A CHEAT and glorious change is here described under the figure of a desert clothed with luxuriant vegetation, vs. 1, 2. The people are encouraged with the prospect of this change and with the promise of avenging judgments on their enemies, vs. 3, 4. The same change is then expressed, by a change of figure, as a healing of corporeal infirmities, vs. 5, 6. The former figure is again resumed, and the wilderness described as free from all its wonted inconveniences, particularly those of barrenness and thirst, disappointment and illusion, pathlessness and beasts of prey, vs. 7—9. The whole prediction winds up with a promise of redemption, restoration, and endless blessedness, v. 10.
This chapter is regarded by Eichhorn, Bertholdt, and Rosenmuller, as entirely distinct from that before it; by Hitzig as a separate composition of the same writer; but by most interpreters as a direct continuation of it. According to Rosenmuller, it was written by the author of ch. xi, xn; according to Umbreit by the author of ch. XL—LXVI, according to Ewald by another in imitation of that writer; according to Gesenius by the author of ch. xin, xiv, which the passage before us resembles, he says, in its literary merit and its moral defects, especially its spirit of revenge and blood thirsty hatred. All these writers agree that it cannot be the work of Isaiah. As a sample of the proofs on which their judgment rests, it may be stated that [“hitzig makes the use of the form “nstn and of the phrase sb “nnm a proof of later date. He authoritatively sets it down as belonging to the period immediately before the termination of the exile. By such assertions and pretended proofs, its genuineness is of course unshaken.
With respect to the subject of the chapter there is no less diversity of judgment. It has been explained with equal confidence as a description of the state of Judah under Hezekiah (Grotius), of the return from exile (Clericus), of the state of Judah after that event (Rosenmuller), of that state and the times of the New Testament together (J. H. Michaelis), of the calling of the Gentiles (Cocceius), of the Christian dispensation (Luther, Calvin, al.), of the state of the church after the fall of Antichrist (Vitringa), of the state of Palestine at some future period (J. D. Michaelis), and of a future state of blessedness (Gill). These arbitrary hypotheses refute each other, t The best description of the chapter is that given by Augusti in the title to his version of it, where he represents it as the description of a happy condition of the church after a period of suffering. This is no doubt its true import, and when thus explained it may be considered as including various particulars, none of which can be regarded as its specific or exclusive subject. Gesenius says this prophecy was of course never fulfilled; but so far is this from being true, that it has rather been fulfilled again and again. Without any change of its essential meaning it may be applied to the restoration of the Jews from Babylon, to the vocation of the Gentiles, to the whole Christian dispensation, to the course of every individual believer, and to the blessedness of heaven. The ground of this manifold application is not that the language of the passage is unmeaning or indefinite, but that there is a real and designed analogy between the various changes mentioned, which brings them all within the natural scope of the same inspired description.
1. Desert and waste shall rejoice (for) them. The verb is trans lated as an imperative of the second or third person by the Septuagint, Cocceius, and others; and as a descriptive present by Gesenius and some later writers; but there is no sufficient reason for departing from the strict sense of the future. The desert has been variously explained to mean Idumea, Judea, the Jewish church, the Christian church, the Gentile world, and the wilderness separating Palestine from Babylonia. The true sense seems to be that given by Gesenius, who supposes the blooming of the desert to be used here, as in many other cases, to express an entire revolution, the subject of the change being not determined by the figure itself but by the whole connexion. The final c has been variously explained, as a suffix, equivalent to onn, cr&? or:-r; as a paragogic letter, used instead of •), on account of the a following; and as a mere orthographical mistake, arising from the same cause. Those who make it a suffix refer it, either to the animals described in the close of the preceding chapter, or to the judgments there threatened against Edom, or to the Jewish exiles returning from captivity. The suffix is not expressed in any of the ancient versions. Kennicott supposes the a to have been added merely to complete the line; but why should such a form have been perpetuated? The idea of the first clause is repeated in the second. And the wilderness shall rejoice and blossom as the rose. This explanation of the last word is given by several of the Rabbins, and retained by Junius, Cocceius, Lowth, and Augusti. The later writers object that the word, according to its etymology, must denote a bulbous plant. The ancient versions, with Luther and Calvin, make it mean the lily, which is retained by Ewald; but for this flower the language has a different name. Saadias and Abulwalid explain it the narcissus, which is approved by Gesenius in his Commentary, and after him by most of the later German writers. But in his Thesaurus he makes it mean the colchicum autumnale or meadowsaffron. Amidst this diversity and doubt, it is best with Barnes to retain the English word rose, as more familiar and as conveying a more striking image of beauty. The poetry, if not the botany, of this translation is superior to Henderson’s (and blossom as the crocus).
