1. 1. ISAIAH 20 COMMENTARY EDITED BY GLENN PEASE A Prophecy Against Egypt and Cush 1 In the year that the supreme commander, sent by Sargon king of Assyria, came to Ashdod and attacked and captured it 1.BARNES, In the year that Tartan came unto Ashdod - Tartan was one of the generals of Sennacherib. Ashdod, called by the Greeks Azotus, was a seaport on the Mediterranean, between Askelon and Ekron, and not far from Gaza (Relands Palestine, iii.) It was one of the five cities of the Philistines, assigned to the tribe of Judah, but never conquered by them Jos_13:8; Jos_15:46-47. The temple of Dagon stood here; and here the ark of God was brought after the fatal battle of Eben-ezer (1Sa_5:1, following.) It sustained many sieges, and was regarded as an important place in respect to Palestine, and also to Egypt. It was taken by Tartan, and remained in the possession of the Assyrians until it was besieged by Psammetichus, the Egyptian king, who took it after a siege of twenty-nine years (Herod. ii. 157). It was about thirty miles from Gaza. It is now a small village, and is called Esdud. It was besieged and taken by Tartan as preparatory to the conquest of Egypt; and if the king who is here called Sargon was Sennacherib, it probable that it was taken before he threatened Jerusalem. Sargon the king of Assyria - Who this Sargon was is not certainly known. Some have supposed that it was Sennacherib; others that it was Shalmaneser the father of Sennacherib, and others that it was Esar-haddon the successor of Sennacherib - (Michaelis). Rosenmuller and Gesenius suppose that it was a king who reigned between Sbalmaneser and Sennacherib. Tartan is known to have been a general of Sennacherib 2Ki_18:17, and it is natural to suppose that he is here intended. Jerome says that Senacherib had seven names, and Kimchi says that he had eight; and it is not improbable that Sargon was one of those names. Oriental princes often had several names; and hence, the difficulty of identifying them. See Vitringa on this place. 2. PULPIT, A PROPHECY AGAINST EGYPT AND ETHIOPIA. The Assyrian inscriptions enable us to date this prophecy with a near approach to exactness. Ashdod was besieged by an Assyrian army twice in the reign of Sargonin his ninth year and in his eleventh year. On the former occasion it is probable that the arms of a general (Tartan) were employed; on the latter it is nearly certain that Sargon made the expedition in person. The capture of Ashdod, here mentioned, is consequently the first capture. Egypt
2. 2. and Ethiopia were at the time united under one head, Shabak, or Shabatok; and the inhabitants of Ashdod looked to this quarter for deliverance from the Assyrian power. Shortly after the first capture, they revolted, deposed the king whom Sargon had set over them, appointed another, and then proceeded, in conjunction with Philistia, Judah, Edom, and Moab, to call in the aid of the Egyptians and Ethiopians. Isaiah's mission on this occasion was to discourage Judaea from joining Ashdod and her allies in this appeal. He was instructed to prophesy that Assyria would shortly inflict a severe defeat on the two African powers, and carry into captivity large numbers of both nations. The prophecy seems to have had its accomplishment about twelve years later, when Sennacherib defeated the combined forces of Egypt and Ethiopia at Eltekeh, near Ekron. Isa_20:1 In the year that Tartan came unto Ashdod; rather, a tartan. The word was not a proper name, but a title of office, equivalent to surena among the Parthians, and signifying "commander-in-chief." The tartan held the second position in the empire. Isaiah has been accused of having confounded together the two sieges of Ashdod (Cheyne); but if one was conducted by the tartan, and the other by Sargon in person, his words would distinguish as perfectly as possible which siege he meant. When Sargon the King of Assyria sent him. The present passage furnished almost the sole trace of the existence of this monarchone of the greatest of Assyria's sovereignsuntil about the middle of the present century, when the exploration of the Assyrian ruins, and the decipherment of the Assyrian inscriptions, presented him to us in the most distinct and vivid way, as king, conqueror, and builder. He was the founder of the last and greatest of the Assyrian dynasties, the successor of the biblical Shalmaneser, and the father of Sennacherib. He reigned from B.C. 722 to B.C. 705. He was the captor of Samaria; he defeated the forces of Egypt; he warred on Susiana, Media, Armenia, Asia Minor, Cyprus; and he conquered and held in subjection Babylon. He built the great city explored by M. Botta, near Khorsabad, which is sometimes called "the French Nineveh." It is now found that Ptolemy's 'Canon' contains his name under the form of Arkeanus, and that Yacut's 'Geography' mentions his great city under the form of Sarghun. But these facts were unsuspected until the recent explorations in Mesopotamia, and Isaiah's mention of him alone gave him a place in history. And fought against Ashdod, and took it. Ashdod was the strongest of the Philistine cities, and one of the most ancient (Jos_15:47). Its name is probably derived from a root meaning "strength." We hear of its having stood on one occasion a siege of twenty-nine years (Herod; 2:157). It is now known asEsdud. When Ashdod is first mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions it is tributary to Sargon, having probably submitted to him in s c. 720, alter the battle of Raphia. It soon, however, revolts and reclaims its independence. In B.C. 713 the Assyrians proceed against it; and its capture is implied by the facts that the Assyrians depose its king, and install, one of his brothers as monarch in his room.
3. 3. 3. GILL, In the year that Tartan came unto Ashdod,.... Or Azotus, as the Septuagint here call it; and which is its name in the New Testament; see Gill on Act_8:40. This Tartan, or whom the Septuagint names Tanathan, and the Arabic version Tathan, was one of Sennacherib's generals, 2Ki_18:17, (when Sargon the king of Assyria sent him); to the above place to besiege it. This Sargon is generally thought to be the same with Sennacherib, since Tartan was one of his generals, who might have more names than one. Jerom says he had seven; the Jewish Rabbins (h) eight; though some think a predecessor of his is meant, Shalmaneser; and others his son Esarhaddon, who in the Apocrypha: "And there passed not five and fifty days, before two of his sons killed him, and they fled into the mountains of Ararath; and Sarchedonus his son reigned in his stead; who appointed over his father's accounts, and over all his affairs, Achiacharus my brother Anael's son.'' (Tobit 1:21) is called Sarchedon, which might easily pass by pronunciation into Sargon: and fought against Ashdod, and took it; which was held by the Assyrians till the time of Psammiticus, and was so strong a city, and so well fortified, that it held out a siege of twenty nine years before he could be master of it (i); how long Tartan lay against it, before he took it, is not said; nor is it certain what year he came against it; those who take Sargon to be Shalmaneser place it in the fourth year of Hezekiah's reign, who sent Tartan to Ashdod at the same time that he went against Samaria, 2Ki_18:9 but others, who think Sennacherib is Sargon, fix it to the fourteenth year of Hezekiah's reign, as Kimchi; who, hearing of Tirhakah king of Ethiopia and Egypt coming against him, went forth to meet him, and subdued him; and at the same time sent Tartan against Ashdod; or rather this was done when he took the fenced cities of Judah, of which this was one, having been taken a little before by Hezekiah from the Philistines; see 2Ki_18:8 though, if Esarhaddon is Sargon, this must be in the times of Manasseh, perhaps about the twenty second year of his reign, by whom he was taken, and carried captive; but it is most likely to have been in Hezekiah's time. 4. HENRY, God here, as King of nations, brings a sore calamity upon Egypt and Ethiopia, but, as King of saints, brings good to his people out of it. Observe, I. The date of this prophecy. It was in the year that Ashdod, a strong city of the Philistines (but which some think was lately recovered from them by Hezekiah, when he smote the Philistines even unto Gaza, 2Ki_18:8), was besieged and taken by an army of the Assyrians. It is uncertain what year of Hezekiah that was, but the event was so remarkable that those who lived then could by that token fix the time to a year. He that was now king of Assyria is called Sargon, which some take to be the same with Sennacherib; others think he was his immediate predecessor, and succeeded Shalmaneser. Tartan, who was general, or commander-in-chief, in this expedition, was one of Sennacherib's officers, sent by him to bid defiance to Hezekiah, in concurrence with Rabshakeh, 2Ki_18:17. II. The making of Isaiah a sign, by his unusual dress when he walked abroad. He had been a sign to his own people of the melancholy times that had come and were coming upon them, by the sackcloth which for some time he had worn, of which he had a gown made, which he girt about
