. 1. Lev. xiii. 3,9 20, and very often elsewhere. Jerome explains explains it here by the word leprous; and many cf the ancient Jews derived from this word the idea that the Messiah would be afflicted with the leprosy. Probably the idea which the word would convey to tbose who were accustomed to read the Jld Testament in Hebrew would be, that he was afflicted or smitten in some way corresponding to the plague or the leprosy; and as these were regarded as special and direct divine judgments, the ides would be that he would be smitten judi cially by God, or be exposed to his dis pleasure and his curse. It is to be par ticularly observed here that the prophet does not say that he would thus be in fact smitten, accursed, and abandoned by God; but only that lie would be thus esteemed, or thought, scil. by the Jews who rejected him and put him to death. It is not here said that he was such. Indeed it is very strongly implied that he was not, since the prophet here is introducing them as confessing their error, and saying that they were mistaken. He was, say they, bearing our sorrows, not suffering for his own sins. IT Smitten of God. Not that he was actually smitten of God, but we esteemed him so. We treated him as one whom we regarded as being under the divine malediction, and we therefore rejected him. We esteemed him to be smitten by God, and we acted as if such an one should be rejected and contemned. The word here used, H33, mcana to smite, to strike, and is sometimes employed to denote divine judgment, as it is here. Thus it means to smite with blindness, Gen. xix. 11; with the pesti« lence, Num. xiv. 12; with emerods, i Sam. v. 6; with destruction, spoken o a land, Mai. iii. 24; of the riv<o 3x
5 But he was wounded 3for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement
«-rii. 25, when he turned it into blood,.n all such instances, it means that JeaovAH had inflicted a curse. And this is the idea here. They regarded him as under the judicial inflictions of God, and as Buffering what his sins deserved. The foundation of this opinion was laid in the belief so common among the Jews, that great sufferings always argued and suppo/^ed great guilt, and were proof of the divine displeasure. This question constitutes the inquiry in the Book of Job, wid was the point in dispute between Jo<) and his friends. IT And afflicted. We esteemed him to be punished by God. In each of these clauses the words ' for uis own sins/ are to be understood. We regarded him as subjected to these calamities on account of his own sins, it did not occur to us that he could bt suffering thus for the sins of others. The fact that the Jev/s attempted to prove that Jesus was a blasphemer, and deserved to die, shows the fulfilment of this, and the estimate which they formed of him. See Acts iii. 17. Luke xxiii. 34. John xvi. 3. 1 Cor. ii. 8.
5. But he was wounded. Marg. tormented. Jerome and the LXX also render this, he was wounded. Jun. and Tremell. " he was affected with grief." The Chaldee has given a singular paraphrase of it, showing how confused was the view of the whole passage in the mind of that interpreter. " And he shall build the house of the sanctuary which was defiled on account of our sins, and which was delivered on account of our iniquities. And in his doctrine, peace shall be multiplied to us. And when we obey his words, our sins shall be remitted to us." The Syriac renders it in a remarkable manner," he is slain on account of our sins," thus showing that it was a common belief that the Messiah would be violently put to death. The word rendered " wounded," ^Vrra, is a participle Po. from '^n khalal, to bore through, to perforate, to
of our peace was upon him; and with his 'stripes dwe are healed
pierce; hence to wound, Ezek. xxviii. 9, 1 Sam. xxxi. 3, 1 Chron. x. 3. There is probably the idea of painful piercing, and it refers to some infliction of positive wounds on the body, and not to mere mental sorrows, or to general humiliation. The obvious idea would be that there would be some act of piercing, some penetrating wound that would endanger or take life. Applied to the actual sufferings of +he Messiah, it refers undoubtedly to the piercing- of his hands, his feet, and Lis side. The word " tormented" in the margin was added by our translators because the Hebrew word might be regarded as derived from Pin hhiil, to writhe, to he tormented, to he pained — a word not unfrequently applied to the pains of parturition. But it is probable that it is rather to be regarded as derived from??H to pierce, or to wound. IT For our transgressions. The prophet here places himself among the people for whom the Messiah suffered these things, and says that he was not suffering for his own sins, but on account of theirs. The preposition "for," V?) here answers to the Greek 6td, on account of, and denotes the cause for which he suffered, and means even according to Gesenius, here, " tht ground or motive on account of, or because of which any thing is done." Lex. Comp. Cant. iii. 8. Deut. vii. 7. Ps. Ixviii. 