2. The same idea of complete and joyful change is again expressed by the same figure, but with greater fulness, the desert being here described as putting on and wearing the appearance of the spots most noted for luxuriant vegetation. (It shall) blossom, it shall blossom and rejoice; yea, (with) joy and shouting; or, yea, joy and shouting (there shall be). The glory of Lebanon is given unto it (die desert), the beauty of Carmel and of Sharon. They (who witness this great change) shall see the glory of Jehovah, the beauty of our God. The figures here employed are so familiar, and in their obvious meaning so expressive, that we only weaken their effect by treating them as symbols or an allegory. Thus Jarchi understands by the glory of Lebanon the temple; Gill, choice and excellent Christians, etc. As a change in the relative condition of the Jews and Gentiles is no doubt included in the prophecy, there is not the same objection to the opinion of Forerius, that the second clause of the verse denotes the transfer of God’s spiritual presence, and the glory connected with it, from the Jewish to the Christian church. According to Oecolampadius, Lebanon, Carmel, and Sha ron are here mentioned, as natural boundaries or landmarks of the country. Schmidius supposes that a mountain, a cultivated field, and an extensive plain, are given as samples of the whole, to intimate that nothing should be wanting to the perfection of the state here promised and described. But Lebanon and Carmel are both mountains, unless we give the latter its gene ric sense of fruitful field, as Junius and Tremellius do, in obvious violation of the context, since the preceding and the following word are evidently proper names. The glory or beauty of the places named is not fertility, as Grotius thinks, but rather its effect as seen in their luxuriant vegetation. The reduplication of the first verb in the sentence is regarded by almost all interpreters as emphatic, though they differ greatly as to its precise force. Calvin and Junius make it expressive of abundant and progressive growth, as if he had said, it shall blossom more and more. Hitzig applies it to the rankness of the growth (hoch sprosst sie auf), Knobel to its universality (ganz sprosset sie). August! repeats the verb as in Hebrew (bluhen ja bluhen), and the Vulgate copies the precise form still more closely (germinans germinabit).—The future translation of ^n: by Calvin and the Eno-lish Version is gratuitous and arbitrary. The preterite form points out the true relation of the cause to its effect. It shall rejoice because the glory of Lebanon has been given to it. The pronoun they is referred by Vitringa to the desert, Lebanon, etc. But as these are the immediate antecedents, the pronoun would hardly have been introduced, except for the purpose of directing attention to some other nominative than the nearest, as in Psalm 22: 18. The true sense is probably that given in the Septuagint (my people) and the Targum (the house of Israel), and in a more general form by Clericus (qui aderunt). Instead of “p% the Seventy seem to have read pii (za eqqttct TOV ‘loQddvov), and this reading, with a corresponding change of the preceding word, is adopted by Houbigant (p^fi mh), Kennicott (p^i^n nrrt), and Lowth (the well-watered plain of Jordan). The words, as they stand in the common text, may be construed either with a preposition 37 or the substantive verb understood. Eleven manuscripts read “£> (to thee) for nb (to it), which merely converts the description into an apostrophe.