4. 4. him. Some think he put himself into that habit of a mourner upon occasion of the captivity of the ten tribes. Others think sackcloth was what he commonly wore as a prophet, to show himself mortified to the world, and that he might learn to endure hardness; soft clothing better becomes those that attend in king's palaces (Mat_11:8) than those that go on God's errands. Elijah wore hair-cloth (2Ki_1:8), and John Baptist (Mat_3:4) and those that pretended to be prophets supported their pretension by wearing rough garments (Zec_13:4); but Isaiah has orders given him to loose his sackcloth from his loins, not to exchange it for better clothing, but for none at all - no upper garment, no mantle, cloak, or coat, but only that which was next to him, we may suppose his shirt, waistcoat, and drawers; and he must put off his shoes, and go barefoot; so that compared with the dress of others, and what he himself usually wore, he might be said to go naked. This was a great hardship upon the prophet; it was a blemish to his reputation, and would expose him to contempt and ridicule; the boys in the streets would hoot at him, and those who sought occasion against him would say, The prophet is indeed a fool, and the spiritual man is mad, Hos_9:7. It might likewise be a prejudice to his health; he was in danger of catching a cold, which might throw him into a fever, and cost him his life; but God bade him do it, that he might give a proof of his obedience to God in a most difficult command, and so shame the disobedience of his people to the most easy and reasonable precepts. When we are in the way of our duty we may trust God both with our credit and with our safety. The hearts of that people were strangely stupid, and would not be affected with what they only heard, but must be taught by signs, and therefore Isaiah must do this for their edification. If the dress was scandalous, yet the design was glorious, and what a prophet of the Lord needed not to be ashamed of. 5. JAMISON, Isa_20:1-6. Continuation of the subject of the nineteenth chapter, but at a later date. Captivity of Egypt and Ethiopia. In the reign of Sargon (722-715 b.c.), the successor of Shalmaneser, an Assyrian invasion of Egypt took place. Its success is here foretold, and hence a party among the Jews is warned of the folly of their expectation of aid from Egypt or Ethiopia. At a later period (Isa_18:1-7), when Tirhakah of Ethiopia was their ally, the Ethiopians are treated as friends, to whom God announces the overthrow of the common Assyrian foe, Sennacherib. Egypt and Ethiopia in this chapter (Isa_20:3, Isa_20:4) are represented as allied together, the result no doubt of fear of the common foe; previously they had been at strife, and the Ethiopian king had, just before Sethos usurpation, withdrawn from occupation of part of Lower Egypt. Hence, Egypt is mentioned alone in Isa_19:1-25, which refers to a somewhat earlier stage of the same event: a delicate mark of truth. Sargon seems to have been the king who finished the capture of Samaria which Shalmaneser began; the alliance of Hoshea with So or Sabacho II of Ethiopia, and his refusal to pay the usual tribute, provoked Shalmaneser to the invasion. On clay cylindrical seals found in Sennacheribs palace at Koyunjik, the name of Sabacho is deciphered; the two seals are thought, from the inscriptions, to have been attached to the treaty of peace between Egypt and Assyria, which resulted from the invasion of Egypt by Sargon, described in this chapter; 2Ki_18:10 curiously confirms the view derived from Assyrian inscriptions, that though Shalmaneser began, Sargon finished the conquest of Samaria; they took it (compare 2Ki_17:4- 6). In Sargons palace at Khorsabad, inscriptions state that 27,280 Israelites were led captive by
5. 5. the founder of the palace. While Shalmaneser was engaged in the siege of Samaria, Sargon probably usurped the supreme power and destroyed him; the siege began in 723 b.c., and ended in 721 b.c., the first year of Sargons reign. Hence arises the paucity of inscriptions of the two predecessors of Sargon, Tiglath-pileser and Shalmaneser; the usurper destroyed them, just as Tiglath-pileser destroyed those of Pul (Sardanapalus), the last of the old line of Ninus; the names of his father and grandfather, which have been deciphered in the palace of his son Sennacherib, do not appear in the list of Assyrian kings, which confirms the view that he was a satrap who usurped the throne. He was so able a general that Hezekiah made no attempt to shake off the tribute until the reign of Sennacherib; hence Judah was not invaded now as the lands of the Philistines and Egypt were. After conquering Israel he sent his general, Tartan, to attack the Philistine cities, Ashdod, etc., preliminary to his invasion of Egypt and Ethiopia; for the line of march to Egypt lay along the southwest coast of Palestine. The inscriptions confirm the prophecy; they tell us he received tribute from a Pharaoh of Egypt; besides destroying in part the Ethiopian No-ammon, or Thebes (Nah_3:8); also that he warred with the kings of Ashdod, Gaza, etc., in harmony with Isaiah here; a memorial tablet of him is found in Cyprus also, showing that he extended his arms to that island. His reign was six or seven years in duration, 722-715 b.c. [G. V. Smith]. Tartan probably the same general as was sent by Sennacherib against Hezekiah (2Ki_18:17). Gesenius takes Tartan as a title. Ashdod called by the Greeks Azotus (Act_8:40); on the Mediterranean, one of the five cities of the Philistines. The taking of it was a necessary preliminary to the invasion of Egypt, to which it was the key in that quarter, the Philistines being allies of Egypt. So strongly did the Assyrians fortify it that it stood a twenty-nine years siege, when it was retaken by the Egyptian Psammetichus. sent Sargon himself remained behind engaged with the Phoenician cities, or else led the main force more directly into Egypt out of Judah [G. V. Smith]. 6. K&D, This section, commencing in the form of historic prose, introduces itself thus: In the year that Tartan came to Ashdod, Sargon the king of Asshur having sent him (and he made war against Ashdod, and captured it): at that time Jehovah spake through Yeshayahu the son of Amoz as follows, i.e., He communicated the following revelation through the medium of Isaiah (b'yad, as in Isa_37:24; Jer_37:2, and many other passages). The revelation itself was attached to a symbolical act. B'yad (lit. by the hand of) refers to what was about to be made known through the prophet by means of the command that was given him; in other words, to Isa_20:3, and indirectly to Isa_20:2. Tartan (probably the same man) is met with in 2Ki_18:17 as the chief captain of Sennacherib. No Assyrian king of the name of Sargon is mentioned anywhere else in the Old Testament; but it may now be accepted as an established result of the researches which have been made, that Sargon was the successor of Shalmanassar, and that Shalmaneser (Shalman, Hos_10:14), Sargon, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon, are the names of the four Assyrian kings who were mixed up with the closing history of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. It was Longperrier who was the first to establish the identity of the monarch who built the palaces at Khorsabad, which form the north-eastern corner of ancient Nineveh, with the Sargon of the Bible. We are now acquainted with a considerable number of brick, harem, votive-table, and other inscriptions which bear the name of this king, and contain all kinds of testimony concerning himself. (Note: See Oppert, Expdition, i. 328-350, and the picture of Sargon in his war-chariot in Rawlinson's Five Great Monarchies, i. 368; compare also p. 304 (prisoners taken by
6. 6. Sargon), p. 352 (the plan of his palace), p. 483 (a glass vessel with his name), and many other engravings in vol. ii.) It was he, not Shalmanassar, who took Samaria after a three years' siege; and in the annalistic inscription he boasts of having conquered the city, and removed the house of Omri to Assyria. Oppert is right in calling attention to the fact, that in 2Ki_18:10 the conquest is not attributed to Shalmanassar himself, but to the army. Shalmanassar died in front of Samaria; and Sargon not only put himself at the head of the army, but seized upon the throne, in which he succeeded in establishing himself, after a contest of several years' duration with the legitimate heirs and their party. He was therefore a usurper. (Note: See Oppert, Les Inscriptions Assyriennes des Sargonides et les Fastes de Ninive (Versailles, 1862), and Rawlinson (vol. ii. 406ff.), who here agrees with Oppert in all essential points. Consequently there can no longer be any thought of identifying Sargon with Shalmanassar (see Brandis, Ueber den historischen Gewinn aus der Entzifferung der assyr. Inschriften, 1856, p. 48ff.). Rawlinson himself at first thought they were the same person (vid., Journal of the Asiatic Society, xii. 2, 419), until gradually the evidence increased that Sargon and Shalmanassar were the names of two different kings, although no independent inscription of the latter, the actual besieger of Samaria, has yet been found.) Whether his name as it appears on the inscriptions is Sar-kin or not, and whether it signifies the king de facto as distinguished from the king de jure, we will not attempt to determine now. (Note: Hitzig ventures a derivation of the name from the Zend; and Grotefend compares it with the Chaldee Sarek, Dan_6:3 (in his Abhandlung ber Anlage und Zerstrung der Gebude von Nimrud, 1851).) This Sargon, the founder of a new Assyrian dynasty, who reigned from 721-702 (according to Oppert), and for whom there is at all events plenty of room between 721-20 and the commencement of Sennacherib's reign, first of all blockaded Tyre for five years after the fall of Samaria, or rather brought to an end the siege of Tyre which had been begun by Shalmanassar (Jos. Ant. ix. 14, 2), though whether it was to a successful end or not is quite