30. Est. v. 9. Judg. v. 11. It is strikingly parallel to the passage in Rom. iv. 25, " Who was delivered for (Sia) our offences." Comp. 2 Cor. v. 21. Heb. ix. 28. 1 Pet. ii. 24. Here the sense is, that the reason why he thus suffered, was, that we were transgressors. All along the prophet keeps up the idea that it was not on account of any sin of which he was guilty that he thus suffered, but it was for the sins of others, — an idea which is every where exhibited in the New Testament. 1T He was bruised. The word here used (&0"n) means properly to be broken t# pieces, to be bruised, to be crushed. Ps. Ixxii. 4. Job. vi. 9. Applied to mind, it means to break down or crush by calamities and trials; and by the use of the word here, no doubt, the most severe inward and outward sufferings are designated. The LXX render it ii£jia\~ oLKiaraiyhe was rendered languid, or feeble. The same idea occurs in the Syriac translation. The meaning is, that he was under such a weight of sorrows on account of our sins, that he was, as it were, crushed to the earth. How true this was of the Lord Jesus it is not neceasary here to pause to show. IT The chastisement of our peace. That is, the chastisement by which our peace is effected or secured was laid upon him, or he took it upon himself, and bore.t, in order that we might have peace. Each word here is exceedingly important in order to a proper estimate of the nature of the work performed by the Redeemer. The word chastisement, *10 V£, properly denotes the correction, chastisement, or punishment inflicted by parents on their children, designed to amend their faults. Prov. xxii. 15, xxiii. 13. It is applied also to the discipline and authority of kings, Job xxii. 18; and to the discipline or correction of God, Job v. 17, Hos. v. 2. Sometimes it means admonition or instruction, such as parents give to children, or God to men. It is well rendered by the LXX by vaidda; by Jerome, discipline. The word does not of necessity denote punishment, though it is often used in that sense. It is properly that which corrects, whether it be by admonition, counsel, punishment, or suffering. Here it cannot properly mean punishment — for there is no punishment where there is no guilt, and the Redeemer had done no sin; — but it means that he took upon himself the Bufferings which would secure the peace of those for whom he died — those which, if they could have been endured by themselves, would have effected their peace with God. The word peace means evidently their peace with God; reconciliation with their Creator. The work of religion in the soul is often represented as peanr.; and tie Redeemer is spoken of a the great agent by whom that is secured. " For he ii our peace;" Eph. ii. 14, 15, 17, comp. Acts x. 36, Rom. v. 1, x. 15. The phrase "upon him," means that the burden by which the peace of men was effected was laid upon him and that he bore it. It is parallel with the expressions which speak of his bearing itt carrying it, &.c. And the sense of the whole is, that he endured the sorrows, whatever they were, which were needful to secure our peace with God. IT And with his stripes. Marg. bruise. The word here used in Hebrew •"HISH means properly stripe, weal, bruise, i. e. the mark or print of blows on the skin, Gr. /iwAo>7n; Vulg. livore. On the meaning of the Hebrew word, see Notes Isa. i. 6. It occurs in the following places and is translated by stripe, and stripest Ex. xxi. 25, twice; bruises, Isa. i. 6 hurt, Gen, iv. 23; bluencss, Prov. xx. 30; wounds, Ps. xxxviii. 5; and 82>otsr as of a leopard, Jer. xiii. 23. The proper idea is the weal or wound rnadw by bruising; the mark designated h / us when we speak of its being * blac t and blue.' It is not a flesh wound; it does not draw blood; but the blood and other humours are collected under the skin. The obvious and natural idea conveyed by the word here is, that the individual referred to would be subjected to some treatment that would cause such a weal or stripe; that is, that he would be beaten, or scourged. How literally this was applicable to the Lord Jesus, it is unnecessary to attempt to prove. See Matt, xxvii. 26. It may be remarked here, that this could not be mere conjecture. How could Isaiah, seven hundred years before it occurred, / conjecture that the Messiah would be / scourged, and bruised? It is this par- / ticularity of prediction, compared with j the literal fulfilment, which furnishes j the Idlest demonstration that the I prophet was inspired. In the prediction \. nothing is vague and general. A 11 ia P particular and minute, as if he saw V what was done, and the description ii ] as minutely accurate as if he was describing what was actually occurring before his eyes. IT We an healed.