3. With the prospect of this glorious change the people are commanded to encourage themselves and one another. Strengthen hands (now) sinking, and knees (now) tottering make firm. The hands and knees are here combined, as Vitringa observes, to express the powers of action and endurance. The participial forms represent the hands as actually hanging down, relaxed, or weakened, and the knees as actually giving way. The passage thus explained is far more expressive than if we make the participles adjectives, denoting a permanent quality or habitual condition. In itself, the language of this verse is applicable either to self-encouragement or to the consolation of others. It is understood to mean, renew your own strength, by Cocceius and Clericus (reparate vires vestras). Most of the older writers, and some moderns, make the other the prominent idea, and suppose the command to be addressed to those in office (Barnes), or to ministers (Calvin), or to the prophets (Knobel), or to these and other good men (Grotius), or to the people generally (Junius). Neither of these interpretations is erroneous except in being too exclusive. There is no reason why the words should not be taken in their widest sense, as meaning, let despondency be exchanged for hope. That self-encouragement is not excluded, may be learned from Paul’s use of the words in that sense (Heb. 12: 12). That mutual encouragement is not excluded, is sufficiently apparent from the following: verse. Thus understood the words may be considered as O J including, but not as specifically signifying, spiritual weakness or inability to do God’s will (Targum), and the duty of encouraging the Gentiles with the prospect of admission to his favour (Menochius). The specific application of the passage to the Roman persecutions (Gurtlerus) is gratuitous. Equally so is the idea that the Jews are here encouraged under the depress ing recollection of sufferings already past (Grotius), or under the alarm excited by the foregoing threats (Calvin). The same objection lies against the exclusive reference of the words to the exiles in Babylon who distrusted the promises (Hendewerk) or believed themselves to be forsaken by Jehovah (Knobel). As a general exhortation, they are applicable to these and to many other situations, none of which can be regarded as the exclusive subject of the promise. The figures here used are the same with those em ployed in ch. 13: 7 and in Job 4: 3, 4. The image presented is that of persons who can scarcely lift up their hands or stand upon their legs (Gill). The Septuagint supposes the command to be addressed to the hands themselves (t,a%vGoi.Te %EIQ£<J)’ Hitzig gratuitously changes hands to arms, as in ch. 10: 10, 13. 14: 27. 19: 16. 25: 10. 26: 11 etc.
4. This verse shows how the command in the one before it is to be obeyed, by suggesting, as topics of mutual encouragement, the vindicatory justice of God, and his certain interposition in behalf of his people. Say ye to the hasty of heart (i. e. the impatient, those who cannot wait for the fulfilment of God’s promise), Be firm, fear not; behold your God (as if already present or in sight); vengeance is coming, the retribution of God; he (himself) is coming, and will save you. The connecting link between his vengeance and their safety is the destruction of their enemies. (Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you. 2 Thess. 1: 6.) ISIE:, as a passive participle, corresponds, in form and sense, to the English hurried. It has been variously explained as meaning inconsiderate (Junius), precipitate (Cocceius), inconstant (Vatablus), faint-hearted (Lowth), palpitating (Rosenmuller), ready to flee (Gesenius), hasty in drawing black conclusions upon themselves and their state (Gill). But the true sense seems to be the one expressed by Clericus, to wit, impatient of delay in the execution of God’s promises (qui nullas moras aequo animo ferre possunt). This includes the ideas of despondency and unbelieving fear, while at the same time it adheres to the strict sense of the Hebrew word. Compare the analogous expression in ch. 28: 16, he that believeth will not make haste or be impatient.—The construction of the second clause is greatly perplexed by making ca^nbx the subject of xia^. Thus the English Version, which is founded upon Calvin’s, supplies two prepositions and assumes an unusual inversion of the terms. Your God will come (with) vengeance, even God (with) a recompense. This construction also involves an anticlimax, as the simple name of God is of course less emphatic than the full phrase your God. Luther has to vengeance, and God who recom penses. Jerome makes the construction still more complex by translating Kin11 as a causative (ullionem adducet retributionis). The true construction, as given by Junius, Cocceius, Vitringa, and most later writers, makes behold your God an exclamation, and vengeance the subject of the verb. Vitringa observes that xin is here used to express both the present and the future, an idea which may be conve/ed in English by the idiomatic phrase, is coming or about to come. The kin might be grammatically construed with ^ina (it will come), but as the act of saving is immediately afterwards ascribed to the same subject, it is better to explain the pronoun as an emphatic designation of Jehovah. Not only his vengeance but himself is coming. Grotius, true to his principle of seeking the fulfilment of all prophecies in the days of the Prophet himself, explains he will save you as meaning he will not let the Ethiopians reach you. The exclusive application of the threatening here implied to the Babylonians, the Jews, Antichrist, or the Devil, is untenable for reasons which have been already given in the exposition of the foregoing verse. While Barnes denies that the phrase your God refers to the Messiah, Calovius alleges that the name of Jesus is expressly mentioned, being included in the verb rcr. The words are really a promise of deliverance to God’s people, and include, as the most important part of their contents, the unspeakable gift of Christ and his salvation.