uncertain. He then pursued with all the greater energy his plan for following up the conquest of Samaria with the subjugation of Egypt, which was constantly threatening the possessions of Assyria in western Asia, either by instigation or support. The attack upon Ashdod was simply a means to this end. As the Philistines were led to join Egypt, not only by their situation, but probably by kinship of tribe as well, the conquest of Ashdod - a fortress so strong, that, according to Herodotus (ii. 157), Psammetichus besieged it for twenty-nine years - was an indispensable preliminary to the expedition against Egypt. When Alexander the Great marched against Egypt, he had to do the same with Gaza. How long Tartan required is not to be gathered from Isa_20:1. But if he conquered it as quickly as Alexander conquered Gaza - viz. in five months - it is impossible to understand why the following prophecy should defer for three years the subjugation of Ethiopia and Egypt. The words, and fought against Ashdod, and took it, must therefore be taken as anticipatory and parenthetical. It was not after the conquest of Ashdod, but in the year in which the siege commenced, that Isaiah received the following admonition: Go and loosen the smock-frock from off thy loins, and take off thy shoes from thy feet. And he did so, went stripped and barefooted. We see from this that Isaiah was clothed in the same manner as Elijah, who wore a fur coat (2Ki_1:8, cf., Zec_13:4; Heb_11:37), and John the Baptist, who had a garment of camel hair and a leather girdle round it (Mat_3:4); for sak is a coarse linen or hairy overcoat of a dark colour (Rev_6:12, cf., Isa_50:3), such as was worn by mourners, either next to the skin (al-habbasar, 1Ki_21:27; 2Ki_6:30; Job_16:15) or over the tunic, in either case being fastened by a girdle on account of its want of shape, for which reason the verb chagar is the word commonly used to signify the putting
7. 7. on of such a garment, instead of labash. The use of the word arom does not prove that the former was the case in this instance (see, on the contrary, 2Sa_6:20, compared with 2Sa_6:14 and Joh_21:7). With the great importance attached to the clothing in the East, where the feelings upon this point are peculiarly sensitive and modest, a person was looked upon as stripped and naked if he had only taken off his upper garment. What Isaiah was directed to do, therefore, was simply opposed to common custom, and not to moral decency. He was to lay aside the dress of a mourner and preacher of repentance, and to have nothing on but his tunic (cetoneth); and in this, as well as barefooted, he was to show himself in public. This was the costume of a man who had been robbed and disgraced, or else of a beggar or prisoner of war. The word cen (so) is followed by the inf. abs., which develops the meaning, as in Isa_5:5; Isa_58:6-7. 7. BI, The purpose of the chapter Judah, alarmed by the capture of Samaria, and the rapid extension of the Assyrian invasion, looked for assistance from Egypt. And the aim of this brief chapter is to recall king and people from any such reliance, by the announcement that the King of Assyria would shortly prevail against Egypt, and lead into captivity multitudes of prisoners. (F. B. Meyer, B. A.) The date of the prophecy The date of the prophecy is assured. The expedition mentioned took place in 711 B.C., and is minutely related in two of Sargons own inscriptions. See Schrader, Cuneiform Inscriptions, vol. 2. (Cambridge Bible for Schools.) The Tartan, The Tartan, Assyrian, turtanu, i.e., Commander-in-chief. (A. B.Davidson, LL. D.) 8. PULPIT, Foolish trust rebuked by a strange sign. Few things are so difficult as to bring men to rely wholly and solely upon God. The circumstances of the time were these. Humanly speaking, Judaea lay absolutely at the mercy of Assyria. There was no existing power or combination of powers that could successfully contend at the time against the vast bodies of well-armed and well-disciplined soldiers which a king of Assyria could bring into the field. Nothing could prolong Jewish independence for more than a few years but some miraculous interposition of God on behalf of the Jewish people. But for God to interpose miraculously, it was necessary that implicit trust should be placed in him. The Jews, however, could not bring themselves to believe that they had no help but Jehovah. They thought Egypt, or Egypt and Ethiopia combined, might well prove a match for Assyria, and were bent on l, lacing themselves under the protection of the combined powers. The lesson of the
8. 8. destruction of the kingdom of Israel, which had trusted in Egypt (2Ki_17:4), and then been destroyed by Assyria, was lost on them. In connection with Ashdod, they had actually sent ambassadors to Egypt to entreat assistance (Isa_30:1-4). Then it was that Isaiah received the special mission which was to warn his countrymen of the utter folly of trusting to human aid. For three years he was to wear the scant clothing that Assyrian captives ordinarily wore, announcing that he did so in token that ere long the warriors of Egypt and Ethiopia would be seen thus clad, on their way from Egypt to captivity at Nineveh. The unusual attire of the prophet could not but create a great sensation. It probably made a considerable impression on Hezekiah and his counselors. It was not forgotten; and if it did not at once cause the negotiations with Egypt to be broken off, it produced the result that, when Isaiah's prediction was fulfilled after the battle of Eltekeh, the Jewish monarch and people did in their trouble turn to God. At the crisis of his danger, Hezekiah made appeal to the Almighty (Isa_37:4); and his appeal was followed by that destruction of the Assyrian host (Isa_37:36) which caused the Assyrians to respect and fear the Jews thenceforward, and to allow them to retain their independence. Thus the life of the Jewish monarchy was extended for above a century. 9. KRETZMANN, In the year that Tartan, the commander-in-chief of the Assyrian armies, 2Ki_18:17, came unto Ashdod, one of the cities of Philistia which had revolted against the Assyrian supremacy (when Sargon, the king of Assyria, who succeeded Shalmaneser at just about the time when Samaria was taken by the Assyrians, sent him), and fought against Ashdod, and took it, in the second last decade of the eighth century before Christ (in 711 B. C. according to the Assyrian annals), 10. CALVIN, 1.In the year that Tartan came to Ashdod. In the preceding chapter Isaiah prophesied about the calamity which threatened Egypt, and at the same time promised to it the mercy of God. He now introduces the same subject, and shews that Israel will be put to shame by this chastisement of the Egyptians, because they placed their confidence in Egypt. He now joins Ethiopia, which makes it probable that the Ethiopians were leagued with the Egyptians, as I have formerly remarked, and as we shall see again at the thirty-seventh chapter. First, we must observe the time of this prediction. It was when the Jews were pressed hard by necessity to resort, even against their will, to foreign nations for assistance. Sacred history informs us (2Kg_18:17) that Tartan was one of Sennacherib captains, which constrains us to acknowledge that this Sargon was Sennacherib, who had two names, as may be easily learned from this passage. We must also consider what was the condition of Israel, for the ten tribes had been led into captivity. Judea appeared almost to
9. 9. be utterly ruined, for nearly the whole country was conquered, except Jerusalem, which was besieged by Rabshakeh. (2Kg_18:13.) Tartan, on the other hand, was besieging Ashdod. Sacred history (2Kg_18:17) mentions three captains; (60) and this makes it probable that Sennacherib forces were at that time divided into three parts, that at the same instant he might strike terror on all, and might throw them into such perplexity and confusion that they could not render assistance to each other. Nothing was now left for the Jews but to call foreign nations to their aid. In the mean time, Isaiah is sent by God to declare that their expectation is vain in relying on the Egyptians, against whom the arm of the Lord was now lifted up, and who were so far from assisting them, that they were unable to defend themselves against their enemies. Hence the Jews ought to acknowledge that they are justly punished for their unbelief, because they had forsaken God and fled to the Egyptians. We must consider the end which is here proposed, for the design of God was not to forewarn the Egyptians, but to correct the unbelief of the people, which incessantly carried them away to false and wicked hopes. In order therefore to teach them that they ought to rely on God alone, the Prophet here foretells what awaits their useless helpers. The warning was highly seasonable, for the Ethiopians had begun to repel the Assyrians, and had forced them to retire, and no event could have occurred which would have been more gladly hailed by the Jews. Lest those successful beginnings should make them wanton, he foretells that this aid will be of short duration, because both the Ethiopians and the Egyptians will soon be most disgracefully vanquished. (60) and Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh FT318 Egyptians prisoners (Heb. the captivity of Egypt) and Ethiopians captives. Eng. Ver. captives of Egypt and the exiles of Cush. Lowth 2 at that time the LORD spoke through Isaiah son of Amoz. He said to him, Take off the sackcloth from your body and the sandals from your feet. And he did so, going around stripped and barefoot.
