BESIDES the first verse, which has been explained already, this chapter contains a prophecy of Christ and of the future condition of the Church. The Prophet here recurs to the theme with which the prophecy opened, (ch. 2: 1-4), but with this distinction, that instead of dwelling on the influence exerted by the church upon the world, he here exhibits its internal condition under the reign of the Messiah.
He first presents to view the person by whose agency the church is to be brought into a glorious and happy state, and who is here described as a partaker both of the divine and human nature, v. 2. He then describes the character of those who are predestined to share in the promised exaltation, v. 3. He then shows the necessity, implied in these promises, of previous purgation from the defilement described in the foregoing chapters, v. 4. When this purgation is effected, God will manifest his presence gloriously throughout his church, v. 5. To these promises of purity and honour he now adds one of protection and security, with which the prophecy concludes, v. 6.
It is commonly agreed that this prediction has been only partially fulfilled, and that its complete fulfilment is to be expected, not in the literal Mount Zion or Jerusalem, but in those various assemblies or societies of true believers, which now possess in common the privileges once exclusively enjoyed by the Holy City and the chosen race of which it was the centre and metropolis.
2. At this point the Prophet passes from the tone of threatening to that of promise. Having foretold a general destruction, he now intimates that some should escape it, and be rendered glorious and happy by the presence and favour of the Son of God, who is at the same time the Son of Man. In that day (after this destruction) shall the Branch (or Offspring) of Jehovah be for honour and for glory, and the Fruit of the Earth for sublimity and beauty, to the escaped of Israel, literally, the escape or deliverance of Israel, the abstract being used for the collective concrete, meaning those who should survive these judgments.—^ ftW may be taken either in the sense of Icing for, serving as, or in that of becoming, as in ch. 1: 14, 21, 22, 31.—As n^s, in its physical and proper sense, means growth, vegetation, or that which grows and vegetates (Gen. 19: 25. Ps. 65: 11. Hos. 8: 7. Ezek. 16: 7), it is here explained by Hitzig, Maurer and Ewald, as synonymous with fruit of the earth, but in its lowest sense, that of vegetable products or abundant harvests. To this interpretation, which is adopted by Gesenius in his Thesaurus, it may be objected, first, that such a subject is wholly incongruous with the predicates applied to it, honourable, glorious, sublime and beautiful; secondly, that this explanation of rnaa is precluded by the addition of the name Jehovah, a difficulty aggravated by the parallelism, which requires the relation between branch and Jehovah to be the same as that between fruit and earth, and as the last phrase means the offspring of the earth, so the first must mean the offspring of Jehovah, an expression which can only be applied to persons. This last objection applies also to the explanation of the phrase as meaning spiritual gifts in opposition to temporal or earthly gifts (Calv. Jun. Schleusner). It does not lie against that proposed by Grotius, and adopted by J. D. Michaelis, Koppe and Eichhorn, by Gesenius in his Commentary, and more recently by Knobel, which applies the phrase to the better race of Israelites who were to spring up after the return from exile. But although the sense thus put upon the word is personal it is not individual, as in every other case where rres is used figuratively elsewhere, but collective. Another objection to it is, that this better race of Israelites are the very persons here called the escaped of Israel, who would then be described as a beauty and a glory to themselves. Knobel evades this objection by denying that the last words of the verse have any connexion with the first clause; but his evasion is an arbitrary one, suggested by the difficulty which attends his doctrine.—The first of these objections applies also to Hendewerk’s interpretation of the phrase as meaning the government or administration, (das regierende Personale des Staates).—The usage of the Hebrew word in application to an individual will be clear from the following examples. “ Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous BRANCH, and a king shall reign and prosper” (Jer. 23: 5). “In those days and at that time will I cause the BRANCH of righteousness to grow up unto David, and he shall execute judgment “ (Jer. 33: 15). Behold I will bring forth my servant the BRANCH” (Zech. 3: 8). “Behold the MAN whose name is the BRANCH” (Zech. 6: 12). The Branch is here represented as a man, a king, a righteous judge, a servant of God. Hence it is reasonable to conclude that the same person, whom Jeremiah calls the branch (or son) of David, is called by Isaiah in the verse before us the branch (or son) of Jehovah. This view of the passage is strongly recommended by the following considerations. It is free from the difficulties which attend all others. It is the ancient Jewish interpretation found in the Chaldee Paraphrase, which ex plains the Branch of Jehovah as meaning his Messiah, (11*1 xmttE). The parallel passages already quoted are referred to the Messiah even by Gesenius, who only hesitates to make the same admission here, because he thinks the parallel phrase, fruit of the earth, cannot be so applied. But no expression could in fact be more appropriate, whether it be translated fruit of the land and referred to his Jewish extraction (Hengstenberg), or fruit of the earth and referred to his human nature (Vitr. Hn.). On the latter supposition, which appears more probable, the parallel terms correspond exactly to the two parts of Paul’s description (Rom. 1: 3, 4), and to the two titles used in the New Testament in reference to Christ’s two natures, SON OF GOD and SON OF MAN.
