Volume Ii Part 2 (1/2)
Why is the Prophet to seek out the king just at this place? The answer is given by chap. xxii. 2. ”And a reservoir you make between the two walls for the waters of the old pool: and not do ye look unto him who makes it (viz., the impending calamity), and not do ye regard him who fas.h.i.+oned it long ago.” When a siege of Jerusalem was imminent, in the lower territory, the first task was to cut off the water from the hostile army. This measure Hezekiah, according to 2 Chron. x.x.xii. 3, took against Sennacherib: ”And he took counsel with his princes and his mighty men, to stop the waters of the fountains which were without the city, and they helped him.” That might be done in faith; but he who, like Ahaz, did not stand in the faith, sought in it, _per se_, his safety; his despairing heart clung to such measures. The stopping of the fountains was, in his case, on a level with seeking help from the a.s.syrians. It is thus in the midst of his sin that the Prophet seeks out the king, and recalls to his conscience: ”take heed and be quiet.”
But why did the Prophet take his son Shearjashub with him? It surely cannot be without significance; for otherwise it would not have been recorded, far less would it have been done at the express command of the Lord. As the boy does not appear actively, the reason can only be in the signification of the name. According to chap. viii., the Prophet was accustomed to give to [Pg 34] his sons symbolical names which had a relation to the destinies of the nation. They were, according to chap.
viii. 18, ”for signs and for wonders in Israel.” But as an interpretation of the name, the pa.s.sage chap. x. 21 is to be considered: ”The remnant shall return, the remnant of Jacob unto the mighty G.o.d.” The word ??? can, accordingly, be understood of returning to the Lord, of repentance only, comp. chap. i. 27; Hos. iii. 5. But with repentance the recovery of salvation is indissolubly connected.
The reason why it is impossible that they who commit the sin against the Holy Ghost shall never recover salvation lies solely in the circ.u.mstance, that it is impossible that they should be renewed to repentance. The fundamental pa.s.sage, which is comprehended in the name of the Prophet's son: ”And thou returnest unto the Lord thy G.o.d.... And the Lord thy G.o.d turneth thy captivity (_i.e._, thy misery), and hath compa.s.sion upon thee, and returneth and gathereth thee from all the nations” (Deut. x.x.x. 2, 3), emphatically points out the indissoluble connection of the return to the Lord, and of the return of the Lord to His people. This connection comes out so much the more clearly, when we consider that, according to Scripture, repentance is not the work of man but of G.o.d, and is nothing else but the beginning of the bestowal of salvation; comp. Deut. x.x.x. 6: ”And the Lord thy G.o.d circ.u.mciseth thine heart, and the heart of thy seed to love the Lord thy G.o.d with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live;” Zech.
xii. 10. King and people feared entire destruction; and it was at this that their powerful enemies aimed. Isaiah took his son with him, ”as the living proof of the preservation of the nation, even amidst the most fearful destruction of the greater part of it.” After having in this manner endeavoured to free their minds from the extreme of fear, he seeks to elevate them to joyful hopes, by the prophetical announcement proper, which showed that, from this quarter, not even the future great judgment, which would leave a portion only, was to be feared.
Ver. 4. ”_And say unto him: Take heed and be quiet; fear not, nor let thy heart be tender for the two ends of these smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin and Aram, and of the son of Remaliah._”
[Pg 35]
The words ”_Take heed_” point to the dangerous consequences of fear; comp. ver. 9: ”If ye do not believe, ye shall not be established.” On the words ”_be quiet_,” lit., make quiet, viz., thy heart and walk, comp. chap. x.x.x. 15: ”For thus saith the Lord: By returning and rest ye shall be saved; in _quietness_ and confidence shall be your strength; and ye would not.” Such as he was, Ahaz could not respond to the exhortations to be quiet. Quietness is a product of _faith_. But the way of faith stood open to Ahaz every moment, and by his promising word and by his example, the Prophet invited him to enter upon it. In the words: ”Fear not,” &c., there is an unmistakable reference to Deut. xx.
