Verses 1-12
II.—THE SECOND WOE
1. THE FOURFOLD ARIEL.
1 Woe 1to Ariel, to Ariel,
2The city where David dwelt!
Add ye year to year;
2 5Yet I will distress Ariel,
And there shall be heaviness and sorrow;And it shall be unto me as Ariel.
3 And I will camp against thee round about,
And will lay siege against thee with a 6mount,
And I will raise forts against thee.
4 And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground,
And thy speech shall be low out of the dust,And thy voice shall be as 7of one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground,
And thy speech shall 8whisper out of the dust.
5 9Moreover the multitude of thy strangers shall be like small dust,
And the multitude of the terrible ones shall be as chaff that passeth away;
Yea, it shall be at an instant suddenly.
6 10Thou shalt be visited of the Lord of hosts
With thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise,With storm and tempest, and the flame of devouring fire.
7 And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel,
Even all that fight against her, and her munition,And that distress her,Shall be as a dream of a night vision.
8 It shall even be as when an hungry man dreameth,
And, behold, he eateth;But he awaketh, and his soul is empty;Or as when a thirsty man dreameth,And, behold, he drinketh;But he awaketh, and, behold, he is faint,
And his soul hath appetite:So shall the multitude of all the nations be,That fight against mount Zion.
9 Stay yourselves, and wonder;
They are drunken, but not with wine;They stagger, but not with strong drink.
10 For the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep,
And hath closed your eyes:The prophets and your 13rulers, the seers hath he covered.
11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a 14book that is sealed,
Which men deliver to one that 15is learned,
Saying, Read this, I pray thee:And he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:
12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned,
Saying, Read this, I pray thee;And he saith, I am not learned.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL
Isaiah 29:1. By comparing Isaiah 30:1 we see that סְפוּ is not from יָסַף, but from ספה (Jeremiah 7:21, et saepe). נקף (Kal only here, Hiphil further in Isaiah 15:8) is circuire circulare. This meaning belongs to תְּקוּפָה Exodus 34:22; 2 Chronicles 24:23.
Isaiah 29:7. צֹבֶיהָ, is used for the sake of variety instead of צֹבְאֶיהָ comp. ואניה תאניה Isaiah 29:2, לבּתע בּתאם Isaiah 29:5. The construction of the suffix is to be explained as in קָמַי Psalms 18:40; Psalms 18:49. מְצוֹדָה is found also in Ezekiel 19:9, where the king of Judah is spoken of who was caught by means of net and pit, placed in a cage by means of hooks, and brought to Babylon into מְצֹדוֹת. The whole connection there renders it probable that מְצדֹוֹת denotes a place for wild animals that have been captured—a prison or something of that kind—whereas in Ecclesiastes 9:12, where only the word again occurs, the meaning “net” is undoubted. When then מְצֹדָה, and not מְצוּדָה is in the text, and when, moreover, I consider that the grammatical co-ordination of מצדתה with the suffix in צביה (all her assailants and of her מצדה) would be very abnormal, because we cannot, e.g., say בָּנֶיהָ וַֽאֲחוֹתָהּ instead of בָּנֶיהָ וּבְנֵי אֲחוֹתָהּ,—it seems to me much more probable that מְצֹדָה is intended to denote here not the fortress Zion, but the siege entrenchments set up against Zion, the מְצֻרֹת verse 3, which enclose the city as a net, and can therefore be called its net. And this net of bulwarks, together with those who by means of it distress Zion (מציקים comp. on הציקותי Isaiah 29:2), shall disappear as a vision of a dream. Moreover the conjecture of Boettcher (Aehrenlese p. 32) that we should read צִבְיָהּ instead of צֹבֶיהָ seems to me not unworthy of attention. For the difficulty still remains to give a specific meaning to צֹבֶיהָ, if it is to stand for צֹבְאֶיהָ. Boettcher not unjustly remarks, too, that the צְבִי, the splendor of the city (Isaiah 23:9; Isaiah 28:1 sqq.; Isaiah 32:13 sq.) certainly formed a prominent point in the vanishing vision as “the refreshment which they desire, and imagine they will receive.” Whoever is inclined to adopt this conjecture of Boettcher, which even Knobel accepts, will have no difficulty in connecting ומצדתה with what precedes it.
