Isaiah 63:15-19

2. PRAYER THAT THE LORD MIGHT LOOK UPON THEN AND REMOVE SIN AND ITS PUNISHMENT

Chap Isaiah 63:15-19 a (19)

15          Look down from heaven, and behold from the habitation of thy holiness and of thy glory:

Where is thy zeal and thy strength,

9The sounding of thy bowels and of thy mercies toward me?

10Are they restrained?

16     Doubtless thou art our father,

11Though Abraham be ignorant of us,

And Israel acknowledge us not:Thou, O Lord, art our father, 12our redeemer;

Thy name is from everlasting.

17     O Lord, 13why hast thou made us to err from thy ways,

And hardened our heart from thy fear?

Return for thy servants’ sake,

14The tribes of thine inheritance.

18     The people of thy holiness have possessed it but a little while:

Our adversaries have trodden down thy sanctuary.

19     15We are thine:

Thou never barest rule over them:

16They were not called by thy name.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

Isaiah 63:16. [“According to the accents the words מעולם גאלנו are connected together. The more correct accentuation would be גאלנו Tifha, מעולם Mercha. From remote antiquity Jahve had acted toward Israel in such a way that the latter could call him גאלנו. What takes place in the present time is so different as to put faith to a hard trial. Translate: Our Redeemer is from ancient time thy name.” Delitzsch.—D. M.].

Isaiah 63:18. בוססו, Pilel from בּוּם (Isaiah 63:6; Isaiah 14:19; Isaiah 14:25) is to tread dow, καταπατεῖν, and includes the idea of profaning and defiling.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

1. After laying the foundation for His prayer by the retrospect of what Jehovah had been of old to His people, the suppliant now passes over to the entreaty that the Lord would graciously look down from heaven on the present distress, and not restrain His love and might (Isaiah 63:15). He still remains the Father of the people, after Abraham and Israel, who had been long ago removed by death, have become strangers to them so far as rendering actual aid is concerned (Isaiah 63:16). With great boldness the Lord is expostulated with for permitting the people to go astray and to become hardened, and He is called upon to change His conduct towards His elect people (Isaiah 63:17). The complaint is made to Him that the people had possessed only for a short time the land promised to them as an inheritance for ever, while the centre of the land, the Sanctuary, which alone gives the country its value, had been trodden down by their enemies (Isaiah 63:18), so that Israel is now situated as if Jehovah had never been their Lord, and His name had never been called upon them (Isaiah 63:19 a).

2. Look down from heaven—restrained.

Isaiah 63:15.רָאָה more frequently follows than precedes הִבִּיט. The Lord has to look down from heaven, for thither He has as it were retired. He is no more to be found in His earthly sanctuary, but only in His heavenly. [But compare Deuteronomy 26:15; Psalms 115:3. The prayer is rather founded on the acknowledged truth, “The Lord looketh from heaven. …. From the place of His habitation He looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth.” Psalms 33:13-14. D. M.]. Solomon had said in his dedicatory prayer (1 Kings 8:13 comp. 2 Chronicles 6:2) “I have built thee a house to dwell in (בֵּית זְבֻל).” To this passage the suppliant seems to allude, when he asks the Lord to look down from the habitation of His holiness and glory. For the earthly בֵּית זְבֻל is destroyed. The word זְבֻל is found only here in Isaiah. Once more the suppliant returns to what he misses. He asks again with אַיֵּה: Where is thy zeal and thy mighty deeds? The zeal of Jehovah is twofold: against His people, so far they make common cause with those who hate the Lord. For then they have the Lord who is a zealous God (Exodus 20:5; Deuteronomy 4:24; Deuteronomy 5:9) against them. But the zeal of Jehovah, is also active for His people, against the enemies of the theocracy (comp. Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 26:11; Isaiah 37:32; Isaiah 42:13; Isaiah 59:17). The expression המון מעים, strepitus viscerum, as image of the emotion of compassion, of commiseratio, is found in the form of a substantive only here, but the verbal expression occurs, Isaiah 16:11; Jeremiah 31:20; Jeremiah 48:30.In אֵלַי observe the change of number. התאפק, se cohibere, comp. Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 54:11.