6 All we, like sheep, have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and
Literally, it is healed to us; or healing has happened to us. The healing here referred to, is spiritual healing, or healirig from sin" PaTdrjrr7?fjTn7lmd re- God, are not
TaTdmr storatroirio~tHe~!avour'ot liod, a un'frequently represented as an act of healing. The figure is deriveTFfrom tile- fact that awakened and convicted sinners are often represented as crushed, broken, bruised by the weight of their transgressions, and the removal of the load of sin is represented as an act of healing. Ps. xli. 4, " I said, O Lord be merciful unto me; heal my soul; for I have sinned against thee." Ps. vi. 2, " Have mercy upon me, O Lord, for I am weak; O Lord heal me, for my bones are vexed." Ps. ciii. 3, " Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases." The idea here is, that the Messiah would be ecourged; and that it would be by that scourging that health would be imparted to our souls. It would be in our place, and in our stead; and it would be designed to have the same effect in recovering us as though it had been inflicted on ourselves. And will it not do it I Is it not a fact that it has such an effect 1 Is not a man as likely to be recovered from a course of sin and folly who sees another suffer in his place what he ought himself to suffer, as though he was punished himself] Is not a wayward and dissipated son quite as likely to be recovered to a course of virtue by seeing the sufferings which his career of vice causes to a father, a mother, or a sister, as though he himself were subjected to severe punishment? When such a son sees that he is bringing down the gray hairs of his father with sorrow to the grave; when he sees that he is breaking the heart of the mother that bore him; when he sees a sister bathed in tears, or in danger of being reduced to poverty or shame by his course, it will be far more likely to reclaim him than would be personal suffering, or the prospect of poverty, want, and an early the Lord hath 'laid on him the iniquity of us'all.
death. And it is on this principle that the plan of salvation is founded. We shall be more certainly reclaimed by the voluntary sufferings of the innocent in our behalf than we should be by being personally punished. Punishment would make no atonement, and would bring back no sinner to God. But the suffering of the Redeemer in behalf of men is adapted to save the world, and will in fact arrest, reclaim, and redeem all who shall ever enter into heaven.
6. All we, like sheep, have gone astray. This is the penitent confession of those for whom he suffered. It is an acknowledgment that they were going astray from God; and the reason whj the Redeemer suffered was, that thr race had wandered away, and that Je hovah had laid on him the iniquity of all. Calvin says, " In order that ho might more deeply impress on the minda of men the benefits derived from the death of Christ, he shows how necessary was that healing of which he had just made mention. There is here an elegant antithesis. For in ourselves we were scattered; in Christ we are collected together: by nature we wander, and are driven headlong towards destruction; in Christ we find the way by which we are led to the gate of life." The condition of the race without a Redeemer is here elegantly compared to a flock without a shepherd, which wanders where it chooses, and which is exposed to all dangers. This image is not unfrequently used to denote estrangement from God. 1 Peter ii. 25, " For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned to the shepherd and bishop of your souls." Comp. Ezek. xxxiv. 5. Matt. ix. 36. Num. xxvii. 17 1 Kings xxii. 17. Zech. x. 2. Ps. cxix 176. Nothing could more strikingly represent the condition of men. They had wandered from God. They we:« following their own paths, and pursuing their own pleasures. They were without a protector, and they were rxpos»e4 on every hand to danger. IT JVe have turned every one to his own way. We had all gone in the path which we chose. We were like sheep which have no shepherd, and which wander where they please with no one to collect, defend, or guide them. One would wander in one direction, and another in another; and of course, solitary and unprotected, they would be exposed to the more danger. So it was, and is, with man. The bond which should have united him to the Great Shepherd, the Creator, has been broken. We have become lonely wanderers, where each one pursues his own interest; forms his ow.i plans; and seeks to gratify his /"own pleasures, regardless of the interest f of the whole. If we had not sinned, ^there would have been a common bond <^to unite us to God, and to each other. /But now, we as a race have become. dissocial, selfish, following our own / pleasures, and each one living to gratify his own passions. What a true and graphic description of man! How has it been illustrated in all the selfish schemes and purposes of the race! And how is it still illustrated every day in the plans and actions of mortals! IT And the Lord hath