Isaiah 29:8. We should expect a pronomen separatum (הוּא) along with the participles אוֹבֵל and שֹׁתֶה, and the adjective עָיֵף. But it is well known that this pronoun is frequently omitted.
Isaiah 29:11. Instead of יוֹדֵעַ הַסֵּפֶר we find in the K’ri סֵפֶד without the article, as in Isaiah 29:12. But the alteration is needless. For in this connection הַסֵּפֶר can also be said, if only we take the article as the generic. Respecting וְאָמַר, vers.11 and 12, comp. on Isaiah 40:6.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1. The Prophet sets forth in vers.1 and 2 the theme of his discourse. For he announces to Ariel, i.e., to the city of God, Jerusalem, that he will cause her after a time great distress, notwithstanding that she is Ariel, i.e., lion of God; that she, however, in this distress will prove herself to be Ariel, i.e., the hearth of God. This thought! is further developed in what follows. The Lord causes Jerusalem to be told that He will besiege and afflict her greatly (Isaiah 29:3), so that she, bowed low in the dust, will let her voice sound faintly as the spirit of one dead (Isaiah 29:4). But the comforting promise is immediately annexed, that the enemies of Jerusalem will suddenly become as fine dust or as flying chaff (Isaiah 29:5). For Jehovah will come against them as with thunder, and tempest, and devouring fire (Isaiah 29:6). The whole force, therefore, of the enemies that fight against Ariel, i. e., here the mount of God, will pass away as a vision of a dream in the night (Isaiah 29:7); these enemies will be in the condition of one who in a dream thinks that he has eaten and drunk, and only on awaking perceives that he has been dreaming (Isaiah 29:8). In Isaiah 29:9-12 the Prophet himself depicts the effect of his words on the obdurate people. They build on other aid. They therefore hear the word of the Prophet in fixed amazement (Isaiah 29:9). For they are as blind (Isaiah 29:10), and in relation to the prophecy they are as one who has to read a sealed document, or as one who has an unsealed writing given him to read, but he cannot read (Isaiah 29:11-12).
2. Woe to Ariel—as Ariel.
Isaiah 29:1-2. This paragraph begins with הוֹי as Isaiah 28:1; Isaiah 29:15; Isaiah 30:1; Isaiah 31:1; Isaiah 33:1. The name אריאל occurs 2 Samuel 23:20 (1 Chronicles 11:22) as the name of Moabite heroes; Ezra 8:16 as the name of a Levite; Ezekiel 43:15-16 the altar is called הַרְאֵל and אֲרִיאֵל (K’ri, Kethibh אֲרִאֵיל); Isaiah 33:0:7אֶרְאֵל is found in the signification “hero.” Interpreters take the word as often as it occurs in the passage before us, namely, Isaiah 29:1 (bis), Isaiah 29:2 (bis), and Isaiah 29:7, either in the signification of “lion of God,” or in that of “hearth of God.” Only Hitzig, who is on this account censured, assumes a play on the word, and takes it in ver.1 as ara Dei, and Isaiah 29:2 as lion of God. I am of opinion that Hitzig has not gone far enough. For it seems to me that the Prophet has each time used the word in a different signification according to the connection, and that it is taken in four different meanings [?]. First of all, Ariel appears as an enigmatical, significant name which the Prophet attributes to the city of Jerusalem in a manner unusual and fitted to excite inquiry. That Jerusalem is meant by it is clear from the connection, especially from קרית חנה דוד Isaiah 29:1, and from הר־ציוז in Isaiah 29:8. But we mark from the connection in each instance, that the Prophet intends each time a different allusion while employing the same word. In adding in Isaiah 29:0:1קרית חנה דוד he gives us to understand that under אריאל he alludes to עָר אֵלcity of God. The word עָר is used besides only of the Moabite capital Ar-Moab: Numbers 21:15; Numbers 21:28; Deuteronomy 2:9; Isaiah 15:1. עָר אֵל may accordingly involve an antithesis to עָר מוֹאָב—Moab, as in Isaiah 25:10 sq., being thought of as the representative of all opposition to God. The Septuagint translator has referred אריאל to Moab, while he takes this word to designate the Moabite city; for he renders ον̓αὶ πόλις ’Αριήλ, ῆν Δανὶδ ἐπολέμησεν,” whereby he certainly had in his eye the victory achieved by David over the Moabites, 2 Samuel 8:2. But what led him to think of Moab in connection with אריאל, was either the recollection of the Moabite heroes mentioned 2 Samuel 23:20, or the similarity in sound to the name of the city