Vs. 5, 6. The change in the condition of the people is now represented by another figure, the removal of corporeal infirmities. Then (when God has thus come) shall the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame leap (or bound) as an hart and the tongue of the dumb shall shout (for joy), because waters have burst forth in the wilderness and streams in the desert. The reason assigned in this last clause for the joy to be expressed shows clearly that the miraculous removal of disease and the miraculous irrigation of the desert are in tended to express one and the same thing. The essential idea in both cases is that of sudden and extraordinary change. This precludes Grotius’s interpretation of the fifth verse as meaning that the most obtuse and prejudiced shall see and acknowledge what God has wrought. It also precludes Jonathan’s symbolical exposition of the words as predicting the removal of spiritual disabilities, and the opposite hypothesis, maintained by many of the older writers, that Isaiah here explicitly foretells the miracles of Christ. Calovius asserts that Christ himself has so interpreted the passage in Matt. 11:5, Luke 7: 22. But as Henderson justly says, there is no proof what ever that Christ refers John the Baptist to this prophecy; he employs none of the formulas which he uniformly uses when directing attention to the Old Testament (e. g. in Matt. 9: 16. 11: 10. 12: 17. 13: 14), but simply appeals to his miracles in proof of his Messiahship; the language is similar, but the subjects different. Another argument is urged by J. D. Michaelis, namely, that the last clause of the sixth verse cannot be applied to the miracles of Christ, and yet it obviously forms a part of the same prophetic picture. The evasion of this difficulty by assuming, as Vitringa seems inclined to do, a mixture of literal and figurative language in the parallel clauses of the very same description, is one of those arbitrary exegetical expedients, which can only be affirmed on one side and rejected on the other. To the question whether this prediction is in no sense applicable to our Saviour’s miracles, we may reply with Calvin, that although they are not directly mentioned, they were really an emblem and example of the great change which is here described. So too the spiritual cures effected by the gospel, although not specifically signified by these words, are included in the glorious revolution which they do denote. The simple meaning of the passage is, that the divine interposition which had just been promised should produce as wonderful a change in the condition of mankind, as if the blind were to receive their sight, the dumb to speak, the deaf to hear, the lame to walk, and deserts to be fertilized and blossom as the rose. In the process of this mighty transmutation, miracles were really performed, both of a bodily and spiritual nature, but the great change which includes these includes vastly more. Gesenius and others understand the sixth verse as describing the joy of the returning exiles, which might be compared to that of men miraculously healed; but it is far more natural to understand the healing as descriptive of the change itself, which must therefore be much more extensive than the restoration of the Jews from Babylon, although this may be one of the particulars included. To the explanation of i”p-3 as a future there is the same objection as to that of ‘,na in v. 2. The original form of expression is not that they shall rejoice for waters shall burst forth, but that they shall rejoice because waters have burst forth already, the last event being spoken of as relatively past, i. e. as previous to the act of rejoicing which the future verb expresses. The version when they shall have burst forth (Cocceius) yields an equally good sense, and indeed the same in substance, but departs without necessity from the usual and strict sense of the particle. The suggestion, which Barnes quotes from Camp bell’s travels in South Africa, that lameness and dumbness (i. e. indisposi tion or inability to speak) are here alluded to as painful incidents to travel in the desert, is striking and ingenious, but a little far-fetched and at variance with the context, which requires changes more extraordinary than the mere relief of taciturnity and footsore weariness. Here as in ch. 34: 14, J. D. Michaelis first suggests a fanciful interpretation (making lameness denote ill success in war), and then prescribes as the only alternative a reference to the paths of virtue and religion, in which those who are deficient may be said to halt or limp. Clericus, who usually follows Grotius in preferring the lowest and the most material sense of which the language is susceptible, applies these words to spiritual changes, but thinks it necessary to apologize for this departure from his usual mode of exegesis, which he does by adding to his note upon the sixth verse, ex quibus intelligere licebit, quamquam propriam verborum potestatem sectemur quotiescumque licet, nos ubi necesse est ad tralatitium adeoque allegoricum (ut vocatur) sensum devenire. The only wonder is that he was able to overcome his scruples in a case where there is no necessity whatever for the so-called allegorical interpretation, but a simple instance of poetical metaphor. The verb “,3”i, to which the older writers gave the sense of singing, is explained by the modern lexicographers as properly denoting the expression of joyous feelings by inarticulate cries or shouts.