laid on him. Lowth renders this, " and Jehovah hath made to light on him the iniquity of us all." Jerome (Vulg.) renders it, " posuit Dominus in eo;" ' the Lord placed on him the iniquity of us all.' The LXX render it, Kvpioj TTixptSuiKCV ai/Tov ratsajiapT tag rijiuv — ' the Lord gave him for our sins.' The Chaldee renders it, ' from the presence of the Lord there was a willingness, ^?"3> to forgive the sins of all of us on account of him.' The Syriac has the same word as the Hebrew. The word here used (?5^), means properly, to strike upon or against, to impinge on any one or any thing — as the Gr. itJiyvvu. It is used in a hostile sense to denote an act of rushing upon a foe, 1 Sam. xxii. 17; to kill, to slay, Judges viii. 21, xv. 12,2 Sam. i. 15. It also means to light upon, to meet With any one. Gen. xxviii. 11, xxxii. 2. Hence also to make peace with any cne; to strike a league or wmpact, Isa. lxiv. 4. It is rendered, in our English versioi, rcachcth to Josh. xix. 11, 22, 26, 27, 34; came, Josh. xvi. 7; fneZand mecf, Amos v. 19 Isa. lxiv. 5, 1 Sam. x. 5, Num. xxxv 19 21, Ex. xxiii. 4, J >sh. ii. 16, Ruth ii. 22, Gen. xxxii. 1, Jo4i. xviii. 10; fall, 1 Sam. xxii. 17,2 Sam. i. 15, 1 Kings ii. 29, Judges viii. 21; entreat, Gen. xviii. 8, Ruth i. 16. Jei. xv. 11; make intercession, Jer. vii. 16, xxvii. 18, xxxvi. 25, Isa. lix. 16, liii. 12; he that comes betwixt, Job xxxvi. 22; and occur, 1 Kings v. 4. The radical idea seems to be that of meeting, occurring, encountering; and it means here, as Lowth has rendered it, that they were caused to meet on him, or perhaps more properly, that Jehovah caused them to rush upon him so as to overwhelm him in calamity, as one is overcome or overwhelmed in battle. The sense is, that he was not overcome by his own sins, but that he encountered ours, as if they had been made to rush to meet him and to prostrate him. That is, he sufTered in our stead; and whatever he was called to endure was in consequence of the fact that he had taken the place of sinners; and having taken their place he met or encountered the sufferings which were the proper expressions of God's displeasure, and sunk under the mighty burden of the world's atonement. IT The iniquity of us all. Notes ver. 5. This cannot mean that he became a sinner, or was guilty in the sight of God; for God always regarded him as an innocent being. It can only mean that he sufTered as if he had been a sinner; or, that he suffered that which if he had been a sinner would have been a proper expression of the evil of sin. It may be remarked here, (1.) That it is impossible to find stronger language to denote the fact that his sufferings were intended to make expiation for sin. Of what martyr could it be said that Jehovah had caused to meet on him the sins of the world? (2) This language is that which naturally expresses the idea that he suffered for all men. It is universal in its nature, and naturally conveys the idea that there was no limitation in respect to the number of those for whom he <iied
1 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted; yet he opened not
7. He *oas oppressed. £?5?- Lowth fenders this, " it was exacted." Heng- Btenberg, " he was abased." Jerome (Vulg.), "he was offered because he was willing." The LXX, " and he, on account of hi3 affliction, opened not his mouth," — implying that his silence arose from the extremity of his sorrows. The Chaldee renders it, " he prayed, and he was heard, and before he opened his mouth he was accepted." The Syriac, " he came and humbled himself, neither did he open his mouth." Kimchi supposes that it means, " it was exacted;" and that it refers to the fact that taxes were demanded of the exiles, when they were in a foreign land. The word here used, ^}, properly means, to drive, to impel, to urge; and then to urge a debtor, to exact payment; or to exact tribute, a ransom, &c. See Deut. xv. 2, 3. 2 Kings xxiii. 35. Comp. Job iii. 18. Zech. ix. 8, x. 4, where one form of the word is rendered die oppressor; Job xxxix. 7, the driver; Ex. v. 6, taskmasters; Dan. xi. 20, a raiser of taxes. The idea is that of urgency, oppression, vexation, of being hard pressed and ill treated. It does not refer here necessarily to what was exacted by God, or to sufferings inflicted by him — though it may include those — but it refers to all his oppressions, and the severity of his sufferings from all quarters. He was urged, impelled, oppressed, and yet he was patient as a lamb. IT And he was afflicted. Jahn and Steudel propose to render this, " he suffered himself to be afflicted." Hengstenberg renders it, " he suffered patiently, and opened not his mouth." Lowth, " he was made answerable; and he opened not his mouth." According to this, the idea is, that he had voluntarily taken tepon himself the sins of men, and that having done so, he was held answerable as a suretv. But it is doubtful whether the Hebrew will bear this construction. According to Jerome, the idea is that he Toiuntarily submitted, and that this was
lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth.