3. Having foretold the happiness and honour which the Son of God should one day confer upon his people, the Prophet now explains to whom the promise was intended to apply. In the preceding verse they were described by their condition as survivors of God’s desolating judgments. In this they are described by their moral character, and by their eternal destination to this character and that which follows it.—And it shall be, happen, come to pass, that the left in Zion and the spared in Jerusalem, singular forms with a collective application, shall be called holy, literally, holy shall be said to him, i. e. this name shall be used in addressing him, or rather may be used with truth, implying that the persons so called should be what they seemed to be, every one written, enrolled, ordained, to life, in Jerusalem.— The omission of rnrnn (Lu. Ges. De W. Ew. Hn.) is a needless departure from the idiomatic form of the original. The expression may be paraphrased, and this shall be the consequence or this shall follow, preparing the mind for an event of moment. As d^n may be either a plural adjective or abstract noun, some understand the phrase to mean enrolled among the living (Lu. Calv. Cler. E. V. Low. Bs.), others enrolled to life (Jun. Cocc. Vitr. J. H.Mich. J. D. Mich. Ges. Hg. De W. Ew. Urn. Hn.). In either case the figure denotes not simply actual life but destination to it. For the origin and usage of the figure itself, see Ex. 30: 12. Num. 1: 18. Ezek. 13: 9. Phil. 4:3. Rev. 3: 5.
4. This verse contains a previous condition of the promise in v. 3, which could not be fulfilled until the church was purged from the pollution brought upon it by the sins of those luxurious women and of the people generally, a work which could be effected only by the convincing and avenging influences of the Holy Spirit. The construction is continued from the verse preceding. All this shall come to pass, if, (provided that, on this condition, which idea may be here expressed by when) the Lord shall have washed away (the Hebrew word denoting specially the washing of the body, and suggesting the idea of the legal ablutions) the filth (a very strong term, transferred from physical to moral defilement) of the daughters of Zion The women before mentioned), and the blood (literally bloods, i. e. blood shed or blood-guiltiness) of Jerusalem (i. e. of the people in general), by a spirit of judgment and a spirit of burning, i. e. by the judgment and burn ing of the Holy Spirit, with a twofold allusion to the purifying and destroy ing energy of fire, or rather to its purifying by destroying, purging the whole by the destruction of a part, and thereby manifesting the divine justice as an active principle. The daughters of Zion are by some understood to be the other towns of Judah (Rosenmuller, Hengstenberg, Umbreit), the objection to which is not its unpoetical character (Gesenius), but its disagreement both with the immediate connexion and with the use of the same terms in ch. 3: 16. Others understand by daughters the inhabitants in general (Sept. sons and daughters), or the female inhabitants regarded as mothers and as forming the character of their children (Hendewerk). But it is natural that in closing his prediction the Prophet should recur to those luxurious women, to whose influence much of the disorder and oppression which prevailed may have been owing. He then makes a transition from particular to general expressions. The idea does not seem to be, the uncleanness of the women and the blood-guiltiness of the men (Hk. Hn.), or the uncleanness and blood-guiltiness both of men and women (Kn.), but the uncleanness of the women and the blood-guiltiness of the people generally.— ri1^ does not mean to remove (Cler. Low. Bs.), nor to drive out (Lu. Um.), nor to extirpate (Ges. Hg. Hk. Ew.), nor to expiate (Calv.), but simply to wash or purge out (Sept. Vulg. Cocc. E. V. Hn.), the verb being specially applied to the washing of the altar and sacrifices (2 Chr. 4: 6. Ezek. 40: 38). Two of these senses are combined by J. H. Michaelis (lavando ejecerit).—The word spirit cannot be regarded as pleonastic or simply emphatic (Hn.) without affording license to a like interpretation in all other cases. It is variously explained here as meaning breath (Hg. Um.), word (Targ. Jon. “pi &n*rna), and power or influence (Ges. Hengstenberg, Bs., etc.). But since this is the term used in the New Testament to designate that person of the Godhead, whom the Scriptures uniformly represent as the executor of the divine purposes, and since this sense is perfectly appropriate here, the safest and most satisfactory interpretation is that which understands by it a personal spirit, or as Luther expresses it, the Spirit who shall judge and burn. Even Ewald adopts the same interpretation upon grounds, as it would seem, entirely philological. Calvin supposes spirit of burning and of judgment to be equivalent in meaning to the burning and judgment of the Spirit. He also gives the preposition its primary meaning, as do the Seventy (iv KV&ufJiaii), in (i. e. in the person of) the Spirit. The common explanation is by (i. e. by means of) or through (i. e. through the intervention of) the Spirit.—The translation of -tfa by consumption or extermination (Cocc. Ges. Hg. De W. Hk. Um.) is neither so precise nor so poetical as that by burning (Sept. Pesh. Vulg. Lu. Calv. E. V. Low. Bs. Ew.).—J. D. Michaelis translates this clause, by the righteous zeal of the tribunals and by a destructive wind!