3. Doubtless thou——everlasting.

Isaiah 63:16. [The E. V. departs in two instances in this verse from the proper signification of כִּי, rendering it in the first, doubtless, and in the second, though. In both cases its strict sense of for, because, can be retained, as is—done by Dr. Naegelsbach. But we prefer taking the second כִּי as=when, which in this connection does not differ much from though. D. M.].

Isaiah 63:16 declares the reason why Israel entreats the Lord to be pleased to look upon their need and to manifest His power and love on them. Jehovah alone is the true Father of Israel. They have indeed also human progenitors who stand in high honor and authority; Abraham (comp. Isaiah 51:2) as their remote, and Israel, the strong contender with God (Genesis 32:28), their immediate ancestor. But these are men, are long dead, and incapable from their present abode outside this world, to take knowledge (הִכִּירdignovit, Isaiah 61:9) of Israel’s lot; not to say that they could not possibly interpose to render them active support. [This is not very satisfactory, though the view of Vitringa, Delitzsch and the best interpreters. But if we take the second כִּי in the common sense of when, and translate “For thou art our Father when Abraham does not know us, and Israel does not recognize us,” then the idea would be that natural affection and regard would cease rather than that God’s paternal love should fail, or His covenant of adoption be annulled. Such a sense is very appropriate. See Psalms 27:10. Comp. Calvin on our passage. Kay remarks, “This verse and Isaiah 64:8 are the only places in the Old Testament where the address Our Father is used in prayer. The Spirit of adoption was not yet given (Galatians 4:4-6).” D.M.].