7. The idea of complete and joyful change is still expressed by the transformation of a desert and the consequent removal of its inconveniences, among which the Prophet here particularly mentions the tantalizing illusions to which travellers in the wilderness are subject. And the mirage shall become a pool (or the sand lake a water lake, the seeming lake a real one), and the thirsty land springs of water, (even) in the haunt of wolves, their lair, a court (or field) for reed and rush. Instead of the general meaning put upon 2^123 by the older writers following the Septuagint (avvdQog) and the Vulgate (quae erat arida), it is now agreed that the word denotes the illusive appearance caused by unequal refraction in the lower strata of the atmosphere, and often witnessed both at sea and land, called in English looming, in Italian fata morgana, and in French mirage. J. D. Michaelis thanks God that the German language has no need of such a term; but Ewald and Umbreit use Kimmung as an equivalent. Other equivalents are employed by Hitzig (Wasserschein), DeWette (Sandmeer), Hendewerk (Sandschimmer), and Henderson (vapoury illusion). In the deserts of Arabia and Africa, the appearance presented is precisely that of an extensive sheet of water, tending not only to mislead the traveller but to aggravate his thirst by disappointment. The phenomenon is well described by Quintius Curtius in his Life of Alexander the Great. (Arenas vapor aestivi solis accendit Camporum non alia quam vasti et profundi aequoris species est.) It is thus referred to in the Koran (24: 39): And as for those who disbelieve, their deeds are like the mirage (ol^w) in the desert; the thirsty reckons it for water, till when he comes he finds it nothing. More deceitful than the mirage (or serab), is an Arabian proverb. Gesenius follows Hyde in deriving the Hebrew word from a Persian phrase meaning a surface of water. Hitzig explains it as an Arabic derivative denoting an abundant flow or stream. Its introduction here adds a beautiful stroke to the description, not only by its local propriety, but by its strict agreement with the context. The etymology of siaa suggests the idea of a gushing fountain, which is expressed in some translations, particularly those of Lowth (bubbling springs) and Augusti (Sprudelquellen). Gesenius and the other recent German writers render n^an jackals, as in ch. 13: 21 and 34: 13; but Henderson’s translation (wolves) has a better effect in English. The essential idea is that of wild and solitary animals, rua and •nsn are combined as in ch. 34: 13. The latter word is explained by some as meaning grass, and the whole clause as predicting, that hay and reeds and rushes (Luther), or grass with reeds and rushes (Junius), shall grow in what was once the haunt of wild beasts; or that grass shall grow instead of reeds and rushes (Augusti); or that grass shall be converted into reeds and rushes (Cocceius). Most writers now however give •vsn the sense of court, en closure, or the more general one of place, and understand the clause to mean, that what was once the haunt of wild beasts should become a place for the growth of reeds and rushes, which require a great degree of moisture, and therefore imply an entire change in the condition of the desert. The same sense is given by Calvin (locus erit arundini et junco) and Vitringa (late excrescet calamus etjuncus). Knobel instead of fiWi reads n^s^ on the alleged authority of the Peshito and the Vulgate (orietur). In the haunt of jackals springs up grass to (the height of) reeds and rushes, a luxuriance of vegetation which of course implies excessive moisture. Even if this construction of the particle were natural and justified by usage, the change in the text would still be inadmissible because unnecessary. All these interpretations understand the last clause as a distinct proposition or description of a change to be wrought in the haunts or lairs of desert animals. But Ewald regards the whole as a mere description of the desert and continues the construction into the next verse. In the haunt of jackals, (in) their lair, (in) the place for reeds and rushes, even there shall be a way etc. As this removes the difficulty of explaining the growth of reeds and rushes as a promise, it would seem to be entitled to the preference, but for the length of the sentence which it assumes and the conjunction at the beginning of v. 8. These objections may be obviated, and the advantages of the construction still secured, by connecting this, as a descriptive clause, not with what follows but with what precedes: fountains shall burst forth in the haunt of wolves, (in) their lair (or resting place), (in) the court (or growing-place) of reeds and rushes. We may then suppose either that these marshy spots are represented as the favourite resort of certain animals, or that two distinct descriptions of the wilderness are given, first by describing it as the resort of solitary animals and then as insusceptible alike of culture and inhabitation. The description, even if inapplicable strictly to the same spot, might correctly be applied to