5. The church is not only to be purified by God’s judgments, but glorified by his manifested presence, and in that state of glory kept secure by his protection. The presence of God is here denoted by the ancient symbol of a fiery cloud, and is promised to the church in its whole extent and to its several assemblies, as distinguished from the one indivisible congregation, and its one exclusive place of meeting, under the old economy. And Jehovah will create (implying the exercise of almighty power and the pro duction of a new effect) over the whole extent (literally, place or space) of Mount Zion (in its widest and most spiritual sense, as appears from what follows), and over her assemblies, a cloud by day and smoke (i. e. a cloud of smoke), and the brightness of a flaming fire by night; for over all the glory (previously promised, there shall be) a covering (or shelter).—Most of the modern versions make this the apodosis of a sentence beginning with v. 4, < When the Lord shall have washed, etc., then will Jehovah create/ etc. (Cler. Low. Ges. Bs. Hn. Um. Kn.) But although this is grammatical and leaves the general sense unchanged, the absence of the i at the begin ning of v. 4, and its insertion here, seem to show that v. 4 is itself the apodosis of a sentence beginning with v. 3, and that a new one begins here (Calv. Cocc. Vitr. J. D. Mich. E. V. Hg. De W. Hk. Ew.). The present tense (Ges. De W. Ew. Um.) is not so well suited to the context as the future (Hg. Hk. etc.). The older writers give “paa the sense of dwellingplace; but the modern lexicographers explain it to mean place in general. •jiaa bs may be rendered either whole place or every place without a change of sense (vide supra, ch. 1: 5. 3: 1). The two appearances described in this verse are those presented by a fire at different times, a smoke by day and a flame by night. There is no need therefore of explaining }v$ to mean vapour (Knobel), or of connecting it with what follows (Sept. Vitr. Cler. Hitzig. Hengstenberg) in violation of the Masoretic accents.—The meaning of the promise is the same whether rpK’ipE be explained to mean her assemblies (Low. Hengst. Ew. Um. Kn.) or her places of assembly (Lu. J. D. Mich. Ges. Hn.); but the former is the sense most agreeable to usage. —Lowth omits ^3 before “paa on the authority of eight manuscripts, and inserts it before nx’ipE on the authority of one manuscript and the Septuagint. More than forty manuscripts and nearly fifty editions read rpxipa, and almost all interpreters explain it as a plural.—In the last clause ^3 has its usual meaning and not that of yea (Low.), which (Hn.),or so that (Kn.).— Clericus, J. D. Michaelis, and Lee (Heb. Lex. s. v. fi?n) make “to the subject of the last clause, c over all, glory shall be a defence,’ which is wholly inconsistent with the Masoretic pointing. Instead of over Kocher reads above, i. e. superior to all former glory, a construction which is given in the Chaldee Paraphrase, “ja “^rP (more than). Some regard this as the statement of a general fact, ‘ over every thing glorious there is protection/ i. e. men are accustomed to protect what they value highly (Vitr. Ros. Hengst. Ew.); but the great majority of writers understand it as a prophecy or promise.—nsn is construed as a passive verb, it is or shall be covered, by the Septuagint ((7X£7ra<y#/J(7£rca), Gesenius, Maurer, Knobel. But as this is a harsh construction, and as the Pual of nsn does not occur elsewhere, it is better, with Ewald, Umbreit, Hengstenberg, and the older writers, to explain it as a noun derived from fi&n, and agreeing with the verb is or shall be understood, or, as Hitzig and Hendewerk suppose, with the same verb in the first clause of the next verse, ’ For over all the glory a covering and shelter there shall be.’ The sense is not affected by this last construction, but such a change in the division of the text can be justified only by necessity.
6. The promise of refuge and protection is repeated or continued under the figure of a shelter from heat and rain, natural emblems for distress and danger. And there shall be a shelter, (properly a booth or covert of leaves and branches, to serve) for a shadow by day (as a protection) from heat, and for a covert and for a hiding-place from storm and from rain.—Instead of making nss the subject of the sentence (E. V. De W. Hn. Um.), some regard it as the predicate referring to a subject understood. He, i. e. God, shall be a shelter, etc. (Ges. Bs.). It, the cloud or the protection, shall be a shelter, etc. (Low. Hg.).—That rt3b means the tabernacle or temple, which it never does elsewhere, is a notion peculiar to Clericus.—tnt is not a whirlwind (Vulg.) or a hail-storm (J. D. Mich.), but an inundation (Jun. Cler. J. H. Mich.), i. e. a flood of rain, a pouring, driving rain (Luther, Wetter. Gesenius, Ungewitter).