4. O Lord, why hast thou—thy name. Isaiah 63:17-19 a. Jerome understands the words of ver.17 as an utterance of the apostate Jews. As Paul in the Epistles to the Corinthians addresses pious and ungodly persons, so here both the pious and the ungodly speak to God. These latter are said here, “movere Domino quaestionem, et suam culpam referre in Deum.” Jerome, however, vindicates God, and says that in reality God is not the cause of error and hardness of heart, but that error and obduracy are only mediately occasioned by His patience, while He does not chastise offenders. Theodoret makes the Jews here directly reproach God with having by His patience incurred the guilt of their delinquencies. Oecolampadius regards this passage as having a double sense. As an utterance of the ungodly it contains actual blasphemy (blasphema inter precandum dicunt: suam culpam in Deum transcribunt), while in the mouth of the godly it expresses only the painful confession that they, after the withdrawal of the divine grace and help, could not but go astray. Calvin disputes all softening of the language by the assumption of foreknowledge or permission. But he makes a distinction. He distinguishes between an indirect or negative hardening (rite excoecare, indurare, inclinare dicitur, quibus facultatem videndi, parendi, recte exsequendi adimit), and a direct or positive (when He per Satanam et consilia reproborum destinat, quo visum est, et voluntates excitat et conatus firmat). As instances of the latter kind he cites Pharaoh (Exodus 4:21; Exodus 7:3; Exodus 10:1, etc.), and Sihon the king of the Amorites (Deuteronomy 2:30). For the first-mentioned kind he appeals to Ezekiel 7:26; Psalms 107:40; Job 12:20; Job 12:24 and to the passage before us (comp. Institutio II, 4, 3 sq.). Whether that indirect hardening, of which Calvin speaks, is essentially different from the permissive, may be doubted. I therefore believe that all those interpreters—and they form the majority—who understand this passage of the divine permission, mean nothing else than what Calvin intends by tbat former kind of hardening. For the cessatio directionis divinae, the ablatio spiritus, the sublatio luminis is just nothing else than that procedure of God by which He makes sin possible, or permits it. Luther, in particular, belongs to those who explain our place in the permissive sense, and with his fine feeling he is able, without doing violence to the words, to remove what causes offence from them. He says: “Sunt verba ardentis affectus. Ah, Domine, quare sinis nos sic errare? Nos hunc affectum non intelligimus, quare privative accipiemus, ut sit sententia: quia noluimusaudire tuum verbum, permisisti nos errare et peccare; sicut fit, peccatum peccati est poena.” And certainly in the mouth of the suppliant church Isaiah 63:17 can never be taken as a blasphemous reproach. But the church in the deepest sorrow, and during a momentary eclipse of the future prospect before her, feels herself driven to put this question, Why ? Not as if she would say that there exists no reason, or only a bad one, but simply to intimate that she does not perceive the reason, that here the providence of God appears to her dark, inexplicable. The church mourns because the Lord has not hindered her going astray, her hardening in evil, which exists not indeed in all, but in many of her members. She thinks that He, the Almighty, could have done it, if He had wished. That He has not willed it is to her inconceivable. She does not even see how this, her partial apostasy must, on the whole, co-operate to the realization of God’s gracious counsel. The statement in this verse is in harmony with Isaiah 6:9-10, and with Isaiah 29:10; Isaiah 45:7. [But in Isaiah 45:7 the evil which God creates is physical evil or pain, the opposite of peace.—D. M.]. For here, as there, God is apparently designated as the author of evil, while yet God can never will evil as such. But when men do not will the good, then they must at last will the evil. It becomes a necessity in the way of punishment, in order that they may be thoroughly acquainted with it, and be thereby healed (see on Isaiah 6:9 sq. and Isaiah 29:10). As an unauthorized weakening of the genuine meaning of this place I must regard it when Seb. Schmidt and Grotius understand the words de futuro: Why shall it then come to this, that we go astray and harden ourselves in idolatry? The imperfects (futures) תתענו and תקשׁיח can only be taken to mean an action not yet finished, and therefore only in the sense of the enduring present. If we ask what sin the Prophet specially has in view when he speaks of erring and hardening, we must say that this erring and hardening can take place in all forms of sin, but that, in the end, all these evil fruits have a common root, namely, the sin against the first (second) commandment, idolatry. We must, of course, think here not only of gross, but also of refined idolatry. The Rabbinical commentators are of the opinion that the Prophet has here in view, doubt, despair and unbelief as the consequences of the long duration of the Exile. This is quite possible, if we think not merely of the Babylonish Captivity, but also, and specially, of the present exile that still continues. But the look of the Prophet is primarily directed to the Babylonian exile, and regarding it we must say that it became to many Jews an occasion even of visible apostacy from Jehovah and of gross idolatry. קָשַׁח (certainly hardened from קָשָׁה) occurs besides here only in Job 39:16, where it has the signification “to regard or treat