different parts of the same wilderness. The suffix in nsan refers not to -px understood (DeDieu), but to d”0n as a plaralis inhumanus (Gesenius),or to each of the d^an distributively (Junius: cubili cujusque) as an individual of the feminine gender (Lam. 4: 31). There is consequently no need of reading D^xzn (Kennicott), fis (Houbigant), nsns or ‘X-iB (Lowth). Gesenius supplies a relative before nxan (which was its lair or where its lair was); but a much more natural construction is proposed by Maurer and Hitzig, who explain it as in simple apposition with t^an ma. The explanation which has now been given of the verse, as a poetical description of complete and joyful change, excludes of course the allegorical interpretation of the pools as meaning schools and the fountains teachers (Vitringa), the dragon’s den the heathen world (Schmidius), the dragons themselves persecutors, pagan emperors’and papal powers (Gill), the reeds and rushes persons eminent in spiritual knowledge, authority, and influence (Cocceius). All these particulars may be included in the change described, but none of them can be regarded as specifically much less as exclusively intended.
8. The desert shall cease not only to be barren but also to be path less or impassable by reason of sand. And there shall be there a highway and a way; and there shall not pass through (or over) it an unclean (thing or person); and it shall be for them (alone). Job (12: 24) speaks of a -pn Kb inn (a wilderness in which there is no way), and Jeremiah (18: 15) of a nbibo xb -pi (a way not cast up), to both which descriptions we have here a contrast. The comparison suggested is between a faint track in the sand and a solid artificial causeway. (Rosenmiiller: via aggerata. Henderson: a raised road. Vatablus: exaltata lapidibus. Clericus: munita semita.) Eighteen manuscripts and several ancient versions omit “p^i, which may be explained however (with Junius and Tremellius) as a hendiadys, highway and way for high way. The way meant is explained by Forerius to be Christ, faith, and the sacraments; by Gill, a way cast up by sovereign grace which is raised above the mire and dirt of sin, and carries over it and from it. Grotius, as usual, goes to the opposite extreme of making it denote the way to the temple. Gataker seems to apply it to the improve ment of the roads in Judea. Musculus understands it as ensuring to the exiled Jews a free return to their own country. But even this return seems to be qnly one of many particulars included in the promise of a general change and restoration, which is really the thing denoted by this whole series of prophetic figures. On the form and import of the phrase, it shall be called, see ch. 1: 26. (J. H. Michaelis: vocabitur quia erit.) For the way of holiness, Clericus substitutes the classical expression, via sacra. The next clause is paraphrased by Grotius as meaning that no Syrian, Assyrian, Ethiopian, or Egyptian, shall be seen there. Hitzig explains it as an exclusion of the heathen generally, and pronounces it a trace of later Judaism. Knobel goes further and describes it as an effusion of national hatred. The obvious meaning of the words is that the people of Jehovah shall themselves be holy. (Compare ch. 1: 25. 4: 3.) This is in fact the meaning even of those scriptures which exclude from Zion (or the sanctuary) the Canaanite (Zech. 14: 21), theuncircumcised (Ezek. 44: 9), and the stranger (Joel 4: 17). The Kin may be grammatically construed either with biboa or with -pi which is sometimes masculine. It shall be for is rendered by Hitzig it belongs to, without a material change of mean ing. The pronoun them, which has no expressed antecedent in the sentence, has been variously applied to the blind whose eyes were opened (Junius), to the saints (Gataker), to Israel (Kimchi), to the exiles (Hitzig), to those recovered from idolatry (Henderson), and to those truly reformed by suffering (Knobel). Barnes and Henderson refer it, by prolepsis, to d^bixa in the next verse. This is no doubt substantially correct; but the precise import of the original expression seems to be, that the highway shall belong exclusively to them for whose sake it was made, for whose use it was intended. A very different sense is put upon this phrase by Calvin, who connects it with what follows and translates, et erit illis ambulans in via, referring ton to God himself, and explaining the whole as a promise that he would go before them in the way thus prepared, as he went before Israel of old in the pillar of cloud and of fire. The same construction is adopted by DeDieu (et erit ipse illis ambulator viae), and Clericus (erit qui prior illis viam ingredietur), who applies it expressly to Christ as the dux salutis nostrae. Lowth says that the old English versions gave the same sense, but that our last translators were misled by the absurd division of the verse in the masoretic text, destroying the construction and the sense. His own version is: but He himself shall be with them, walking in the way, which he explains to mean, that God should dwell among them, and set them an example that