the cause of his sufferings. Ilensle! renders it, " God demands the debt, and he the great and righteous one suffers " It is probable, however, that our translation has retained the correct sense. The word Ft 3 2 in Niphil means to be afflicted, to suffer, be oppressed or depressed, Ps. cxix. 107, and the idea here is, probably, that he was greatly distressed and afflicted. He was subjected to pains and sorrows which were hard to be borne, and which are usually accompanied with expressions of impatience and lamentation. The fact that he did not open his mouth in complaint was therefore the more remarkable, and made the merit of his sufferings the greater. IF Yet he opened not hit mouth. This means that he was perfectly quiet, meek, submissive, patient. He did not open his mouth to complain of God on account of the great sorrows which he had appointed to him; nor to God on account of his being ill-treated by man. He did not use the language of reviling when he was reviled, nor return on men the evils which they were inflicting on him. Comp. Ps. xxxix. 9. How strikingly and literally was this fulfilled in the life of the Lord Jesus! It would seem almost as if it had been written after he lived, and was history rather than prophecy. In no other instance was there ever so striking an example of perfect patience; no other person ever so entirely accorded with the description of the prophet. IT He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter. This does not mean that he was led to the slaughter as a lamb is, but that as a lamb which is led to be killed is patient and silent, so was he. He made no resistance He uttered no complaint. He suffered himself to be led quietly along to be DUt to death. What a striking and beautiful description! How tender and ho-w true! We can almost see here the meek and patient Redetmer led along without resistance; and amidst the clamom of the multitude that were assembled
8 He *was taken 2from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for
with various feelings to conduct him to death, himself perfectly silent and composed. With all power at his disposal, yet as quiet and gentle as though he had no power; and with a perfect consciousness that he was going to die, as calm and as gentle as though he were ignorant of the design for which they were leading him forth. This image occurs also in Jeremiah, ch. xi. 19, " but I was like a lamb or an ox that is brought to the slaughter." IT As a sheep. As a sheep submits quietly to the operation of shearing. Comp. 1 Peter ii. 23, "Who when he was reviled, reviled not again." Jesus never opened his mouth to revile Dr complain. It was opened only to bless those that cursed him, and to pray for his enemies and murderers.
8. He was taken from prison. Marg. away by distress and judgment. The general idea in this verse is, that the Bufferings which he endured for his people were terminated by his being, after some form of trial, cut off out of the land of the living. Lowth renders this, " by an oppressive judgment he was taken off." Noyes, " by oppression and punishment he was taken away." The LXX render it, " in his humiliation, iv tj}
TanavoxTKi, his judgment, f) Kpicrtg avrnv, [his legal trial, Thompson,] was taken away;" and this translation was followed by Philip when he explained the passage to the Eunuch of Ethiopia, Acts viii. 33. The Eunuch, a native of Ethiopia, where the Septuagint was commonly used, was reading this portion of Isaiah in that version, and the version was sufficiently accurate to express the general sense of the passage, though it is by no means a literal translation. The Chaldee renders this verse, " from infirmities and retribution he shall collect our captivity, and the wonders which shall be done for us in his days who can declare 1 Because he shall remove the dorniu ion of the people from the land of Israel; the sins which my people have
he 'was cut ofFout of the land of the living; for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
sinned shall come even unto them.'" The Hebrew word which is here used, "ISJP (from 122, to shut up, to close), means properly a shutting up or closure; and then constraint, oppression, or vexation. In Ps. cvii. 39, it means violent restraint, or oppression. It does not mean prison in the sense in which that word is now used. It refers rather to restraint, and detention; and would be better translated by confinement, oi by violent oppression. The Lord Jesus, moreover, was not confined in prison. He was bound, and placed under a guard, and was thus secured. But neither the word used here, nor the account in the New Testament, leads ua to suppose that in fact he was incarcerated. There is a strict and entire conformity between the statement here., and the facts as they occurred on the. trial of the Redeemer. See John xviii. 24. Comp. Notes on Acts viii. 33. 