10. 10. 1.BARNES, By Isaiah - Margin, By the hand of Isaiah. So the Hebrew. That is, by the instrumentality of Isaiah. He sent him to make known the fate of the Egyptians, and the folly of trusting in them on this occasion. Go, and loose the sackcloth - For the meaning of the word sackcloth, see the note at Isa_3:24. It was commonly worn as an emblem of mourning. But there is reason to believe that it was worn also by the prophets, and was regarded, in some degree, as their appropriate dress. It was made usually of the coarse hair of the goat, and was worn as a zone or girdle around the loins. That this was the dress of Elijah is apparent from 2Ki_1:8 : He was an hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather; that is, he was clothed in a garment made of hair. The same was true of John the Baptist Mat_3:4. That the prophets wore a rough garment is apparent also from Zec_13:4 : Neither shall they (the false prophets) wear a rough garment (Hebrew, A garment of hair) to deceive; that is, the false prophets shall not assume the dress of the true prophets for the purpose of deluding the people, or to make them think that they are true prophets. It is evident, therefore, that this hairy garment was regarded as a dress that pertained particularly to the prophets. It is well known, also, that the ancient Greek philosophers had a special dress to distinguish them from the common people. Probably the custom of wearing hair cloth among the monks of later ages took its rise from this example of the prophets. His removing this garment was designed to be a sign or an emblem to show that the Egyptians should be stripped of all their possessions, and carried captive to Assyria. Walking naked - That is, walking without this special prophetic garment. It does not mean that he was in a state of entire nudity, for all that he was directed to do was to lay this garment - this emblem of his office - aside. The word naked, moreover, is used in the Scriptures, not to denote an absolute destitution of clothing, but that the outer garment was laid aside (see the note at Joh_21:7). Thus it is said of Saul 1Sa_19:24 that he stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel, and lay down naked all that day; that is, he stripped off his royal robes, and was naked or unclothed in that respect. He removed his special dress as a king, or military chieftain, and appeared in the ordinary dress. It cannot be supposed that the king of Israel would be seen literally without raiment. So David is said to have danced naked before the ark, that is, with his royal robes laid aside. How long Isaiah walked in this manner has been a matter of doubt (see the note at Isa_20:3). The prophets were accustomed to use symbolic actions to denote the events which they foretold (see the note at Isa_8:18). Thus the children of Isaiah, and the names given to them, were significant of important events (Isa_8:1-3; compare Jer_18:1-6; Jer_43:8-9); in both of which places he used emblematic actions to exhibit the events concerning which he prophesied in a striking manner. Thus also the prophets are expressly called signs and wonders Zec_3:8; Eze_12:6. 2. CLARKE, Walking naked and barefoot - It is not probable that the prophet walked uncovered and barefoot for three years; his appearing in that manner was a sign that within three years the Egyptians and Cushites should be in the same condition, being conquered and made captives by the king of Assyria. The time was denoted as well as the event; but his appearing in that manner for three whole years could give no premonition of the time at all. It is probable, therefore, that the prophet was ordered to walk so for three days to denote the accomplishment of the event in three years; a day for a year, according to the prophetical rule, Num_14:34; Eze_4:6. The words shalosh yamim, three days, may possibly have been lost out of the text, at the end of the second verse, after yacheph, barefoot; or after the same
11. 11. word in the third verse, where, in the Alexandrine and Vatican copies of the Septuagint, and in MSS. Pachom. and 1. D. 2 the words , three years, are twice expressed. Perhaps, instead of shalosh yamim, three days, the Greek translator might read shalosh shanim, three years, by his own mistake, or by that of his copy, after yacheph in the third verse, for which stands the first , three years, in the Alexandrine and Vatican Septuagint, and in the two MSS. above mentioned. It is most likely that Isaiahs walking naked and barefoot was done in a vision; as was probably that of the Prophet Hosea taking a wife of whoredoms. None of these things can well be taken literally. From thy foot - ragleycha, thy feet, is the reading of thirty-four of Kennicotts and De Rossis MSS., four ancient editions, with the Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate, and Arabic. 3. GILL, At the same time spake the Lord by Isaiah the son of Amoz,.... Or, "by the hand of Isaiah", by his means; and it was to him likewise, as the following words show; and so the Septuagint version renders it; he spoke by him, by the sign he used, according to his order, and he spoke to him to use the sign: saying; so the Arabic version, "with him"; and with these versions Noldius agrees: go, and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins; a token of mourning, and which the prophet wore, as Kimchi thinks, because of the captivity of the ten tribes; and it may be also on account of the miseries that were coming upon the people of the Jews; though some think this was his common garb, and the same with the royal garment the prophets used to wear, Zec_13:4 but that he had put off, and had put on sackcloth in its room, which he is now bid to take off: and put off thy shoe from thy foot; as a sign of distress and mourning also, 2Sa_15:30, and he did so, walking naked and barefoot; Kimchi thinks this was only visionally, or in the vision of prophecy, as he calls it, and not in reality; but the latter seems most probable, and best to agree with what follows; for he was obedient to the divine command, not regarding the disgrace which might attend it, nor the danger of catching cold, to which he was exposed; and hence he has the character of a servant of the Lord, in the next words, and a faithful obedient one he was. 4. BI, Isaiah stripped and barefooted Owing to the great importance which is attributed to clothing from the standpoint of Oriental culture and manners, anyone who appears without the upper garment is already regarded as naked and bare. Isaiah has to lay off the garment of the preacher of repentance and of the mourner, so that only his tunic remains; and in this dress, and moreover barefooted, he has to appear in public. It is the costume of a man who had been robbed and disgraced, of a beggar, it may be, or a prisoner of war. (F. Delitzsch.) Gods appointment magnifies mean things
12. 12. The appointment of God renders those things and actions which in themselves seem mean and contemptible, momentous and useful: it stamps them with real dignity and importance, and makes them truly instructive. View the ceremonial institutions of the Old Testament, such as circumcision, abstinence from particular kinds of food and of raiment, uncleanness contracted by touching certain objects, and sprinkling the tabernacle with blood, and they appear trifling and ridiculous. Contemplate them again as the ordinances of God, infinitely wise and gracious, and you may discern their excellence and extensive utility. Look at our prophet as he is here described, and you see an odd appearance; but consider him acting by Divine commission, that he might represent to his countrymen the future naked and destitute condition to which those nations were to be reduced in whom they foolishly placed their confidence, and every circumstance acquires new consequence. (R. Macculloch.) Isaiahs obedience When we are in the way of our duty we must trust God both with our credit and with our safety. (M. Henry.) Gods purpose dignifies what might otherwise be scandalous If the dress was scandalous, yet the design was glorious. (M. Henry.) 5. JAMISON, by literally, by the hand of (compare Eze_3:14). sackcloth the loose outer garment of coarse dark hair-cloth worn by mourners (2Sa_3:31) and by prophets, fastened at the waist by a girdle (Mat_3:4; 2Ki_1:8; Zec_13:4). naked rather, uncovered; he merely put off the outer sackcloth, retaining still the tunic or inner vest (1Sa_19:24; Amo_2:16; Joh_21:7); an emblem to show that Egypt should be stripped of its possessions; the very dress of Isaiah was a silent exhortation to repentance. 5B. PULPIT, Unpleasant service. It may always remain uncertain whether Isaiah went stripped and barefoot for three whole years or for a shorter period. Two things, however, are quite certain, viz. that for some time, longer or shorter, this servant of Jehovah (verse 3) went about Jerusalem in that humiliating condition, and that he would have unhesitatingly done this all the time if God had required him to do so. Many suggestions have been made on the subject, but it does not occur to any one to entertain the idea that Isaiah would decline to render such an unpleasant service, however long the period of service might be. I. THAT GOD SOMETIMES DEMANDS OF US SERVICE WHICH WE FIND IT HARD TO RENDER. It may be:
13. 13. 1. To incur the hostility of those whose honor and affection we would fain enjoy. Isaiah had to pronounce against an alliance with Egypt and Ethiopia, thus stirring up the active dislike of those politicians who advised that course. We may often have to take a course which is regarded and denounced as unpatriotic or disloyal. 2. To endure privation as the consequence of fidelity. Isaiah, in the fulfillment of his prophetic mission, went half-clad through all changes of temperature. In order to speak the true and faithful word which God has put into our mind, or to take the right course which he opens before us, we may have to do that which will lessen our resources and lead to straitened means and even to serious embarrassment. 3. To expose ourselves to the derision of the skeptic or the scoffing. Doubtless the partisans of Egypt sneered and the idle multitude mocked as the unclothed prophet passed by. It is hard to have to utter that truth or to identify ourselves with that course which entails the bitter raillery of the opponent and the heartless jest of the ribald crowd. But "my servant Isaiah walked naked and barefoot" as long as he was charged to do so. And we conclude II. THAT WE CANNOT HESITATE TO RENDER INSTANT AND FULL COMPLIANCE, For: 1. God's demand is absolute and authoritative. If the filial son hastens to do the behest of his father, the loyal subject that of his king, the brave soldier that of his commander, however uninviting or even perilous it may be, how much more shall we render instant and hearty obedience to the "Do this" of our heavenly Father, of our Divine Redeemer. 2. God asks us to do that which is small and slight indeed in comparison with the service which, in Jesus Christ, he has rendered us. What are the privations, the insults, the humiliations we may be summoned to endure for Christ when compared with the poverty and the shame and the sorrow to which he stooped for us? 3. Our unpleasant work is prior, and perhaps preparatory, to nobler and more congenial service further on. Faithful in the "few things" now and here, we shall have rule given us over "many things" in the coming years, and still more truly in the better land.C. 6. PULPIT, Loose the sackcloth from off thy loins. Dr. Kay supposes that Isaiah was wearing sackcloth exceptionally, as during a time of mourning. But it is more probable that the Hebrew sak represents the haircloth ("rough garment," Zec_13:4), which, as ascetics, the Hebrew
14. 14. prophets wore habitually (2Ki_1:8; Mat_3:4). Walking naked. Probably not actually "naked," for captives were not stripped bare by the Assyrians, but with nothing on besides his short tunic, as the male captives are commonly represented in the Assyrian sculptures. 7. KRETZMANN, at the same time spake the Lord by Isaiah, the son of Amoz, in the year when the siege of Ashdod began, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth, the loose outer garment of coarse cloth which Isaiah wore, from off thy loins and put off thy shoe from thy foot. And he did so, walking naked, that is, with only his tunic or shirtlike garment, and barefoot, presenting the appearance of one who bad been robbed or spoiled, stripped of his possessions, like a beggar or captive of war. The very dress of Isaiah called attention to his message of repentance. 8. CALVIN, 2.Go and loose the sackcloth from thy loins. In order to confirm this prophecy by the use of a symbol, the Lord commanded Isaiah to walk naked. If Isaiah had done this of his own accord, he would have been justly ridiculed; but when he does it by the command of the Lord, we perceive nothing but what is fitted to excite admiration and to strike awe. In this nakedness, and in the signs of a similar kind, something weighty is implied. Besides, the Lord does nothing either by himself or by his servants without likewise explaining the reason; and therefore the Prophet does not merely walk naked, but points out the design which the Lord had in view in ordering him to do so. In other respects false prophets imitate the true servants of God, and put on varied and imposing shapes, to dazzle the eyes of the multitude, and gain credit to themselves; but those symbols are worthless, because God is not the author of them. This ought to be carefully observed in opposition to the Papists, who bring forward empty ceremonies instead of true sacraments. This is the rule with which we ought to meet them. If they proceed from God, we ought to embrace them, but if not, we may boldly reject them; and, indeed, they cannot be adopted without offering an insult to God, because in such cases men usurp his authority. Besides, God does not bring forward signs without the word, for what would a sacrament be if we beheld nothing but the sign? It is the doctrine alone that makes the sacrament, and therefore let us know that it is mere hypocrisy where no doctrine is taught, and that Papists act wickedly when they lay aside doctrine, and give the name of sacrament to empty ceremonies; for the Lord has connected them in such a manner that no man can separate them without infringing that order which he has enjoined. When the Lord commands him to loose the sackcloth; almost all the commentators infer from it that Isaiah at that time wore a garment of mourning, because he bewailed the distressed condition of Israel; for
15. 15. sackcloth was a mourning dress, as is evident from Joel (Joe_1:13.) Their interpretation is, that this was done in order that, in the dress of culprits, he might supplicate pardon from God, or that it was impossible for his countenance or his dress to be cheerful when his heart was sad, and he could not but be affected with the deepest grief when he beheld so great a calamity. Some think that it was his ordinary dress, because the Prophets, as Zechariah informs us, commonly wore a mantle. (Zec_13:4.) But that conjecture rests on exceedingly slight grounds, and has no great probability. It is more probable that he wore sackcloth as expressive of mourning. Judea was at that time sunk into such a state of indifference, that when men saw their brethren wretchedly distressed and wasted, still they were not affected by it, and did not think that the affliction of their brethren was a matter which at all concerned them. They still thought that they were beyond the reach of danger, and mocked at the Prophets when they threatened and foretold destruction. Hence Micah also complains that no man bewails the distresses of Israel. (Mic_1:11.) A question arises, Was this actually done, or was it merely and simply a vision which he told to the people? The general opinion is, that the Prophet never went naked, but that this was exhibited to him in a vision, and only once. They allege as a reason, that on account of heat and cold, and other inconveniences of the weather, he could not have walked naked during the whole period of three years. What if we should say that the Prophet wore clothes at home, and also in public, unless when he wished to come forth to teach, and that on such occasions he was accustomed to present to the people a spectacle of nakedness? I pay little attention to the argument, that he was unable to endure heat and cold; for God, who commanded him to do this, could easily strengthen and protect him. But they assign another reason, that nakedness would have been unbecoming in a Prophet. I answer, this nakedness was not more unbecoming than circumcision, which irreligious men might consider to be the most absurd of all sights, because it made an exposure of the uncomely parts. Yet it must not be thought that the Prophet went entirely naked, or without covering those parts which would present a revolting aspect. It was enough that the people understood what the Lord was doing, and were affected by it as something extraordinary. I am led to form this opinion by what is here said, By the hand of Isaiah; for although this mode of expression frequently occurs elsewhere, still we never find it where it does not imply something emphatic, to describe the effect produced. He places himself in the midst between God and his countrymen, so as to be the herald of a future calamity, not only in words, but likewise by a visible symbol. Nor is it superfluous that it is immediately added, He did so. I am therefore of opinion that Isaiah walked naked whenever he discharged the office of a prophet, and that he uncovered those parts which could be beheld without shame.