Ar (Greek ’́ΑρNum 21:15; Deuteronomy 2:9) which lies in Ar-iel. That the resemblance could have been thought of by the Prophet appears from the manifold permutations which occur between א and ע in Hebrew, and in the cognate dialects (comp. Isaiah 29:0:5פתע and &פתאם אגם and אזל ענם, and &תאב עזל and &תעב גאל and געלetc. Comp. Ewald,Gr., § 58, a, note 1 and c; Gesen.Thes. p. 2). The yod in אריאל does not militate against our exposition. For, apart from the fact that a mere similarity in sound is the matter in question, the “i” would not grammatically stand in the way of the explanation “City of God,” as this “i” occurs not rarely as an antique connecting vowel especially in proper names (comp. Gabriel, Abdiel, etc., Ewald,Gr., § 211, b). Accordingly I consider the words קרית חנה דוד as explanatory of the word Ariel, or as a hint to intimate in what signification the Prophet would have us understand the word here. For Jerusalem, a holy city from a high antiquity (Genesis 14:18 sqq.), became, the city of God (Isaiah 60:14; Psalms 46:5; Psalms 48:2; Psalms 48:9; Psalms 87:3; Psalms 101:8), and the centre of the theocracy from the day when David, chosen king, by all Israel, took up in it his royal residence, (2 Samuel 5:6 sqq.). With the words סבּי שׁנה וג׳ to ואניה the Prophet confirms the woe which he had pronounced. First of all, the question presents itself, whether the words ספו … ינקפו contain an indefinite or a definite statement of time. If the declaration of time be indefinite, the occurrence of the calamity would be placed in prospect at a point of time incalculably remote. For nothing would indicate how long this adding year to year, and this revolution of the festivals should last. Thereby, however, the effect of the prophecy on those living at the time of its delivery would be neutralized. For they could indulge the hope that the catastrophe would not affect them. The design of the Prophet could not be to produce such an impression.
We must therefore assume that the Prophet wishes to indicate by these words an interval at least approximately defined, and a point of time not very remote, but rather relatively near (as Isaiah 32:10). The meaning then would be: Add to the present year another year, and let another annual revolution of festivals be completed. This would be tantamount to saying, that from the end of the present year another year would run its course, and then the catastrophe announced in what follows would take place. The addition חגים ינקפו is intended to intimate that a full sacred year has yet to run its course. If the time when the Prophet spoke this prophecy was coincident with the beginning of the sacred year, then the addition was really superfluous. But if this coincidence did not exist, then the addition had the meaning that the complete year is not to be reckoned from the day when the Prophet spoke the words, but from the beginning of the next sacred year. It is therefore not probable that the Prophet made the utterance at the time of the Passover festival, which formed the commencement of the theocratic year (Exodus 7:2). But the Prophet must have spoken the words a considerable time before the Passover. [“Many of the older writers, and the E. V., take the last words of the verse in the sense, let them kill (or more specifically, cut off the heads) the sacrificial victims; but it is more in accordance both with the usage of the words and with the context to give חַגִּים its usual sense of feasts or festivals, and נָקַף that of moving in a circle or revolving, which it has in Hiphil. The phrase then exactly corresponds to the one preceding, “add year to year.” Alexander.—D. M.] Isaiah 29:2 tells what shall happen at the point of time indicated. Then the Lord will cause Ariel difficulty and distress (Isaiah 29:7; Isaiah 51:13); and there shall arise sighing and groaning (besides only Lamentations 2:5 borrowed from this place; the verb אָנָהIsa 3:26; Isaiah 19:8, comp. the related תַּֽאֲנָה of the snorting of the female camel [wild she-ass.