harshly.” before יראתך has here a negative force, and the sentence expresses a consequence, so as not to fear thee. Comp. Isaiah 62:10; Isaiah 59:1-2 et saepe. While the Prophet sees the Lord, as it were, engaged in a woful work, the work namely of judicially hardening ever more the mass of Israel after the flesh, he becomes anxious for Israel as a body. If this continues, what shall become of the elect people? Who will be able to withstand the current of inward and outward corruption? Therefore he entreats the Lord not to continue to act in this way, but to revorse the course He is pursuing. The Prophet has very probably Numbers 10:36 before his mind in using the word שׁוּב. Accordingly, as the verb is intransitive, we have to regard שׁבטי נ׳, not as in apposition to עבריך, but as the accusative of place dependent on שׁוּב. Then we obtain the idea that the Prophet conceives the erring and hardening spoken of as caused by the Lord turning away from Israel, and leaving them to their fate. He is here besought, in opposition to this, to return to the tribes of His inheritance, and that for His servants’ sake. Who are these servants? They can only be those who faithfully serve the Lord in distinction from those who err and harden themselves. But the Prophet means by these servants not merely those who in the present time have remained faithful, but all faithful servants of Jehovah of all times. He thinks especially of the patriarchs who first received the promises. It is for the sake of all His faithful servants that the Lord does not entirely reject Israel. That Israel here bears the designation the tribes of thine inheritance is doubtless because the Prophet wishes thereby to point to Jehovah’s election of Israel to be His סְגֻּלָּה (Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 7:6 et saepe), His specially dear to Him and inalienable inheritance (Isaiah 19:25; Isaiah 47:6). To the complaint of the decay of religious life (Isaiah 63:17) there is added (Isaiah 63:18-19 a) a complaint regarding the mournful external relations, the fruit of that internal decay. The subject of יָֽרְשׁוּ can only be עס־קדשׁך. If we take צרינו as subject, as many do, we must then take לַמּצְעָר in a signification which it has not. For מִצְעָר (besides here Genesis 19:20; Job 8:7; Psalms 42:7; 2 Chronicles 24:24) is the harder form of מִזְעָר, which latter occurs in no other Old Testament writer than Isaiah, who has it in Isaiah 10:25; Isaiah 29:17; Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 14:6. The signification is everywhere paulum, a little. The word is synonymous with מְעַט, which word in all these places of Isaiah (with exception of the last-mentioned, Isaiah 24:6,) is joined to מזער. If now we take צרינו as subject, we must take למוער in the sense of pro-pemodum, parum abest quin, almost, nearly, as Cocceius, Luther and Stier do. But then the form should be כְּמִוְעָר after the analogy of כִּמְעַט. Further,למצער can neither be=מצער without לְ (LXX.) nor=nullo pretio, sine labore (Jerome). למצער can only be a particle of time, and mean for a short time. Many are inclined to regard מקרשׁך as the common object of ירשׁו and בוססו, while they take מקדשׁ either as a designation of the whole land, or of the temple alone. But the whole land is never called מקדשׁ, and the expression ידשׁ cannot well be employed of the temple. We must, too, in that case refer למצער to both sentences. For it stands as emphatically at the beginning as מקדשׁך stands at the close. I, therefore, agree with Delitzsch in taking ירשׁו absolutely, and in understanding as its object the land. This object could be easily omitted, as ידשׁ is used countless times both of the taking of the holy land into possession, and of the holding of it in possession. The word, too, is often employed absolutely: Deuteronomy 2:24; Deuteronomy 2:31; Genesis 21:10; 2 Samuel 14:7; Micah 1:15, et saepe. Although למצעד is a rhetorical hyperbole, it is yet justified, inasmuch as, if the Lord does not hear the prayer contained inIsa Isaiah 63:17 b, the time during which Israel possessed the land would be short in comparison with the following permanent exclusion from its possession. The treading down of the Sanctuary is regarded as the dissolving of the bond of connection between Israel and his God. Israel stands, therefore, now as a people over which Jehovah has never ruled. It is no more distinguished in anything from the heathen nations. Before מעולם, which must be connected with what follows, אֲשֶׁד is to be supplied. According to our way of speaking כַּֽאֲשֶׁר would be required. [In the E. V. the important word thine is arbitrarily supplied. Dr. Naegelsbach’s rendering is here to be preferred: We are become as those over whom thou never barest rule, (or didst not rule from ancient time), on whom thy name was never called.—D. M.]. That Israel has been, as it were, marked with the name of Jehovah, and thus distinguished from all nations, is always set forth as one of its greatest privileges (comp. Deuteronomy 28:10; 2 Chronicles 7:14; Jeremiah 14:9, et saepe. Comp. Isaiah 43:7; Isaiah 65:1). [The first verse of chap. 44 in the E. V. forms the latter part of Isaiah 63:19 of the preceding chapter in the Hebrew text. It is convenient in the Commentary to adhere to the division of chapters and verses observed in the Hebrew Bible. Accordingly, what stands in the English Bible as the first verse of chap 64 appears in the Commentary as the conclusion of Isaiah 63:19. And in conformity with this arrangement chap, 64 instead of twelve, has only eleven verses.—D. M.].