they should follow his steps. Among the later writers this construction is approved by Dathe and Ewald (und da er den Weg ihnen geht). The objections to it, stated by Gesenius, are, the sense which it puts upon the particle in tab, and the needless violation of the masoretic accents. He, and most of the other modern writers, give precisely the construction found in Junius and Tremellius (viator ne stulti quidem poterunt deerrare), taking ^”n -^n as equivalent to mx ins (ch. 33: 8), and though singular in form collective in meaning and construction. The 1 before n^ix is not expletive (Henderson) but exegetical and emphatic. The meaning strictly is, the travellers and the fools, i. e. the travellers not excepting such as are ignorant or foolish, n^ix is translated by the Septuagint tiisanaQftwoi, and by Cocceius leves. Gataker explains it as denoting simple-minded Christians, while Henderson understands the whole clause as a promise, that the Jewish exiles, however defective some of them might be in intellectual energy, should not fail of reaching Zion. Hendewerk comes nearer to the full sense of the words, which he explains to mean that only moral impurity, not ignorance or weakness, should exclude men from this highway. But the words, in their primary and strict sense, are descriptive, not of the travellers, but of the way itself, which should not be a faint or dubious track through shifting ‘sands, but a highway so distinctly marked that even the most ignorant and inexperienced could not miss it. The straightness or directness of the path, which Grotius and Rosenmuller make a prominent idea, may be implied, but is not expressed.
9. The wilderness, though no longer barren or pathless, might still be the resort of beasts of prey. The promised highway might itself be exposed to their incursions. But immunity from this inconvenience is here promised. There shall not be there a lion, and a ravenous beast shall not ascend it, nor be found there; and (there) shall walk redeemed (ones). For a similar promise, in a still more figurative dress, see Hosea 2: 18, and 536 for a description of the desert as the home of deadly animals, Isaiah 30: 6. Hendewerk refers there and it to the desert, Hitzig and others to the way. Both are consistent with the context, which describes all the inconveniences and dangers of the desert as removed; but in this place the primary allusion is no doubt to the highway described in the foregoing verse. Hence the phrase ascend it, i. e. from the level of the sands, through which the road is supposed to be cast up. This precludes the necessity of referring, with Gesenius, to the use of this verb by Ezra and Nehemiah in reference to the journey from Babylon, or by Job in reference to the wilderness itself as higher than the cultivated country (Job 6: 18). Lowth seems to take yns rvnn as a poetical description of the lion (the tyrant of the beasts). But the first word is an adjective denoting violent, rapacious, ravenous, destructive, deadly. It is translated as a simple case of concord by the Vulgate (mala bestia), Luther (reissendes Thier), Tremellius (violenta /era), the English Bible (ravenous beast), and Henderson (destructive beast). The original construction is retained by Cocceius (violenta ferarum), while Knobel supplies a preposition (ein zerreissendes unter ihnen), and Ewald makes it a direct superlative (das gewaltsamste der Thiere). These terms are applied by the Targum to persecuting kings and rulers, by Jarchi to Nebuchadnezzar in particular, by Junius to the enemies of the church, and by Augusti to the avenger of blood. But they are rather intended to complete the great prophetic picture of a total change in the condition of the desert, under which general idea we may then include a great variety of suitable particulars, without however making any one of them the exclusive subject of the prophecy. The feminine verb x^^n is well explained by Knobel, as agreeing in form with rvnn and in sense with y>”S. There is no need therefore of reading xw* with Lowth on the authority of four Hebrew manuscripts. Knobel gives cnbixa its original and proper sense of bought back i. e. out of the bondage into which they had been sold. Most other writers give it the more general meaning freed or delivered. (Junius: vindicati. Cocceius: asserti.) Barnes understands it in a double sense, as expressive both of temporal and spiritual redemption. Augusti refers it to the avenger of blood whom he supposes to be mentioned in the other clause (von ihm gesichert wandelt man hin). Calvin construes labm as a subjunctive (ut redempti ambulent). Vitringa makes the last clause a distinct proposition, or rather the beginning of the next verse (et ibunt asserti, et redempti etc.). Ewald adopts a construction somewhat similar (50 gehen sie erldst, und Jahves losgekaufte u. s. w.). There is no need, however, of departing from the simpler and more usual construction, which connects it closely with what goes before, supplying there as in the English Bible (the redeemed shall walk there) and only as in the version of Gesenius (nur Erloste gehen dort).