—D.M.] in heat, Jeremiah 2:24). Here Ariel is represented as on all sides oppressed, which extorts pitiable groaning. The name Ariel seems therefore to involve here an antithesis to הציקותי: The strong is oppressed, and in this his distress he sighs and groans. When then in this connection the idea of strength is prominent in אריאל, we shall have to take the word here in its common signification=lion of God. But this distress does not last forever. The Prophet in this statement passes hastily over the whole field of vision from the bad beginning to the glorious end: Jerusalem (for this is the subject of והיתה) shall yet be to the Lord as אריאל. It is manifest that the word must be taken here as a word of good meaning. In such a signification we find it used Ezekiel 43:15 sq. For there the altar of burnt offering is so designated. The same altar is also called there הַרְאֵל. But this designation seems to be given to the altar as a whole. When therefore אריאל along with הראל is an altar-name, we may assume that both words have a signification referring to the nature of the altar. In the case of הראל this is at once evident; the high place of God is put in opposition to the high places (בָּמוֹת) of the false gods. It is true that אֲרִי is found elsewhere only in the signification lion. But the radix אָרָה denotes carpere (Psalms 80:13; Song of Solomon 5:1), and can, like בָעַר, be used of fire. If further we compare the Arabic ’irâ, focus, caminus, and consider that in Isaiah 31:9, it is said of the Lord that אוּר לוֹ בְצִיּוֹן, it follows that the Prophets were justified, in a connection in which a manifold playing on a word is ingeniously practised, in finding in the word ארי an allusion to the place of fire, to the altar. It is particularly to be observed that the Prophet in our place says כַּֽאֲרִיאֵלas Ariel. He does not say לַֽאֲרִיאֵל. Jerusalem is not therefore to become an altar, but it is to prove itself as a holy hearth, which it has long been. It shall be treated as such by the Lord, it shall therefore be again delivered out of distress.
3. And I will camp——the dust.
Isaiah 29:3-4. What was stated in Isaiah 29:1-2 with the brevity of a theme is now set forth more fully. And, first, it is shown how the Lord will afflict the strong lion, and compel him to utter lamentable sounds of distress. חנה, which is employed by Isaiah only in this chapter, denotes here encamping with a view to besieging. The word stands frequently in the historical books in this sense in conjunction with עַל: Joshua 10:5; Joshua 10:31; Joshua 10:34; 2 Samuel 12:28 et saepe.כַּדּוּד (besides only Isaiah 22:18)=as in a circle. דּוּר (related to דּוֹרperiodus) is to be regarded as standing in the accus. localis.צוּר (in Isaiah besides only Isaiah 21:2) stands frequently with עַל in the sense of pressing upon: Deuteronomy 20:12; Deuteronomy 20:19;2 Kings 6:25; 2 Kings 24:11; Jeremiah 32:2 et saepe.מֻצָּב (ἅπ. λεγ.), is synonymous with מַצָּב מַצָּנָה נְצִיב = Statio, excubiae praeaidium, post. As to construction the word is to be regarded as in the accusative (accus. instrum.). מְצוּרָה, which occurs in Isaiah only here, is a very general term, which is most frequently equivalent to מָצוֹר in the expression עָרֵי מְצוּרַה (2 Chronicles 11:10; 2Ch 11:23; 2 Chronicles 12:4; 2 Chronicles 14:5; 2 Chronicles 21:3). It manifestly denotes not instruments for attacking a place, but fortifications, entrenchments employed by a besieging army, among which are סֹלְלָה(2 Samuel 20:15; Jeremiah 6:6, et saepe) and דָּיֵקּ (2 Kings 25:1). The plural then denotes the various parts of the works thrown up by the besiegers. As the fortifications for defence are also called מְצוּרוֹת2Ch 11:11. The expression והקימתי is not opposed to what has been said. For the machines used in a siege, the כָּרִים, as is clear from Ezekiel 4:2, belong to the מצורים. Isaiah 29:4 illustrates the words in Isaiah 29:2, and there shall be sighing and groaning [E. V., heaviness and sorrow]. The construction ושׁפלת תדברי is the well-known one, according to which an adverbial notion is expressed by the verb that is placed first. Jerusalem will lie so low that her voice will be only heard as if it proceeded from the dust, yea, from under the earth. There is here a climax descendens. The voice comes from a female sitting on the ground, out of the dust, from under the earth. In the clause ומעפרו׳ we mark a pregnant construction. שָׁחַח is used by Isaiah with tolerable frequency: Isaiah 2:9; Isaiah 2:11; Isaiah 2:17; Isaiah 5:15; Isaiah 25:12; Isaiah 26:5. The word is used especially of a suppressed voice Ecclesiastes 12:4. Regarding אוֹב and צפצף comp. on Isaiah 7:19. The voice will, like that of the spirit of one dead, come forth out of the earth.