16. 16. So far as relates to sackcloth, although it was customary for men in private stations of life to express their guilt in this manner in adversity, yet it is probable that it was with a view to his office that Isaiah made use of this symbol to confirm his doctrine, that he might the better arouse the people from their sluggishness. If at any time the Lord chastise ourselves or our brethren, he does not enjoin us to change our raiment, but we are cruel and ( ) without natural affection, if we are not moved by the afflictions of brethren and the ruin of the Church. If we have any feeling towards God, we ought to be in sadness and tears; and if it be our duty to mourn, we ought also to exhort others and stimulate them by our example to feel the calamities of the Church, and to be touched with some ( ) compassion. 3 Then the LORD said, Just as my servant Isaiah has gone stripped and barefoot for three years, as a sign and portent against Egypt and Cush,[a] 1.BARNES, Like as - That is, as Isaiah has gone stripped of his special garment as a prophet, so shall the Egyptians and Ethiopians be stripped of all that they value, and be carried captive into Assyria. Hath walked ... three years - A great deal of difficulty has been felt in the interpretation of this place, from the strong improbability that Isaiah should have gone in this manner for a space of time so long as our translation expresses. The Septuagint renders this, As my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years, three years shall be for signs and wonders to the Egyptians and Ethiopians. The phrase in the Hebrew, three years, may either be taken in connection with the preceding part of the sentence, as in our translation, meaning that he actually walked so long; or it may be taken with that which follows, and then it will denote that he was a sign and wonder with reference to the captivity of the Egyptians and Ethiopians; and that by this symbolic action he in some way indicated that they would be carried away captive for that space of time; or, as Aben Ezra and Abarbanel suppose, that he signified that their captivity would commence after three years. Lowth supposes that it means that his walking was for three days, and that the Hebrew text bas been corrupted. Vitringa also seems to suppose that this is possible, and that a day was a symbolic sign for a year. Rosenmuller supposes that this prophetic action was continued during three years at intervals, so that the subject might be kept before the mind of the people. But the supposition that this means that the symbolic action of walking naked and barefoot continued for so long a time in any manner, is highly improbable. (1) The Hebrew does not necessarily require it. It may mean simply that his actions were a sign and wonder with reference to a three years captivity of the Egyptians. (2) It is in itself improbable that he should so long a time walk about Jerusalem expressly as a sign and wonder, when a much shorter period would have answered the purpose as well. (3) Such a sign would have hardly met the circumstances of the case. Asdod was taken. The Assyrian king was advancing.
17. 17. The Jews were in consternation and looking to Egypt for help; and amidst this agitation and alarm, there is the highest improbability that Isaiah would be required to remain a sign and wonder for the long space of three years, when decided action was needed, and when, unless prevented, the Jews would have formed a speedy alliance with the Egyptians. I suppose, therefore, that the entire sense of the phrase will be expressed by translating it, my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot, a three years sign and wonder; that is, a sign and indication that a three years calamity would come upon Egypt and Ethiopia. Whether this means that the calamity would commence in three years from that time, or that it should continue three years, perhaps we cannot determine. Grotius thinks that it means that it would occur after three years; that is, that the war between the Assyrians and Ethiopians would continue during that time only. In what manner Isaiah indicated this, is not certainly known. The conjecture of Lowth is not improbable, that it was by appearing three days naked and barefoot, and that each day denoted a year. Or it may have been that he appeared in this manner for a short period - though but once - and declared that this was the design or purport of the action. Upon Egypt ... - With reference to; or as a sign in regard to Egypt. It does not mean that he was in Egypt, but that his action had reference to Egypt. And Ethiopia - Hebrew, kush - (see the note at Isa_11:11). Whether this denotes the African Cush or Ethiopia, or whether it refers to the Cush in Arabia, cannot be determined. The latter is the more probable supposition, as it is scarcely probable that the Assyrian would extend his conquests south of Egypt so as to subdue the African Ethiopia. Probably his conquest embraced the Cush that was situated in the southern regions of Arabia. 2. PULPIT, My servant Isaiah. Isaiah shares this honorable title, "my servant," with a select few among God's saintswith Abraham (Gen_26:24), Moses (Num_12:7), Caleb (Num_14:24), Job (Job_1:8; Job_42:7, Job_42:8), Eliakim (Isa_22:20), and Zerubbabel (Hag_2:23). It is a great acknowledgment for the Creator to make to the creature, that he really does him service. Three years. Probably from B.C. 713 to B.C. 711, or during the whole of the time that Philistia, Edom, Moab, and Judah were making representations to the Egyptians and Ethiopians, and endeavoring to obtain their aid. It has been proposed, by an arbitrary emendation, to cut down the time to "three days;" but a three days' sign of the kind could not have been expected to have any important effect. The supposed "impropriety" of Isaiah's having "gone naked and barefoot" for three years arises from a misconception of the word "naked." which is not to be taken literally (see the comment on verse 2). The costume adopted would be extraordinary, especially in one of Isaiah's rank and position; but would not be in any degree "improper." It would be simply that of working men during the greater part of the day (see Exo_22:26, Exo_22:27). 3. GILL, And the Lord said,.... Here follows the explanation of the sign, and the accommodation of it to the thing signified by it:
18. 18. like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot; not wholly naked, for that would have been very indecent and dangerous indeed; but without his upper garment, as Saul, 1Sa_19:24 and David, 2Sa_6:14 or with rent and ragged clothes, and old shoes, as Jarchi (k) interprets it, and which might be only when he appeared abroad; and how long he thus walked is not certain, whether only one day, as some, or three days, as others, or three years, which is not said, though our version inclines to it; but the three years next mentioned are not to be joined to Isaiah's walking, but to the thing signified by it; for the accent "athnach" is at the word which is rendered "barefoot", and distinguishes this clause from the following. The Septuagint indeed puts the phrase "three years" into both clauses, but it only belongs to the latter: three years for a sign and wonder upon Egypt, and upon Ethiopia; that is, the prophet's walking naked and barefoot was a sign that three years after this Egypt and Ethiopia should be subdued by the Assyrians; or, that so long he should be in subduing them, or their calamities should last such a term of time. This sign was only seen by the Jews, for whose sake chiefly this prophecy was, to take off their dependence on the above nations; though probably this might be made known to the Egyptians and Ethiopians. 4. HENRY, The exposition of this sign, Isa_20:3, Isa_20:4. It was intended to signify that the Egyptians and the Ethiopians should be led away captive by the king of Assyria, thus stripped, or in rags, and very shabby clothing, as Isaiah was. God calls him his servant Isaiah, because in this matter particularly he had approved himself God's willing, faithful, obedient servant; and for this very thing, which perhaps others laughed at him for, God gloried in him. To obey is better than sacrifice; it pleases God and praises him more, and shall be more praised by him. Isaiah is said to have walked naked and barefoot three years, whenever in that time he appeared as a prophet. But some refer the three years, not to the sign, but to the thing signified: He has walked naked and barefoot; there is a stop in the original; provided he did so once that was enough to give occasion to all about him to enquire what was the meaning of his doing so; or, as some think, he did it three days, a day for a year; and this for a three years' sign and wonder, for a sign of that which should be done three years afterwards or which should be three years in the doing. Three campaigns successively shall the Assyrian army make, in spoiling the Egyptians and Ethiopians, and carrying them away captive in this barbarous manner, not only the soldiers taken in the field of battle, but the inhabitants, young and old; and it being a very piteous sight, and such as must needs move compassion in those that had the least degree of tenderness left them to see those who had gone all their days well dressed now stripped, and scarcely having rags to cover their nakedness, that circumstance of their captivity is particularly taken notice of, and foretold, the more to affect those to whom this prophecy was delivered. It is particularly said to be to the shame of Egypt (v. 4), because the Egyptians were a proud people, and therefore when they did fall into disgrace it was the more shameful to them; and the higher they had lifted up themselves the lower was their fall, both in their own eyes and in the eyes of others. 5. JAMISON, three years Isaiahs symbolical action did not continue all this time, but at intervals, to keep it before the peoples mind during that period [Rosenmuller]. Rather, join three years with sign, a three years sign, that is, a sign that a three years calamity would come on Egypt and Ethiopia [Barnes], (Isa_8:18). This is the only instance of a strictly symbolical act performed by Isaiah. With later prophets, as Jeremiah and Ezekiel, such acts were common. In some cases they were performed, not literally, but only in prophetic vision. wonder rather, omen; conveying a threat as to the future [G. V. Smith].