10. The whole series of promises is here summed up in that of restoration and complete redemption. And the ransomed of Jehovah shall return and come to Zion with shouting, and everlasting joy upon their head; glad ness and joy shall overtake (them), and sorrow and sighing shall flee away. The first phrase, which is no doubt equivalent in meaning to o^ixa in v. 9, is paraphrased as follows in one of the French versions: ceux-la desquels TEternel aura paye la rancon. The connexion with the preceding context is needlessly though not erroneously expressed in some versions by trans lating the initial particle yea (Lowth), so (J. H. Michaelis), or therefore (Calvin). Zion is mentioned as the journey’s end; they shall not only move towards it but attain it. The words everlasting joy may either be governed by the preposition (with shouting and everlasting joy upon their head), or construed with the substantive verb understood (everlasting joy shall be upon their head). The latter construction seems to agree best with the Masoretic accents. Jarchi understands by nbis nnair ancient joy or the joy of old; but more seems to be promised. The Chaldee Para phrase supposes the image here presented to be that of a cloud of glory encompassing the head or floating over it. Gataker and Lowth suppose an allusion to a crown or wreath, and Umbreit to a sacerdotal crown particularly. Vitringa, Gill, and Rosenmiiller understand the Prophet as alluding to the festal use of unguents. (See Ps. 45: 8. Ecc. 9: 8. Luke 7: 46.) Paulus combines the figure of a crown with that of unction. Gesenius, Maurer, and Knobel explain joy upon the head as meaning its expression in the countenance. According to Sanctius, head is put for person or the whole body, which seems altogether arbitrary. Clericus explains the clause to mean that joy shall be at the head i. e. march before them. It de serves to be recorded, as a monstrum interpretation^ that Forerius sup poses an allusion to the washerwomen’s practice of carrying clothes upon their heads. In the last clause, joy and gladness may be either the subject or the object of the verb. The latter construction is given in the English Bible (they shall obtain joy and gladness) after the example of the Targum, Peshito, and Vulgate. In favour of the other, which is given in the Septuagint (xaTatfipsrat avtovi), may be urged the analogy of Deut. 28: 2 (all these blessings shall come on thee and overtake thee) and of the last clause of the verse, where sorrow and sighing are allowed to be the subjects of the verb by all ex.cept Cocceius, who consistently translates it, shall escape sorrow and sighing. The figures of this verse are applied to the return from exile by the Targum (from the midst of their captivity), and Henderson thinks that deliverance not too trivial to be thus described. Junius applies it in a wider sense to the reception of converts into the church. Calvin extends it to the whole course of life and to its close. The Talmud applies it to the world to come, and Gill says that’ the highway before described not only leads to Zion the church below, but to the Zion above, to the heavenly glory; and all the redeemed, all that walk in this way, shall come thither; at death their souls return to God that gave them, and in the resurrection their bodies shall return from their dusty beds and appear before God in Zion.’ The allusions to the Babylonian exile are correctly explained by Barnes upon the principle that minor and temporal deliverances were not only emblems of the great salvation but preparatory to it. The devout Vitringa closes his exposition of the cheering promise, with which Isaiah winds up the first great division of his prophecies, by exclaiming to his reader, Ora mecum Dominum supplex, ut tarn suo tempore propitius impleat; interim credens non festinabit.