1T And from judgment. From a judicial decision; or by a judicial sentence. This statement is made in order to make the account of his sufferings more definite. He did not merely suffer affliction; he was not only a man of sorrows in general; he did not suffer in a tumult, or by the excitement of a mob; but he suffered under a form of law, and a sentence was passed in his case (comp. Jer. i. 16, 2 Kings xxv. 6), and in accordance with that he was led forth te death. According to Hengstenberg, the two words here " by oppression, and by judicial sentence " are to be taken together as a hendiadys, meaning an oppressive, unrighteous proceeding. Sc Lowth understands it. It seems to me, however, that they are rather to be taken as denoting separate things — the detention or confinement preliminary to the trial, and the sentence consequent upon the mock trial. IT And who shall declare his generation? The word rendered " declare" means to relate oi announce. ' Who can give a correct statement in regard to it' — implying either that there was some want of willingness or ability to do it. This phrase has been very variously interpreted; and it is by no means easy to fix its exact meaning. Some have supposed that it refers to the fact that when a prisoner was about to be led forth to death, a crier made proclamation calling on any one to come foward and assert his innocence, and declare his manner of life. But there is not sufficient proof that this was done among the Jews, and there is no evidence that it was done in the case of the Lord Jesus. Nor would this interpretation exactly express the sense of the Hebrew. In regard to the meaning of the passage, besides the sense referred to above, we may refer to the following opinions which have been held, and which are arranged by Hengstenberg. I. Several, as Luther, Calvin, and Vitringa, translate it, " who will declare the length of his life ] " i. e. who is able to determine the length of his future days — meaning that there would be no end to his existence, and implying that though he would be cut off, yet he would be raised again, and would live for ever. To this, the only material objection is, that the word "TO dor, generation, is not elsewhere used in that sense. Calvin, however, does not refer it to the personal life of the Messiah, so to speak, but to his life in the Church, or to the perpetuity of his life and principles in the Church which he redeemed. His words are, " yet we are to remember that the prophet does not speak only of the person of Christ, but embraces the whole body of the Church, which ought never to be separated from Christ. We have, therefore, says he, a distinguished testimony respecting the perpetuity of the Church. For as Christ lives for ever, so he will not suffer his kingdom to perish." Comm. in loco. II. Others translate it, " who of his contemporaries will consider it," or " considered it?" So Storr, Doederlin, Dathe, Rosenmuiler and Gesenius render it. According to Gesenius it means, * who of his contemporaries considered that he was token out of the land of the living on account of the sin c my people V III Lowth and some other^ adopt the inter pretation first suggested, and render it " his manner cf life who would declare V In support of this, Lowth appeals to the passages from the Mishna and ihe Gemera of Babylon, where it is said that before any one was punished for a capita, crime, proclamation was made before him by a crier in these words, " whosoevei knows any tiling about his innocence, let him come and make it known." On this passage the Gemara of Babylon adds, " that before the death of Jesus, this proclamation was made forty days; but no defence could be found." TMs is certainly false; and there is no sufficient reason to think that the custom prevailed at all in the time of Isaiah, or in the time of the Saviour. IV. Others render it, " who can express his posterity, the number of his descendants ]" So Hengstenberg renders it. So also Kimchi. V. Some of the fathers referred it to the humanity of Christ, and to his miraculous conception. This was the belief o; Chrysostom. See Calvin in loco. So also Morerius and Cajetan understood it. But the word is never used in this sense.
The word Ti^j dor, generation, means properly an age, generation of men; the revolving period or circle of human life; from ^Tfdiir, a circle. Eccl. i. 4. Lcut. xxiii. 3, 4, 9. It then means, also, a dwelling, a habitation. Isa. xxxviii. 12. Ps. xlix. 20. It occurs often in the Old Testament, and is in all other instances translated " generation," or " generations." Amidst the variety of interpretations which have been proposed, it is perhaps not possible to determine with any considerable degree of certainty what is the true sense of the passage. The only light, it seems to me, which can be thrown on it, is to be derived from the tenth verse, where i'. is said, " he shall see his seed, he shah prolong his days;" and this would lead us to suppose that the sense is, that he would have a posterity which no one would be able to enumerate, or declare. According to this, the sense would be, ' he shah be indeed cut off out of the land of the living. But his name, his iacr. shall not be extinct. Notwithstanding this, his generation, race, posterity, shall be so numerous that no one shall be able to declare it.' This interpretation is not quite satisfactory, but it has more probabilities in its favour than any other.