19. 19. upon in reference to, against. 6. K&D, It is not till Isaiah has carried out the divine instructions, that he learns the reason for this command to strip himself, and the length of time that he is to continue so stripped. And Jehovah said, As my servant Yesha'yahu goeth naked and barefooted, a sign and type for three years long over Egypt and over Ethiopia, so will the king of Asshur carry away the prisoners of Egypt and the exiles of Ethiopia, children and old men, naked and barefooted, and with their seat uncovered - a shame to Egypt. The expression as he goeth (ca'asher halac) stands here at the commencement of the symbolical action, but it is introduced as if with a retrospective glance at its duration for three years, unless indeed the preterite halac stands here, as it frequently does, to express what has already commenced, and is still continuing and customary (compare, for example, Job_1:4 and Psa_1:1). The strange and unseemly dress of the prophet, whenever he appeared in his official capacity for three whole years, was a prediction of the fall of the Egypto- Ethiopian kingdom, which was to take place at the end of these three years. Egypt and Ethiopia are as closely connected here as Israel and Judah in Isa_11:12. They were at that time one kingdom, so that the shame of Egypt was the shame of Ethiopia also. Ervah is a shameful nakedness, and ervath Mitzrayim is in apposition to all that precedes it in Isa_20:4. Sheth is the seat or hinder part, as in 2Sa_10:4, from shathah, to set or seat; it is a substantive form, like , , , , with the third radical letter dropt. Chashuphay has the same ay as the words in Isa_19:9; Jdg_5:15; Jer_22:14, which can hardly be regarded as constructive forms, as Ewald, Knobel, and Gesenius suppose (although of the construct has arisen from ,) but rather as a singular form with a collective signification. The emendations suggested, viz., chasuphe by Olshausen, and chasuph with a connecting i by Meier, are quite unnecessary. 7. PULPIT, The insufficiency of the stronger. Assyria attacked Ashdod with designs on Judaea. Judaea rested on Egypt and Ethiopia; but these "powers" would be utterly defeated by Assyria, and their citizens led away into captivity with every circumstance of humiliation and shame. In that hour of fear and humiliation (Isa_20:5) the inhabitants of Judaea would be constrained to argue from the insufficiency of Egypt and Ethiopia to their own helplessness. If such strong nations as these are ignominiously overthrown, "how shall we escape?" We conclude I. THAT TIMES OF SEVERE TRIAL AWAIT US ALL. Not only collectively but individually considered. As separate, individual souls we must anticipate that the future has in store for us not only the pleasant, the gratifying, the successful, but also the unpleasant, the painful, even the overwhelming. Some of the more crushing sorrows it may be our fortune to escape, but every one of us will have his share. Sickness which
20. 20. threatens to be fatal; bitter disappointment which appears to throw the whole future path into darkest shadow; bereavement which takes away the very light of our eyes; the sudden loss which strips the tree of branch as well as bloom; the financial or (what is a thousand times worse) the moral failure of beloved friend or near relation; the last illness unexpectedly arriving and extinguishing many a cherished purpose; the powerful temptation inviting and almost constraining to folly, or vice, or crime;one or more el these things, or things as bad as these, will certainly overtake us all. II. THAT THOSE WHO ARE STRONGER THAN WE ARE SOMETIMES FOUND TO BREAK BENEATH THE BLOW. We hear or read of men who in mental capacity, in educational advantages, in worldly endowments, or in the number of their friends, are superior to ourselves, but who cannot stand the strain of their trial. Either their health breaks down, or their sanity seriously suffers, or their faith fails, or their courage and energy succumb, or their moral character is lost, and consequently their reputation is shattered, never to be restored. III. THAT IF THESE STRONGER SOULS ARE BEATEN, WE MUST BE IN DANGER OF DEFEAT. If Egypt and Ethiopia are led into captivity, how shall Judaea be delivered"how shall we escape?" The storm in which such noble vessels founder will wreck our fragile bark. On any ordinary human calculations we cannot hope to be victorious where spirits so much stronger and wiser than we are have been crushed. But we need not yield to despondency; if we are the disciples and followers of Jesus Christ, and if, therefore, "the Lord is on our side," we may find relief and rest in the thought IV. THAT WE HAVE A SAFE REFUGE IN AN ALMIGHTY SAVIOR. So long as Judea was faithful to Jehovah, she had no need to be afraid of Assyria, and she could afford to witness the overthrow of the Egyptian and Ethiopian armies. So long as we are loyal to our Divine Lord we may go fearlessly forward into the future. If the good Shepherd"the great Shepherd of the sheep"be our Guardian, we will "fear no evil," though we walk through the valley of the shadow of death, though the darkest shadows shut us round.C. 8. KRETZMANN, And the Lord said, Like as My servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years, to bring home with great emphasis the lesson which the Lord wished to convey, for a sign and wonder upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia, for a portentous type against the double kingdom,
21. 21. 9. POOLE, Walked naked and barefoot three years; not constantly, but when he went abroad among the people, to whom this was appointed for a sign. Some think it was only three days, a day being usually put for a year in prophetical scriptures, as Num_14:33,34 Eze 4:4-6. But although a day be put for a year, yet a year is never put for a day. A sign; either, 1. When this judgment should come, to wit, three years after this prophecy. Or, 2. How long it should continue, for three years; for some have observed that the Chaldeans spent so much time in conquering Egypt and Ethiopia. 10. CALVIN, 3.Three years. Why for such a period? Because that was the time granted to the Egyptians and Ethiopians, during which the Lord gave them a truce for repentance, and at the same time wished to make trial of the obedience of his people, that without delay they might relinquish unlawful aid, and that, though the Egyptians and Ethiopians appeared to be secure, they might know that they were not far from ruin. The Lord intended also to expose the rebellion of wicked men; for undoubtedly many persons made an open display of their impiety when they despised the nakedness of the prophet, and the godly, on the other hand, moved by the sight of his nakedness, though the prosperity of the Ethiopians was delightfully attractive, still did not hesitate to fix their attention on the word. What they were bound to consider was not the nakedness itself, but the mark which the Lord had put upon it; in the same manner as, in the visible sacraments, we ought to behold those things which are invisible. 4 so the king of Assyria will lead away stripped and barefoot the Egyptian captives and Cushiteexiles, young and old, with buttocks baredto Egypts shame. 1.BARNES, So shall the king of Assyria - The emphasis here is on the word so. As Isaiah has walked naked, that is, stripped off his usual clothing, so shall the Egyptians and Ethiopians be led away stripped of all their possessions.