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. On Isaiah 63:7. [“God does good because He is good; what He bestows upon us must be run up to the original, it is according to His mercies, not according to our merits, andaccording to the multitude of His loving-kindnesses, which can never be spent. Thus we should magnify God’s goodness, and speak honorably of it, not only when we plead it (as David Psalms 51:1), but when we praise it.” Henry. D. M.].

2. On Isaiah 63:9. The angel of the face or presence belongs to “the deep things of God" (1 Corinthians 2:10). It is not right to imagine that a certain and exhaustive knowledge is possible in reference to these things. The humility which becomes even science, imposes on it the duty to write everywhere a non liquet, where, through the nature of things, limits are placed to human knowledge. Not to regard these limitations is the manner of the pseudo-scientific, immodest scholasticism. What, therefore, we have said regarding the angel of the face makes no higher pretension than that of a modest hypothesis. [Comp. in Hengstenberg’s Christology, Vol. Isaiah 1:0 : The Angel of the Lord in the books of Moses and in the book of Joshua.—D. M.].

3. On Isaiah 63:10. “There are two ways in which the Holy Ghost is offended or vexed. One way is of a less dreadful nature. It is when a man takes from the Holy Spirit the opportunity to work in the soul for its joy, as He is wont to communicate to it His gracious influence and His gracious operations. When such is the case, then as an offended friend when He perceives that no heed is given to most of His counsels, the Holy Spirit is grieved, and, although reluctantly, ceases for a time to advise the stubborn, ut carendo discat quantum peccaverit. Of this kind of grieving Paul speaks Ephesians 4:30. It can be committed by the godly and the elect. But the Holy Spirit can be offended and vexed in a gross and flagitious way, when one not only does not believe and follow Him, but also obstinately resists Him, despises all His counsel, reviles and blasphemes Him, will none of His reproof (Proverbs 1:24-25), gives the lie to His truth, and so speaks against the sun… This the Scripture calls ἀντιπίπτειν (Acts 7:51), ἐνυβρίζειν (Hebrews 10:29), βλασφημεῖν (Matthew 12:31), θεομαχεῖν (Acts 5:39). Let us, therefore, not grieve the Holy Spirit with evil desires, words and deeds, that we may be able on the future day of redemption to show that seal uninjured with which we were sealed on that day of our redemption when we were regenerated. To this end let us assiduously breathe forth the prayers of David Psalms 143:10; Psalms 51:12-14.” Leigh.

4. On Isaiah 63:10. [They rebelled and vexed His Holy Spirit. This statement implies the personality of the Holy Ghost, or the Spirit of God’s holiness. He is represented as a person whom we can grieve. We have in this passage clear indications of the doctrine of the Trinity. In Isaiah 63:9 we have the Angel of God’s face, and in Isaiah 63:10 we have the Spirit of His holiness, both clearly distinguished from God the fountain of their being.—D. M.].

5. On Isaiah 63:11. “Faith asks after God and so does unbelief, but in different ways. Both put the question, Where? Faith does it to seek God in time of need, and to tell Him trustfully of His old kindnesses. Unbelief does it to tempt God, to deny Him, to lead others into temptation, and to make them doubt regarding the divine presence and providence. Therefore it asks: “Where is the God of judgment” (Malachi 2:17)? “Where is now thy God "(Psalms 42:4; Psalms 42:11; Psalms 79:10; Psalms 115:2)? If you, as the praying Church here does, ask in the former manner diligently after God, you will be preserved from the other kind of asking.” Leigh.

6. On Isaiah 63:15. “Meritum meum miseratio Domini. Non sum meriti inops, quando ille miserationum Dominus non defuerit, et si misericordiae Domini multae, multus ego sum in meritis.” Augustine.

7. On Isaiah 63:16. “We can from this sentence [?] cogently refute the doctrine of the invocation of the Saints. For the Saints know nothing of us, and are not personally acquainted with us, much less can they know the concerns of our hearts, or hear our cry, for they are not omnipresent. If it be alleged that God makes matters known to them and that they then pray for us, what a round-about business this would be! It would justify the prayer said to have been made by a simple man: “Ah Lord God! tell it, I beseech thee, to the blessed Mary that I have told thee to tell it again to her, that she should tell thee that I have wished to say to her by so many Ave Marias and Pater Nosters, that she should say to thee to be pleased to be gracious unto me.” Meyer, de Rosariis, cap. III., thes. V., p. 52). With how much more brevity and efficacy do we pray with the penitent publican: God be merciful to me, a sinner! ”Leigh.

8. On Isaiah 63:17. “There is no more heinous sin than to accuse God of being the cause of our sin. Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God (James 1:13; Psalms 5:5; Deuteronomy 32:4; Ps. 92:16). He commands what is good, forbids and punishes what is evil. How then could He be the cause of it? But when He punishes sin with sin, i.e., when He at last withdraws from the sinner His grace that has been persistently despised, then He acts as a righteous Judge who inflicts the judgment of hardening the heart on those who wilfully resist His Spirit.” Leigh.

9. On Isaiah 66:0 [“This chapter is a model of affectionate and earnest entreaty for the divine interposition in the day of calamity. With such tender and affectionate earnestness may we learn to plead with God! Thus may all His people learn to approach Him as a Father; thus feel that they have the inestimable privilege in the times of trial of making known their wants to the High and Holy One. Thus when calamity presses on us; when as individuals or families we are afflicted; or when our country or the church is suffering under long trials, may we go to God, and humbly confess our sins, and urge His promises, and take hold of His strength, and plead with Him to interpose. Thus pleading, He will hear us; thus presenting our cause, He will interpose to save us.” Barnes. D. M.].

10. On Isaiah 64:3-4 a. [4, 5 a]. The God who appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, called Moses, and led by him the people of Israel out of Egypt, who chose Joshua, Samuel, David and others to be His servants and glorified Himself by them, this God alone has shown Himself to be the true and living God, and we can hope from Him that He will yet do more, and manifest Himself still more signally.