1, ff., according to which pa.s.sage the priest was, on the occasion of hostile oppression, to speak to the people: ”Let not your hearts be tender, and be not terrified.” That which, in the Law, the priest was commanded to do, is here done by the Prophet, who was obliged so often to step in as a subst.i.tute, when the cla.s.s of the ordinary servants fell short of the height of their calling.--The ”firebrand” is the image of the conqueror who destroys countries by the fire of war, comp.
remarks on Rev. viii. 8. The Prophet is just about to announce to the hostile kings their impending overthrow; for this reason, he calls them _ends_ of firebrands, which no longer blaze, but only glimmer. He calls them thus because he considers them with the eye of _faith_; to the bodily eye a bright flame still presented itself, as the last words: ”For the fierce anger,” &c., and vers. 5 and 6 show. _Chrysostom_ remarks: ”He calls these kings 'firebrands,' to indicate at the same time their violence, and that they are to be easily overcome; and it is for this reason, that he adds 'smoking,' _i.e._, that they were near being altogether extinguished.”
Vers. 5, 6. ”_Because Aram meditates evil against thee, Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, saying: Let us go up against Judah, and drive it to extremity, and conquer it for us, and set up as a king in the midst of it the son of Tabeal._”
We have here, farther carried out, the thought indicated by the words: ”for the fierce anger,” &c. The interval, in the original text, between vers. 6 and 7, is put in to prevent the false connection of these verses with ver. 7 (_Hitzig_ and _Ewald_).--??? always means ”to loathe,” ”to experience disgust;” here, [Pg 36] in Hiph., ”to cause disgust,” ”to drive to extremity;” comp. my work on Balaam, Rem. on Num. xxii. 3.--??? means always: ”to cleave asunder,” ”to open,” ”to conquer.”--The words: ”_For us_,” show that Tabeal is to be the va.s.sal only of the two kings. The absolute confidence with which the Prophet recognizes the futility of the plan of the two kings, forms a glaring contrast to the modern view of Prophetism, Ver. 2 shows in what light ordinary consciousness did, and could not fail to look on the then existing state of things.
Ver. 7. ”_Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pa.s.s._” (A plan stands when it is carried out.)
Ver. 8. ”_For the head of Aram is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin, and in threescore and five years more, Ephraim shall be broken, and be no more a people._”
Ver. 9. ”_And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah's son. If ye believe not, ye shall not be established._”
Each of these two verses forms a complete whole.--The words: ”For the head of Aram,” &c., to ”Rezin” receive their explanation from the ant.i.thesis to vers. 5 and 6, where the king of Aram and the king of Ephraim had declared their intention of extending their dominion over Judah. As, concerning this intention and this hope, the Lord has declared His will that it shall not be, we must understand: Not as regards Judah, and not as regards Jerusalem. It is in vain that men's thoughts exalt themselves against the purposes of G.o.d. From Aram, the Prophet turns, in the second part of the verse, to Ephraim: ”And even Ephraim! What could it prevail against the Lord and His Kingdom! It surely should give up all attempts to get more; its days are numbered, the sword is already suspended over its own head.” But inasmuch as it is possible, although not likely, that Ephraim, before its own overthrow, may still bring evil upon Judah, this is expressly denied in ver. 9: Samaria, according to the counsel of G.o.d, and the limit a.s.signed to it, is the head of Ephraim only, and not, at the same time, of Judah, &c. With this are then connected the closing words: ”If ye believe not, ye shall not be established” (properly, the consequence will be that ye do not continue), which are equivalent to it: it is hence not Samaria [Pg 37] and the son of Remaliah that you have to fear; the enemy whom you have to dread, whom you have to contend against with prayer and supplication, is in yourselves. Take heed lest a similar cause produce a similar effect, as in the last clause of ver.