22. 22. The Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives - The Egyptians and Ethiopians, or Cushites, were often united in an alliance, and appear to have been when this prophecy was delivered. Thus Nah_3:8 : Ethiopia and Egypt were her strength, and it was infinite; Put and Lubim were thy helpers. To the shame of Egypt - It shall be a disgrace to them to be subdued, and to be carried captive in so humiliating a manner. It is remarked by Belzoni (Operations and Recent Discoveries in Egypt and Nubia), that in the figures on the remains of their temples, prisoners are often represented as naked, or only in aprons, with disheveled hair, and with their hands chained. He also remarks, that on a bas-relief, on the recently-discovered graves of the kings of Thebes, a multitude of Egyptian and Ethiopian prisoners are represented - showing that Egypt and Ethiopia were sometimes allied, alike in mutual defense and in bondage (compare Isa_47:2, and Nah_3:5). 2. PULPIT, So shall the King of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives. In Sennacherib's annals for the year B.C. 701, twelve years after this prophecy was given, we find the following passage: "The kings of Egypt, and the archers, chariots, and horsemen of the King of Meroe, a force without number, gathered and came to the aid of Ekron. In the neighborhood of Eltekeh their ranks were arrayed before me, and they urged on their soldiers. In the service of Asshur, my lord, I fought with them, and I accomplished their overthrow. The charioteers and sons of the kings of Egypt, and the charioteers of the King of Meroe, alive in the midst of the battle, my hand captured". Young and old. The intermixture of young and old, of full-grown males with women leading children by the hand or carrying them upon the shoulder, in the Assyrian sculptures, strikes us even on the most cursory inspection of them. Naked and barefoot. Assyrian captives are ordinarily represented "barefoot." Most commonly they wear a single tunic, reaching from the neck to the knees, or sometimes to the ankles, and girt about the waist with a girdle. It is probable that Egyptian and Ethiopian prisoners would be even more scantily clad, since the ordinary Egyptian tunic began at the waist and ended considerably above the knee. 3. GILL, So shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives,.... As beasts are led or driven, being taken prisoners, and carried captive by the king of Assyria, namely Sargon, whoever is intended by him: young and old; without any regard to age, sparing none for their tender years or gray hairs: naked and barefoot; as prisoners of war commonly are, being stripped by their conquerors of their clothes, and having only a few rags given them to cover their nakedness with, and obliged to travel without shoes on their feet:
23. 23. even with their buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt; having no clothes on them to cover those parts; or the skirts of their garments cut off, as David's servants were by the Ammonites, 2Sa_10:4 and this to humble and mortify the pride of the Egyptians. 4. JAMISON, buttocks uncovered Belzoni says that captives are found represented thus on Egyptian monuments (Isa_47:2, Isa_47:3; Nah_3:5, Nah_3:8, Nah_3:9), where as here, Egypt and Ethiopia are mentioned as in alliance. 5. KRETZMANN, so shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, as foretold by the symbolic act of Isaiah, even with their buttocks uncovered, as a sign of extreme disgrace, 2Sa_10:4-5, to the shame of Egypt. 6. POOLE, Lead away, like beasts, of which this word is commonly used. Their buttocks uncovered; having their garments cut off by the middle, to the discovery of their buttocks and their secret parts. Compare 2Sa_10:4 Isa_47:2. 7. CALVIN, 4.The captivity of Egypt and the removal of Ethiopia. (61) The words and are taken collectively, to denote the multitude of captives and emigrants. Next, he shews that there will be no distinction of age, declaring that the old, as well as the young, shall be led into captivity. 5 Those who trusted in Cush and boasted in Egypt will be dismayed and put to shame. 1.BARNES, And they shall be afraid - The Jews, or the party or faction among the Jews, that were expecting aid from allied Ethiopia and Egypt. When they shall see them vanquished, they shall apprehend a similar danger to themselves; and they shall be ashamed that they ever confided in a people so little able to aid them, instead of trusting in the arm of God. Egypt their glory - Their boast, as if Egypt was able to save them. The word rendered here glory ( tiph'ereth) means properly, ornament, praise, honor; and then it may mean the object of glory, or that in which people boast or confide. That is its sense here (compare Isa_10:12; Isa_13:19; Zec_12:7).
24. 24. 2. PULPIT, They shall be afraid and ashamed. Those who have resorted to Egypt and Ethiopia for aid shall be "ashamed" of their folly in doing so, and "afraid" of its consequences (see the last clause of Isa_20:6). 2B. PULPIT, The bitter experience of all who trust in man. The sin of Judah, in its latter days, was its reliance on Egypt for help rather than on God. In alarm at the advance of Assyria, the natural alliance was with Egypt; but alliance with any world-power was unworthy of a nation whose history had been so full of Divine deliverings and defendings as that of the Jews. And Egypt could not help. It was a broken reed. A type of all merely human helpers; for "cursed is the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord." Hoses represents Israel as finding out how vain is the help of man, and turning to God with this penitential promise, "Asshur shall not save us; we will not ride upon horses: neither will we say any more to the work of our hands, Ye are our gods." The following three points open up lines of thought and illustration, and should be sufficiently suggestive without detailed treatment. I. WE CANNOT TRUST MAN, FOR WE CANNOT BE SURE OF HIS GOOD WILL. These two dangers are ever before us: 1. The man who seems willing to serve us may be deceiving us, and really serving his own ends, setting his interests before ours. 2. And if a man begins sincerely to serve us, we have no security that his good will is maintained, and presently he may take advantage of us. We cannot read hearts. And hearts do not always keep steadfast. So "put not your trust in princes, nor in the sons of men, in whom there is no help." II. WE CANNOT TRUST MAN, FOR WE CANNOT BE SURE THAT HIS ABILITY MATCHES HIS WILL. So often we find in life that men who could, will not help us, and men who would, cannot. With this sort of feeling in his mind the sufferer came to the "Man Christ Jesus," saying, "Ifthou wilt, thou canst make me clean." III. WE CAN NEVER RECKON ON MAN IF HE IS AGAINST GOD. Such a man can never be any help to us. The Jews forsook God to seek help from a godless nation, and it was bound to prove a bitter and
25. 25. humiliating experience. Man may be, and often is, God's agent for helping us; but then our trusting is in God who sends, and not in the man who may be sent to do his bidding.R.T. 3. GILL, And they shall be afraid and ashamed,.... That is, those that trusted and depended upon the Egyptians and Ethiopians, particularly the Jews after mentioned, shall be "afraid" that it will be their turn next, that they also shall be taken and carried captive; and they shall be "ashamed" that they have put their trust and confidence in those nations, and not in the Lord: of Ethiopia their expectation; from whom they expected assistance and protection, particularly when Tirhakah king of Ethiopia went out against the king of Assyria, that he would have been a match for him, and have overcome him, and so have freed them from such a powerful enemy: and of Egypt their glory; who was their ally, and a very potent one, and in whom they gloried; but now should be ashamed, when both those people on whom they relied were carried captive. 4. HENRY, The use and application of this, Isa_20:5, Isa_20:6. 1. All that had any dependence upon, or correspondence with, Egypt and Ethiopia, should now be ashamed of them, and afraid of having any thing to do with them. Those countries that were in danger of being overrun by the Assyrians expected that Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, with his numerous forces, would put a stop to the progress of their victorious arms, and be a barrier to his neighbours; and with yet more assurance they gloried that Egypt, a kingdom so famous for policy and prowess, would do their business, would oblige them to raise the siege of Ashdod and retire with precipitation. But, instead of this, by attempting to oppose the king of Assyria they did but expose themselves and make their country a prey to him. Hereupon all about them were ashamed that ever they promised themselves any advantage from two such weak and cowardly nations, and were more afraid now than ever they were of the growing greatness of the king of Assyria, before whom Egypt and Ethiopia proved but as briers and thorns put to stop a consuming fire, which do but make it burn the more strongly. Note, Those who make any creature their expectation and glory, and so put it in the place of God, will sooner or later be ashamed of it, and their disappointment in it will but increase their fear. See Eze_29:6, Eze_29:7. 5. JAMISON, they the Philistine allies of Egypt who trusted in it for help against Assyria. A warning to the party among the Jews, who, though Judah was then the subordinate ally of Assyria, were looking to Egypt as a preferable ally (Isa_30:7). Ethiopia was their expectation; for Palestine had not yet obtained, but hoped for alliance with it. Egypt was their glory, that is, boast (Isa_13:19); for the alliance with it was completed. 6. BI, Unreasonable expectations
26. 26. A great deal of the discomfort, a large proportion of the disappointments of the world, may be traced to unreasonable expectationsto the fact that men will persist in expecting what they have no right to expect at all, or to expect in that precise form or degree. Indeed, so many of the expectations cherished in this world are so vain and unreasonable, involving those who entertain them in such necessary disappointment, that someone has sardonically observed, Blessed is the man who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed. But, while we would not take so gloomy a view of human life as this, we cannot help feeling that much of the worry and mortification of life may be accounted for by our expecting what we have no right to expect. We all suffer from the same complaint, in larger or lesser degree. The symptoms differ in different individuals; the disease is radically the same. Young and old, rich and poor, learned and ignorant, masters and servants, buyers and sellers, husbands and wives, parents and children, pastors and peopleall, in some way or other, and to some extent or other, are the victims of unreasonable expectations. Life with all of them would be a brighter, smoother, pleasanter thing, if they expected less. As we grow older we ought to grow wiser in this respect. Having regard only to the ordinary intercourse and social relationships of lifehow many complaints would be hushed, how much irritation would be allayed, how much needless mortification be averted, how much resentment cease, how many fancied slights and injuries appear inconsiderable, if, instead of brooding over our rights, which we imagine have been withheld or invaded, we were to sit down, and quietly, dispassionately consider what, living in a world like this, we might, on the whole, reasonably expect. If we were thus to inquire we should find that we were getting more than we deserved; and that, for the most part, we were being treated by others quite as fairly, honourably, and tenderly as we were in the habit of treating them. (T. M. Morris.) Unreasonable expectations in relation to religion The subject of unreasonable expectations is of almost illimitable extent, and in further dwelling upon it I would limit my remarks to three points I. THE THINGS WHICH GODS PEOPLE UNREASONABLY EXPECT. Nothing can be more plain than that our expectations as Christians should be limited by the teaching and promise of Gods Word. We are safe so long as we rest in the promise of God. I. It is unreasonable to expect that you can place yourselves in any false position, form any unworthy association, engage in any questionable occupation, and be saved from the natural consequences of so doing. Lot was a very good man, but he made a very great mistake. If, in your legitimate business,if, in sustaining any of the just relationships of life, you meet with danger or temptation, you may reasonably expect that God will grant you all the necessary assistance and protection. But if the danger or temptation be of your own seeking, it is likely that God will teach you wisdom by leaving you to endure the consequences of your rashness or perversity. It is unreasonable for you to expect that you can touch pitch and not be defiled, take fire in your bosom and not be burned, nourish a viper and not be stung. 2. It is unreasonable to expect that you should grow in grace, or realise any very high degree of enjoyment in the Divine life, if all the while you are neglecting or insufficiently using the means of growth, the sources of enjoyment which are placed within your reach. 3. It is unreasonable to expect in Christian life what our Master expressly warns us against expecting. Many seem disappointed because they do not find the way of Christian pilgrimage perfectly smooth and pleasant from its commencement to its close. Your Master tells you plainly that you have to lay your account with suffering and trial, with disappointment and danger. The Christian life is never represented as one of ease and self-indulgence, but rather