IT For. ^ ki. This particle does not here denote the cause of what was just stated, but points out the connexion. Comp. 1 Sam. ii. 21. Ezra x. 1. In these places it denotes the same as M and." This seems to be the sense here. Or, if it be here a causal particle, it refers not to what immediately goes before, but to the general strain and drift of the discourse. All this would occur to him because he was cut off on account of the transgression of his people. He was taken from confinement, and was dragged to death by a judicial sentence, and he should have a numerous spiritual posterity, because he was cut off on account of the sins of the people. IT He was cut off. This evidently denotes a violent, and not a peaceful death. See Dan. ix. 26: " And after threescore and two weeks shall the Messiah be cut off, but not for himself." The LXX render it, "for his life is taken away from the earth." The word here used ("it 3), means properly to cut, to cut in two, to divide. It is applied to the act of cutting down trees with an axe. See 2 Kings vi. 4. Here the natural and obvious idea is, that he would be violently taken away, as if he was cut down in the midst of his days. The word is never used to denote a peaceful death, or a death in the ordinary course of events; and the idea which would be conveyed by it would be, that the person here spoken of would be cut off in a violent manner in the midst of his life. IT For the transgression of my people. The meaning of this is not materially different from " on account of our sins." " The speaker here — Isaiah — does not place himself in opposition to the people, but includes himself among thtm, and speaks of them as his people, i. e. those with whom he was connected." Hengstenberg. Others, however, suppose that Jehovah is here Introduced as speaking, and that he says that the Messiah was to be cut off for the sins of his people. IT Was h$ stricken. Marg. " the stroke upon him;" i. e. the stroke came upon him. The word rendered in the margin " stroke," IMS, denotes properly a blow Deut. xvii. 8, xxi. 5; then a spot, mark or blemish in the skin, whether produced by the leprosy or any other cause. It is the same word which is used in ver. 4. See Note on that verse. — The Hebrew, which is rendered in the margin " upon him," 1333, has given rise to much discussion. It is properly and usually in the plural form, and it has been seized upon by those who maintain that this whole passage refers not to one individual but to some collective body, as of the people, or the propheta (see Analysis prefixed to ch. lii. 13), as decisive of the controversy. To this word Rosenmuller,in his Prolegomena to the chapter, appeals for a decisive termination of the contest, and Rupposes the prophet to have used this p'u'-a' form for the express purpose of 'i^^ring up any difficulty in regard to V, "waning. Gesenius refers to it for ') f *,r^e purpose, to demonstrate thf t t' e f,ropliet must have referred to -/re rjllective body — as the prophets- t.r J not to an individual. Aben Ezm i'.iA Abarbanel also maintain the same V»'rg,and defend the position that it can r.^cx be applied to an individual. Thu' J3 not the. place to go into an extended examination of this word. The diffici hies which have been started in regard to it have given rise to a thorough crit':al examination of the use of the par' icle in the Old Testament, and an ir -riiry whether 'I is ever used in the ' angular numV-. Those who are dispos d to see the process and the result of the investigation may consult Ewald's Heb. Gramna»r Leipzig, 1827, p. 3G5; Wiseman's Lectures, p. 331^333, Edit. Andov. 1837, and Hengstenberg's Christol. p. 523. In favour of regarding it as here used in the singular number, and as denoting an individual, we may just refer to the following considerations. (1.) It is sc rendered by Jerome, and in the Syriao version. (2.) In some places the suffix
9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich ain
IE attached to nouns is certainly singular. Thus in Ps. xi. 7, fe^B « his face," speaking of God; Job xxvii. 23, " Men shall clap their hands at him,"
i^bs? where it is certainly singular; Isa. xliv. 15, "He makelh it a graven image, and falleth down thereto," 1E3. (3.; In Ethiopic the suffix is certainly singular. Wiseman. These consideratic.is show that it is proper to render it in the singular number, and to regard it as referring to an individual. The LXX render it els Oavarov, unto death, and evidently read it as if it were an abbreviation of n*rab Idmuth, and they render the whole passage," for the transgressions of my people he was led unto death." This translation is adopted and defended by Lowth, and has also been defended by Dr. Kennicott. The only argument which is urged, however, is, that it was so used by Origen in his controversy with the Jews; that they made no objection to the argument that lie urged; and that as Origen and the Jews were both acquainted with the Hebrew text, it is to be presumed that this was then the reading of the original. But this authority is too slight to change the Hebrew text. The single testimony of Origen is too equivocal to determine any question in regard to the reading of the Hebrew text, and too much reliance should not be reposed even on hi3 statements in regard to a matter of fact. This is one of the many instances in which Lowth has ventured to change the Hebrew text with no sufficient authority. 