8 it has been threatened against Ephraim.--This prophecy and warning, one would have expected to have produced an effect so much the deeper, because they were not uttered by some obscure fanatic, but by a worthy member of a cla.s.s which had in its favour the sanction of the Lawgiver, and which in the course of centuries had been so often and so gloriously owned and acknowledged by G.o.d.[3]
[Pg 38]
Vers. 10, 11. ”_And the Lord spoke farther unto Ahaz, saying, Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy G.o.d; ask it from the depth, or above from the height._”
Ahaz observed a dignified silence after those words of the Prophet; but his whole manner shews the Prophet that they have not made any impression upon him. If David's spirit had rested on Ahaz, he would surely, if he had wavered at all, have, on the word of the Prophet, thrown himself into the arras of his G.o.d. But in order that the depth of his apostacy, the greatness of his guilt, and the justice of the divine judgments may become manifest, G.o.d shows him even a deeper condescension. The Prophet offers to prove the truth of his announcement by any miraculous work which the king himself should determine, and from which he might, at the same time, see G.o.d's omnipotence, and the Divine mission of the Prophet. As Ahaz refused the offered sign, the word 2 Tim. ii. 12, 13: e? ?????e?a, ???e????
????seta? ??? e? ?p?st??e?, ??e???? p?st?? ??e??--????sas?a? ???
?a?t?? ?? d??ata? came into application. According to Deut. vii. 9 ff.
the truth and faithfulness of G.o.d must now manifest itself in the [Pg 39] infliction of severe visitations upon the house of David.--The character of a _sign_ is, in general, borne by everything which serves for certifying facts which belong to the territory of faith, and not to that of sight. 1. In some instances, the sign consists in a mere naked word; thus in Exod. iii. 12: ”And this shall be the sign unto thee that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve G.o.d upon this mountain.” Moses' doubts of the truth of his Divine mission originated in the consciousness of his own unworthiness, and in the condition of those to whom he was sent. From these doubts he was delivered by the announcement that, at the place where he had been called, he, at the head of the delivered people, should serve his G.o.d. This was to him a _sign_ that G.o.d was in earnest in calling him. 2. In other instances the a.s.surance given by the sign consists in its perceptibility and corporeality; so that the word a.s.sumes, as it were, flesh and blood. A case of this kind it is, _e.g._, when, in chap. viii. 18, Isaiah calls his two sons, to whom, at the command of G.o.d, he had given symbolical names, expressive of the future salvation of the covenant-people, ”Signs and wonders in Israel;”
farther, chap. xx. 3, where the Prophet walks naked and barefoot for a sign of the calamity impending over Egypt and Ethiopia in three years.
3. In another cla.s.s of signs, a fact is announced which is, in itself, natural, but not to be foreseen by any human combination, the coming to pa.s.s of which, in the immediate future, furnishes the proof that, at a distant future, that will be fulfilled which was foretold as impending.
The wonderful element, and the demonstrative power do not, in such a case, lie in the matter of the sign, but in the telling of it beforehand. It is in this sense that, in 1 Sam. x., Samuel gives several _signs_ to Saul, that G.o.d had destined him to be king, _e.g._, that in a place exactly fixed, he would meet two men who would bring him the intelligence that the lost a.s.ses were found; that, farther onwards, he would meet with three men, one of whom would be carrying three kids, another, three loaves of bread, and another, a bottle of wine, &c. In 1 Sam. ii. 34, the sudden death of his two sons is given to Eli as a sign that all the calamities threatened against his family should certainly come to pa.s.s. In Jer. xliv. 29, 30, the impending defeat of Pharaoh-Hophras is given as a _sign_ of the divine vengeance breaking in upon the Jews in Egypt. Even before the [Pg 40] thing came to pa.s.s, it could not in such a case, be otherwise than that the previous condition and foundation brought before the eyes in a lively manner (Jer. xliv. 30: ”_Behold_, I give Pharaoh-Hophras into the hands of his enemies”) gave a powerful shock to the doubts as to whether the fact in question would come to pa.s.s. 4. In other cases, the a.s.surance was given in such a manner, that all doubts as to the truth of the announcement were set at rest by the immediate performance of a miraculous work going beyond the ordinary laws of nature. Thus, _e.g._, Isaiah says to Hezekiah, in chap. xxviii. 