11. On Isaiah 64:4 [5]. [“Note what God expects from us in order to our having communion with Him. First, We must make conscience of doing our duty in everything, we must work righteousness, must do that which is good, and which the Lord our God requires of us, and must do it well. Secondly, We must be cheerful in doing our duty; we must rejoice and work righteousness, must delight ourselves in God and His law, must be pleasant in His service and sing at our work. God loves a cheerful giver, a cheerful worshipper; we must serve the Lord with gladness. Thirdly, We must conform ourselves to all the methods of His providence concerning us, and be suitably affected with them; must remember Him in Hisways, in all the ways wherein He walks, whether He walks towards us, or walks contrary to us; we must mind Him, and make mention of Him, with thanksgiving, when His ways are ways of mercy, for in a day of prosperity we mustbe joyful, with patience and submission when He contends with us, for in a day of adversity we must consider.” Henry. D. M.].

12. On Isaiah 64:7 [8]. [“This whole verse is an acknowledgment of the sovereignty of God. It expresses the feeling which all have when under conviction of sin, and when they are sensible that they are exposed to the divine displeasure for their transgressions. Then they feel that if they are to be saved, it must be by the mere Sovereignty of God; and they implore His interposition to ‘mould and guide them at His will.’ It may be added, that it is only when sinners have this feeling that they hope for relief; and then they will feel that if they are lost, it will be right; if saved, it will be because God moulds them as the potter does the clay.” Barnes. D. M.].

HOMILETICAL HINTS

1. On Isaiah 63:7. Text for a Thanksgiving Sermon. What is our duty after that the Lord has shown us great loving kindness? 1) To remember what He has done to us. 2) To be mindful of what we ought to render to Him for the same.

2. On Isaiah 63:8-17. The history of the people of Israel a mirror in which we too may perceive the history of our relation to God. 1) God is to us from the beginning a loving and faithful Father (Isaiah 63:8-9). 2) We repay His love with ingratitude, as Israel did (Isaiah 63:10 a). 3) God punishes us for this as He punished Israel (Isaiah 63:10 b). 4) God receives us again to His favor when we, as Israel, call on Him in penitence (Isaiah 63:11-17).

On Isaiah 63:7-17. “If God in Christ has become our Father, He remains our Father to all eternity. 1) He is our Father in Christ. 2) He abides faithful even when we waIsa Isaiah 63:3) When we have fallen, His arms still stand open to receive us.” Deichert in Manch. G. u. ein Geist, 1868, page 65.

4. On Isaiah 64:5-7. Joh. Ben. Carpzov has a sermon on this text, in which he treats of righteousness, and shows 1) justitiam salvantem, i. e., the righteousness with which one enters the kingdom of heaven; 2) justitiam damnantem, i. e., the righteousness with which a man enters the fire of hell; 3) justitiam testantem, i. e., the righteousness by which a man testifies that he has attained the true righteousness.

5. On Isaiah 64:6-9. “Let us hear from our text an earnest and affecting confession of sin, and at the same time consider 1) the doctrine of repentance; 2) the comfort of forgiveness which believers receive.”—Eichhorn.

6. On Isaiah 64:6. (We all do fade, etc.) “These are very instructive words, from which we learn what a noxious plant sin is, and what fruit it brings forth. First, says he, we fade as a leaf. This means that sin brings with it the curse of God, and deprives us of His blessing both for the body and the soul, so that the heart is dissatisfied and distressed. Then it robs us of the highest treasure, confidence in the grace of God. For sin and an evil conscience awaken dread of God. As it is impossible to call upon God aright without faith and a sure persuasion of His aid, it follows that sin hinders prayer also, and thus robs us of the highest comfort. When men have no faith and cannot pray, then the awful punishment comes upon them, that God hides His face and leaves them to pine in their sins. For they cannot help themselves, and have lost the consolation and protection which they need in life.”—Veit Diet.

Footnotes:

[9]Or, the multitude.

[10]they are restrained.

[11]because.

[12]Or, our redeemer from everlasting is thy name.

[13]Why dost thou make us err.

[14]to the tribes.

[15]We have become as those over whom thou never barest rule, on whom thy name was not called.

[16]Or, thy name was not called upon them.