27. 27. as a state of warfare. You are treading in the footsteps of those who, in uninterrupted succession, have walked in the same rough way. 4. I might easily enumerate many other unreasonable expectations in which Christians are tempted to indulge. It is unreasonable to expect results from unassisted human nature which can only flow from Divine grace. It is unreasonable to expect from an attempted conformity to the law what can only be secured by a simple dependence on the Gospel. It is unreasonable to expect that we shall find on earth what can be only realised in heaven, or that we can derive from any inferior and created source what can only be found in the centre and sum of all excellency, the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. II. THE THINGS WHICH ARE UNREASONABLY EXPECTED OF GODS PEOPLE. 1. There are those who make it a matter of reproach against religion, and prefer it as an excuse for their unbelief, that the Gospel, the religion of the Cross, does not come up in sundry particulars to their idea of what a religion which claims mans acceptance and confidence ought to be. Such objections we may dismiss as the fruit of unreasonable expectations, for all, save the most shallow and pretentious of such objectors, are ready to confess that there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in their philosophy. 2. There are those who do not go so far as to object against religion as unreasonable, who seem to resent it as an injury that any measure of mystery should attach to any of the statements of Scripture. In reply to this, several things may be said. It might be said that, taking into account what this revelation professes to be, it was reasonable to expect that the truths communicated, while intelligible on the one side, should lose themselves in mystery on the other. And it might be further remarked, in reference to many of those who thus object, that they make but very little use of such light as they confessedly have. Is it not the part of reason first of all to inquire whether the Bible be an authentic and authoritative revelation from heaven to earth, and then, if its claims to be so regarded are substantiated to the satisfaction of reason, is it not the very part and office of reason to sit submissively at the feet of the Divine Teacher and learn of Him? 3. There are many who but very slightly interest themselves in the truth which Christians hold, who seem to take much pleasure in narrowly scrutinising the lives which Christians live. The real or alleged inconsistencies of professing Christians do not afford any ground of reasonable objection against the Gospel, or any valid excuse for its continued rejection. In judging of any practical system, we must have reference to what it professes to be, and to accomplish. If you confine attention to those who are the sincere and genuine followers of the Lamb, it is unreasonable to expect that they should manifest in this world an absolute perfection of character. Such perfection, we believe, can be only realised when this body of sin and death shall have been laid aside. III. THE THINGS WHICH THOSE WHO ARE NOT GODS PEOPLE UNREASONABLY EXPECT FOR THEMSELVES. 1. It is unreasonable to expect that anything which the world contains can meet the need, or satisfy the desire, of mans immortal soul. 2. It is unreasonable to expect that in religion anyone can serve two masters. No such thing as neutrality is possible in religion, and, strictly speaking, there is no such thing as indecision. 3. It is unreasonable to expect that sinful men can satisfy the requirements of the law, and avert its penalty, by any obedience they can render, by any penance they can endure.
28. 28. 4. It is unreasonable to expect that those who, enjoying Gospel light, die despising Gospel grace, will be in any wise benefited by the uncovenanted mercies of God. 5. It is unreasonable to expect that you can spend a sinful, worldly life, and men have a comfortable death and a happy eternity. 6. It is unreasonable to expect that, because you pass muster in this world, and occupy a moderately creditable position among your fellow men, that therefore you will do moderately well ]n another world; and that, if you do not shine forth conspicuously with the best, you will go through the gates into the city, unnoticed among the crowd. 7. It is unreasonable to expect that, because sentence is not speedily executed against an evil work, that therefore it never will be; and that, because the present order of things has continued so long, that therefore it will continue forever. (T. M. Morris.). 7. PULPIT, The insufficiency of the stronger. Assyria attacked Ashdod with designs on Judaea. Judaea rested on Egypt and Ethiopia; but these "powers" would be utterly defeated by Assyria, and their citizens led away into captivity with every circumstance of humiliation and shame. In that hour of fear and humiliation (Isa_20:5) the inhabitants of Judaea would be constrained to argue from the insufficiency of Egypt and Ethiopia to their own helplessness. If such strong nations as these are ignominiously overthrown, "how shall we escape?" We conclude I. THAT TIMES OF SEVERE TRIAL AWAIT US ALL. Not only collectively but individually considered. As separate, individual souls we must anticipate that the future has in store for us not only the pleasant, the gratifying, the successful, but also the unpleasant, the painful, even the overwhelming. Some of the more crushing sorrows it may be our fortune to escape, but every one of us will have his share. Sickness which threatens to be fatal; bitter disappointment which appears to throw the whole future path into darkest shadow; bereavement which takes away the very light of our eyes; the sudden loss which strips the tree of branch as well as bloom; the financial or (what is a thousand times worse) the moral failure of beloved friend or near relation; the last illness unexpectedly arriving and extinguishing many a cherished purpose; the powerful temptation inviting and almost constraining to folly, or vice, or crime;one or more el these things, or things as bad as these, will certainly overtake us all. II. THAT THOSE WHO ARE STRONGER THAN WE ARE SOMETIMES FOUND TO BREAK BENEATH THE BLOW. We hear or read of men who in mental capacity, in educational advantages, in worldly endowments, or in the number of their friends, are superior to ourselves, but who cannot stand the strain of their trial. Either their health breaks down, or their sanity seriously suffers, or their faith fails, or their
29. 29. courage and energy succumb, or their moral character is lost, and consequently their reputation is shattered, never to be restored. III. THAT IF THESE STRONGER SOULS ARE BEATEN, WE MUST BE IN DANGER OF DEFEAT. If Egypt and Ethiopia are led into captivity, how shall Judaea be delivered"how shall we escape?" The storm in which such noble vessels founder will wreck our fragile bark. On any ordinary human calculations we cannot hope to be victorious where spirits so much stronger and wiser than we are have been crushed. But we need not yield to despondency; if we are the disciples and followers of Jesus Christ, and if, therefore, "the Lord is on our side," we may find relief and rest in the thought IV. THAT WE HAVE A SAFE REFUGE IN AN ALMIGHTY SAVIOR. So long as Judea was faithful to Jehovah, she had no need to be afraid of Assyria, and she could afford to witness the overthrow of the Egyptian and Ethiopian armies. So long as we are loyal to our Divine Lord we may go fearlessly forward into the future. If the good Shepherd"the great Shepherd of the sheep"be our Guardian, we will "fear no evil," though we walk through the valley of the shadow of death, though the darkest shadows shut us round.C. 8. KRETZMANN, And they, the inhabitants of Palestine, also the Jews, who looked to Egypt as a possible ally against Assyria, shall be afraid and ashamed of Ethiopia, their expectation, finding themselves disappointed in their hopes of help from this quarter, and of Egypt, their glory, of whose power they had boasted and on whose strength they had relied. 9. POOLE, They; all they that shall trust to them, and glory in them, as appears from the following words; the pronoun they being put indefinitely here, as it is Isa_2:19, and elsewhere. But under this general expression the Israelites not only are comprehended, but seem to be principally intended, because to them this prophecy was delivered, and they were eminently guilty of this sin; of which see Isa_30:2 31:1. 10. CALVIN, 5.And they shall be afraid. He now shews for whose benefit he had foretold these things about the Egyptians and Ethiopians. It was in order that the Jews might learn amidst their afflictions to hope in God, and might not have recourse to foreign aid, which the Lord had forbidden.
30. 30. 6 In that day the people who live on this coast will say, See what has happened to those we relied on, those we fled to for help and deliverance from the king of Assyria! How then can we escape? 1.BARNES, And the inhabitant - The dwellers generally. Of this isle - The word 'iy isle is used here in the sense of coast, or maritime country, and is evidently applied to Palestine, or the land of Canaan, which is a narrow coast lying on the Mediterranean. That the word is often used in this sense, and may be applied to a maritime country, see the notes at Isa_13:22; Isa_41:1. The connection here requires us to understand it of Palestine. Shall say ... - Shall condemn their own folly in trusting in Egypt, and seeking deliverance there. And how shall we escape? - They shall be alarmed for their own safety, for the very nation on which they had relied had been made captive. And when the stronger had been subdued, how could the feeble and dependent escape a similar overthrow and captivity? All this was designed to show them the folly of trusting in the aid of another nation, and to lead them to put confidence in the God of their fathers. 2. PULPIT, The inhabitant of this isle; rather, of this coast (Knobel, Hitzig, Kay); i.e. of Palestine generally, which was a mere strip of coast compared with Egypt and Ethiopia. Sargon speaks of all the four powers who at this time "sought to Egypt," as "dwelling beside the sea". Such is our expectation; rather, so hath it gone with our expectation; i.e; with Egypt and Ethiopia. 3. GILL, And the inhabitants of this isle shall say, in that day,.... Not of Ashdod, Isa_20:1 or the isle of Caphtor, Jer_47:4 but the land of Israel, as both Jarchi and Kimchi interpret it; so called, because it bordered on the sea, as such countries are sometimes called isles; see Jer_25:22. Ben Melech interprets it of Jerusalem, and observes that the word signifies a place or country, whether it has a river or sea encompassing it, or not; besides, the land of Canaan had the Mediterranean sea on one side of it, and the sea of Galilee and Tiberias on the other, and was moreover separated from all other countries by the power, providence, and presence of God:
31. 31. behold, such