4. Moreover the multitude——Mount Zion.
Isaiah 29:5-8. These words expand the short promise at the close of Isaiah 29:2. The distress of Jerusalem shall not last long. The supplication of her who has been brought so low shall be heard; her enemies shall be brought still lower; they shall be crushed even to dust. אָבָק comp. Isaiah 5:24. דַּק besides Isaiah 40:15. הָמוֹן is used by the Prophet four times in this passage: Isaiah 29:5 bis, Isaiah 29:7 and Isaiah 29:8. Regarding זָר comp. on Isaiah 1:7. The image of chaff carried away by the wind is frequent: Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 41:15; Psalms 1:4; Psalms 35:5; Job 21:18; Zephaniah 2:2. עריצים comp. Isaiah 13:11. The crushing of the enemies shall be not only complete, but also sudden. It will be thereby all the more terrible. פֶּתַע is substantive=the opening of the eyes, a moment; but פִּתְאֹם is an adverb (comp. &יוֹמָם הֲלֹם). In regard to the permutation of ע and א see on Isaiah 29:1. The two words stand together Numbers 6:9, where, however, we find בפתע פתאם, and Isaiah 30:13. לְ denotes the measure (momentaneo modo, comp. לְאַט לְצֶדֶק לָבֶטַח, etc). Isaiah 29:6 describes the means, by which the Lord crushes the enemy of Jerusalem. תפקד is taken by Gesenius, Hitzig, Knobel, Delitzsch impersonally: A visitation shall be made. But it seems to me that this would require the passive of the causative conjugation, namely Hophal. (Comp. on Isaiah 38:10). The reference to Jerusalem is suggested by Isaiah 29:2; Isaiah 29:7-8. The Prophet says therefore, that Jerusalem will be graciously visited, i. e., delivered (Isaiah 24:22) [According to this interpretation we must translate “and she shall be visited, etc.” If we use the second person as in the E. V., “thou shalt be visited,” then the enemy must be addressed, and not the city Jerusalem, which would require the verb to be in the feminine form of the second person.—D. M.]. ברעם וגו׳, observe here the similarity of sound in these words. רַעַם, the cracking, roaring (of thunder Psalms 104:7; Psalms 77:19), is found only here in Isaiah. רעשׁconquassatio, σεισμός (hence earthquake 1 Kings 19:11; Amos 1:1), is further used by Isaiah 9:4. סופה from סוּף אָסַף סָפָה) auferre, rapere, is rather the whirlwind, turbo, comp. Isaiah 5:28; Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 66:15. סערה tempest, hurricane, comp. Isaiah 40:24; Isaiah 41:6. Both words are found in conjunction elsewhere only in Amos 1:14. The flame of devouring fire, comp. Isaiah 30:30. The plural להבים13:8; Isaiah 66:15. Besides לֶהָבָה4:5; Isaiah 5:24; Isaiah 10:17; Isaiah 43:2; Isaiah 47:14. אשׁ אכלה comp. Isaiah 30:27; Isaiah 30:30; Isaiah 33:14. Vitringa thinks that we ought to take these words literally, and find in them an intimation that the Lord destroyed the Assyrians in that night (Isaiah 37:36) by a frightful thunderstorm. But this is a manifest misconception of the Prophetic style. In Isaiah 29:7-8 the Prophet depicts at the close the disappointment which the enemy will feel. This is expressed by a simple image. The Assyrians, so far as they had really seen Jerusalem before them, and had it in reach of their power, will, after their overthrow, have the impression that they had seen Jerusalem only in a dream, in a vision of the night: and in so far as they had hoped to be able easily to conquer Jerusalem, they will be as if they had eaten in a dream, but on awaking, should feel themselves as hungry as before. By the two images the Prophet expresses very emphatically the thought that the whole attempt of Assyria upon Jerusalem should be as if it had not been; should be in fact as empty and unreal as the fabric of a dream. The subject of Isaiah 29:7 is המןו־ו׳ and וכל־צביה וגו׳. The expression חלום חזון לילה is found besides only Job 33:15, where we read בַּֽחֲלוֹם חֶזְיוֹן לַיְלָה (comp. Job 4:13; Job 20:8). They who fight against Ariel will be as a vision of a dream (צבא as a verb in Isaiah besides only Isaiah 31:4). In what sense we have to take Ariel here, is evident from Isaiah 29:8. For there the whole phrase “the multitude of all the nations that fight against” is repeated, but instead of “Ariel” we read “Mount Zion.” This makes it clear that the Prophet would have us take אֲרִיאֵל here in the sense of הַרְאֵל Mount of God [?]