7: ”And this shall be the sign unto thee from the Lord, that the Lord will do this thing which He has spoken,” and, as a _sign_ that the Lord would add fifteen years to the life of the King, who was sick unto death, he makes the shadow on the sun-dial of Ahaz to go back ten degrees. Of this description were also the signs granted to Gideon, and, in many respects, the plagues in Egypt also. In the pa.s.sage before us, no other sign can possibly be spoken of than one of the _two last cla.s.ses_. For it was a real, miraculous sign only which could possibly exert any influence on a mind so darkened as was that of Ahaz, and it was the vain offer of such an one only which was fitted to bring to light his obduracy. If, then, the Prophet was willing and able to give a real, miraculous sign, why, then, is the answer of Ahaz so unsuitable? And we can surely not suppose, as _Meier_ does, that he should have intentionally misunderstood the Prophet. The temptation of the Lord by the children of Israel, to which the word of the Lord, Deut. vi. 16, quoted by Ahaz, refers, consisted, according to Exod. xvii., in their having asked _water_, as a _miraculous sign_ that the Lord was truly in the midst of them. How could the Prophet reproach Ahaz with having offended, not men merely, but G.o.d, unless he had offered to prove, by a fact which lay absolutely beyond the limits of nature, the truth of his announcement, the divinity of Him who gave it, the divinity of his own mission, and the soundness of his advice? _Hendewerk_ is of opinion that ”it is difficult to say what the author would have made to be the sign in the heavens; probably, a very simple thing.” But in making this objection it is forgotten that Isaiah gives _free choice_ to the king. _Hitzig_ says: ”Without knowing it, Isaiah here plays a very dangerous game. For if Ahaz had accepted his proposition, Jehovah would [Pg 41] probably have left His servant in the lurch, and he would have begun to doubt of his G.o.d and of himself.” In these words, at all events, it is conceded that the prophets themselves would not be what people in modern times would have them to be. If such was their position towards _miracles_, then, in their own convictions, _prophecies_, too, must be something else than general descriptions, and indefinite forebodings. But how should it have been possible that an order could have maintained itself for centuries, the most prominent members of which gave themselves up to such enthusiastic imprudence and rashness? Moreover, it is overlooked that afterwards, to Hezekiah, our Prophet grants that in reality which here he offers to Ahaz in vain,--???? and ???? are _Infin. absol._ ”going high,” ”going low.” The Imperat. ???? must be understood after ???? also. Some explain ???? by ”to h.e.l.l,” ”down to h.e.l.l;” but this is against the form of the word, which it would be arbitrary to change. Nor does one exactly see how, if we except, perhaps, the apparition of one dead, Isaiah could have given to the king a sign from the Sheol; and in other pa.s.sages, too (comp. Joel iii.
3 [ii. 30]), signs in the heavens and in the earth are contrasted with one another. _Theodoret_ remarks that both kinds of miracles, among which the Lord here allowed a choice to Ahaz, were granted by Him to his pious son, Hezekiah, inasmuch as He wrought a phenomenon in _heaven_ which affected the going back of the shadow on the sun-dial of Ahaz; and on _earth_, inasmuch as He, in a wonderful manner, destroyed the a.s.syrians, and restored the king to health. _Jerome_ farther remarks, that, from among the plagues in Egypt, the lice, frogs, &c., were signs on earth; the hail, fire, and three day's darkness, were signs in the heaven. It is on the pa.s.sage before us that the Pharisees take their stand, when in Matt. xvi. 1 they ask from the Lord that He should grant them a sign from heaven. If even the Prophet Isaiah offered to prove in such a manner his divine mission, then, according to their opinion, Christ was much more bound to do this, inasmuch as He set up far higher claims. But they overlooked the circ.u.mstance that enough had already been granted for convincing those who were well disposed, and that it can never be a duty to convince obstinate unbelief in a manner so palpable.
[Pg 42]
Ver. 12. ”_And Ahaz said: I will not ask, neither will I tempt the Lord._”
Ahaz declines the offer by referring to Deut. vi. 16., and thus a.s.suming the guise of reverence for G.o.d and His commandment. ”He pretends,” says _Calvin_, ”to have faith in the words of the Prophet, and not to require anything besides the word.” The same declarations of the Law, the Lord opposes to Satan, when the latter would induce Him to do something for which he had no word of G.o.d, Matt. iv. 7. That would really have been a tempting of G.o.d. Ahaz had no doubt that the miracle would really be performed; but he had a dislike to enter within the mystical sphere. Who knows whether the G.o.d who grants the miracle is really the highest G.o.d? comp. Is. x. 10, 11, x.x.xvi. 18-20, x.x.xvii.