9. And he made his grave with the wicked. Jerome renders this, et dubit impios pro sepultura et divitcm pro morte.iy,a. The LXX render it, " and I will give the wicked &vt\ rrjg ratfivs — instead of his burial, and the rich in the place, or instead of his death" — i*rt rov Qavdrov. The Chaldee renders it, " and ue will deliver the wicked into Gehenna, and the rich in substance who oppress oy a death that is destructive, that the
his *death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
workers of iniquity may no more r>e established, and that they may no more speak deceit in their mouth." The Syriac renders it beautifully, " the wicked stenberg renders it, " they appointed him his grave with the wicked (but he waa with a rich man after his death); although he had done nothing unrighteous, and there was no guile in his mouth." The sense, according to him, \s, that not satisfied with his sufferings and death, they sought to insult him even in death, since they wished to bury his corpse among criminals. It is then incidentally remarked, that this object was not accomplished. This whole verse is exceedingly important, and every word in it deserves a serious examination, and attentive consideration It has been subjected to the closest investigation by critics, and different interpretations have been given to it. They may be seen at length in Rosenmiiller, G C3enius, and Hengstenberg. The word rendered "he made," "|P)T5j from V-3 nathan, is a word of very frequent occurrence in the Scriptures. According to Gesenius, it means, (1) to give, as (a) to give the hand to a victor; (6) to give into the hand of any one, i. e. the power; (c) to give, i. e. to turn the back; (d) to give, i. e. to yield fruit as a tree; (c) to give; i. e. to show compassion; (/) to give honour, praise, etc.; (g) to give into prison, or into custody;
(2) to sit, place, put, lay; (a) to set before any one; (b) to set one over any person or thing; (c) to give one's heart to any thing; i. e. to apply the mind, &c.
(3) to make; (a) to make or constitute one as any thing; (b) to make a thing as something else. The notion of giving, or giving over, is the essential idea of the word, and not that of making, as our translation would seem to imply; and the sense is, that he was given by design to the grave of the wicked, or it
And his grave was appointed with the wicked; But he was with a rich man in his death — Although he had done no wrong, Neither was there any guile in his mouth.
But who gave, or appointed him 1 I answer. The word may either (1) here j be used impersonally as in Ps. lxxii. 15, I u to him shall be given," marg. " one Bhall give," Eccl. ii. 21, meaning, that some one gave, or appointed his grave with the wicked; i. e. his grave was appointed with the wicked; or, (2) the phrase " my people," ^^l? must be supplied; my people appointed his grave to be with the wicked; or (3) God gave, or appointed bis grave with the wicked. It seems to me that it is to be regarded as used impersonally, meaning that his grave was appointed with the wicked; and then the sense will be, that it was designed that he should be buried with the wicked, without designating the person or persons who intended it. So it ' is correctly rendered by Lowth and Noyes, " his grave was appointed with the wicked." IT With the wicked. It was designed that he should be buried with the wicked. The sense is, that it was not only intended to put him to death, but also to heap the highest indignity on him. Plence, it was intended to deny him an honourable burial, and to consign him to the same ignominious grave with the violators of the laws of God and man. One part of an ignominious punishment has often been to deny to him who has been eminent in guilt an honourable burial. Hence, it was said of Ahab (1 Kings xxi. 19), that the dogs should lick his blood; and of Jezebel that the dogs should eat her. 1 Kings xxi. 23. Thus of the king of Babylon (Isa. xiv. 19), that he should "be cast out of his grave as an abominable branch." See Note on that place. Hence those who have been peculiarly guilty are sometimes quartered, and their heads and other parts of the body suspended on posts, or they are hung in chains, and their flesh left to be devoured oy the fowls of heaven. So Josephus, Ant. B. iv. ch. viii. § 6, says, " He that flasphemeth God, let him be stoned;