. א and ה are interchanged just as frequently as א and ע, comp. אֵיךְ and &הָמוֹן הֵיךְ and &אַדֹּרָם אָמוֹן1Ki 12:18 and הַדֹּרָם2Ch 10:18; (See Gesen.Thes. p. 2). Ezekiel too has in Isaiah 43:15 got from our אֲרִיאֵל his הַרְאֵל. In Isaiah 29:8 the Prophet compares the departure of the Assyrians from Jerusalem to the awaking of a hungry or thirsty man who perceives that he has only dreamt that he has been eating or drinking. The term נֶפֶשׁ as in Isaiah 5:14; Isaiah 32:6. שׁוֹקֵקָה (Psalms 107:9) has the signification “panting for, hungry” as a derivative meaning from the radical notion “to run to and fro,” (Isaiah 33:4). The concluding words of this verse “the multitude of all the nations that fight against Mount Zion,” which correspond exactly to what we find in Isaiah 29:7, except that there instead of “Mount Zion” the name “Ariel” occurs, furnish the key to the understanding of the enigmatical word Ariel. Can it be deemed accidental that the Prophet in Isaiah 29:8 repeats those words of Isaiah 29:7 with the sole change of substituting for “Ariel” the words “Mount Zion?” Is not this a hint which the Prophet at the close gives to assist in understanding his meaning? And the first who understood this hint was Ezekiel (Isaiah 43:15).
5. Stay yourselves——not learned.
Isaiah 29:9-12. The prediction contained in Isaiah 29:1-8, must have been received by the hearers of the Prophet with very mingled feelings, because it holds out to them the prospect of deliverance, but deliverance in a way not agreeable to them. For the saying מעם יהוה תפקד Isaiah 29:6 did not please them. Although then the Prophet is aware that he does not say what corresponds to their wishes, still they must just hear it for their punishment. Yes, stop and wonder, whether it please you or not, whether you comprehend it or not; it is so as I have said to you. The Hithpael התמהמה (to stand questioning, refusing, delaying Genesis 43:10; Psalms 119:60 et saepe) is found only here in Isaiah. תמה to be astonished, to wonder (conjoined with התמהמה in Habakkuk 1:5 as here) occurs further in Isaiah 8:8. Both verbs denote amazement at what is offered, with unwillingness to receive it. The Hithpael השׁתעשׁע stands Psalms 119:16; Psalms 119:47 undoubtedly in the signification oblectari, delectari. Many expositors would take the word here too in this meaning, while they consider the two imperatives as marking an antithesis (be joyous and yet blind). But we do not perceive from the context why they should be joyful. It is better therefore to take השׁתעשׁע in the original signification of Kal which is “permulsum, oblitum esse” (comp. Isaiah 6:10). Hence the significations “oblectari” (Isaiah 11:8; Isaiah 66:12) and “to become blind” are equally derived. Kal occurs only in this passage where it has this last signification. The threatening of a punishment, which should first affect the spirit, is here announced to the Israelites. But this punishment will also produce its outward and visible effects. Because these effects follow in the way of punishment, the Prophet speaks of them no more in the imperative, but in the perfect. He sees the people reel and stagger like drunken men, although this intoxication does not proceed from wine. יין with שׁכרו is the accusative of the instrument. Where a capacity to receive the divine word is wanting, there it works an effect the very opposite of what it should properly produce; it hardens, blinds, stupefies. It is as if the spirit of understanding had become in those who do not desire the knowledge of the truth, a spirit of stupefaction, of stupidity. תרדמה, which is found only here in Isaiah, has here this spiritual sense. עָצַם is used Isaiah 33:15 of the binding up of the eyes, but in Isaiah 31:1 in its usual signification of being strong. That these two significations are closely connected in other cases also is well known. Compare &חָזַק חוּל (Isaiah 22:21) קָשַׁר (Genesis 30:42), ἴσχω, ἰσχύω. The Piel עִצֵּם, which is used by Jeremiah (Jeremiah 50:17) as a denominative in the sense of “to break the bones, to bone,” occurs only here in Isaiah. The words prophets and seers, if omitted, would not be missed in Isaiah 29:10. For this reason it is utterly improbable that they are an interpolation of a glossator. They obscure the meaning, instead of making it more apparent. We might almost conjecture that there were Prophets of a first, and of a second rank. The latter would have been the interpreters of the former, as in the New Testament the speech of those who spoke with tongues was explained by interpreters (1 Corinthians 12:10; 1Co 12:30; 1 Corinthians 14:5; 1 Corinthians 14:13). Not as if these prophets of the second rank or interpreters had an official position. For there is no trace of this. But there were persons who, when the meaning of the prophetic utterances was the subject of conversation among the people, pushed themselves in the foreground, claiming to be specially endowed with the capacity of explaining what the prophets had spoken; and perhaps they acquired as such here and there a certain authority. The prophetic word of the great Isaiah may have been often thus interpreted to the people by such prophets. But these subordinate prophets, although perhaps their possession of a certain physical gift of prophecy was not to be disputed, (comp. Saul, 1 Samuel 10:10 et saepe) stood yet in a nearer relation to the people than to the Lord. Therefore their prophetic gift was often not sufficient; often it was even abused by them (comp. 1 Corinthians 14:32; 1 Kings 22:6 sqq.). Isaiah alludes here to this state of matters. The people were often puzzled by the prophecy of Isaiah, and even their prophets who were wont to be their eyes for such things, had as it were bound-up eyes or covered heads. נָבִיא and חֹזֶה, comp. נביא and רֹאֶה1Sa 9:9. The figure employed in Isaiah 29:11-12 suits very well to the explanation proposed. Reading was an art which was not understood by every one. He who could not himself read, must request another to read to him. Thus was it too with the prophecy of Isaiah. The people must apply to their prophets to interpret it for them. But it happened then, says Isaiah, as it often happens to one who applies to another in order to have a writing read to him. It can be the case that the person asked is able to read, but yet cannot read the document reached to him, because it is sealed. But what can this mean? If any one reaches me a sealed paper, in order that I may read it to him, he must unite with his request the permission to unseal it. Or, were there seals which could not be removed by every one? It appears to me, that the comparison here made use of is purely imaginary. It is very unlikely that any one could not comply with the request to read a document, because it was sealed. The Prophet only imagines such a case. But what he meant to intimate thereby was most real. The words of Isaiah were to many among those prophets of the people sealed words, i.e., intelligible as to their verbal meaning, but incomprehensible as to their inner signification. To others, or partially perhaps even to all, they were not intelligible even in their verbal meaning. They did not know what to make of them. They stood before them as one who cannot read stands before what is written. It seems that this prophecy regarding Ariel proved to be one of the most obscure prophecies of Isaiah. This gives occasion to the Prophet’s expressing himself in this manner regarding the reception and understanding of his prophecies. חזות הכל denotes not merely the immediately preceding prediction, but the prophecy of Isaiah in general. For why should it have happened thus with only those words that immediately precede? חזות (comp. Isaiah 21:2; Isaiah 28:18) is synonymous with חָזוֹן Isaiah 1:1.
Footnotes:
[1]Or, O Ariel, that is, the lion of God.
[2]Or, of the city.
[3]let the feasts complete a revolution.
[4]Heb. cut off the heads.
[5]then.
[6]post.
[7]of the spirit of one dead.
[8]Heb. peep, or, chirp.
[9]But.
[10]she shall be visited (delivered).
[11]Or, take your pleasure and riot.
[12]blind yourselves and be blind.
[13]Heb. heads.
[14]Or, letter.
[15]knows writing.
Be the first to react on this!