10-12. Who knows whether He is not laying for him a trap; whether, by preventing him from seeking the help of man. He is not to bring upon him the destruction which his conscience tells him he has so richly deserved? At all events the affording of His help is clogged with a condition which he is resolved not to fulfil, viz., his conversion. A better and easier bargain, he thought, could be struck with the a.s.syrians; how insatiable soever they might be, they did not ask the heart. How many do even now-a-days rather perish in sin and misery, than be converted!
Ver. 13. ”_And he said: Hear ye now, O house of David: Is it too little for you to provoke man, that you provoke also my G.o.d?_”
When Ahaz had before refused to believe in the simple announcement of the Prophet, his sin was more pardonable; for, inasmuch as Isaiah had not proved himself outwardly as a divine amba.s.sador, Ahaz sinned to a certain degree against man only, against the Prophet only, by unjustly suspecting him of a deceitful pretension to a divine revelation. Hence, Isaiah continues mild and gentle. But when Ahaz declined the offered sign, _G.o.d himself_ was provoked by him, and his wickedness came evidently to light. It is substantially the same difference as that between the sin against the _Son of Man_, the Christ coming outwardly and as a man only (Bengel: _quo statu conspicu, quatenus aequo tum loco c.u.m hominibus conversabatur_), and the sin against the Holy Ghost who powerfully glorifies Him outwardly and inwardly. It is the ant.i.thesis [Pg 43] of the relative ignorance of what one is doing, and of the absolute unwillingness which purposely hardens itself to the truth known, or easy to be known. We say _relative_ ignorance; for an element of obduracy and hardening already existed, if he did not believe the Prophet, even without a sign. For the fact that the Prophet was sent by G.o.d, and spoke G.o.d's word, was testified to all who would hear it, even by the inner voice, just as in every sin against the Son of Man there is always already an element of the sin against the Holy Ghost.--The truth that G.o.dlessness is the highest folly is here seen in a very evident manner. The same Ahaz who rejects the offer of the living G.o.d, who palpably wishes to reveal to him that He is a living G.o.d, sacrifices his son to the dead idol Moloch, who never yet gave the smallest sign of life! In this mirror we may see the condition of human nature.--The circ.u.mstance that it is not Ahaz, but the house of David that is addressed, indicates that the deed is a deed of the whole house.--The Prophet says, ”_My G.o.d_,” _i.e._, the G.o.d whose faithful servant I am, and in whom ye hypocrites have no more any share. In Ver.
11, the Prophet had still called Him the G.o.d of Ahaz.
Ver. 14. ”_Therefore the Lord himself giveth you a sign: Behold the Virgin is with child, and heareth a Son, and thou callest his name Immanuel._”
Ahaz had refused the proffered sign; the whole depth of his apostacy had become manifest; no further regard was to be had to him. But it was necessary to strengthen those who feared G.o.d, in their confidence in the Lord, and in their hope in him. For this reason, the Prophet gives a sign, even against the will of Ahaz, by which the announcement of the deliverance from the two kings was confirmed. Your weak, prostrate faith, he says, may erect itself on the certain fact that, in the Son of the Virgin, the Lord will some day be with us in the truest manner, and may perceive therein a guarantee and a pledge of the lower help in the present danger also.--”Therefore”--because ye will not fix upon a sign. _Reinke_, in the ably written Monograph on this pa.s.sage, a.s.signs to ??? the signification, ”nevertheless,” which is not supported by the _usus loquendi_.--??? must be translated as a Present; for the pregnancy of the Virgin and birth of Immanuel are present to [Pg 44]
the Prophet; and the fact cannot serve as a sign, in so far as it manifests itself outwardly, but only in so far as, by being foretold, it is realized as present.--??? _He_, _i.e._, of His own accord without any co-operation, such as would have taken place if Ahaz had asked the sign.--??? refers by its form to the house of David; but in determining the sign, it is not the real condition of its representative at that time which is regarded, but as he ought to be. In substance, the sign given to unG.o.dly Ahaz is destined for believers only.--??? ”behold”