Isa 45:9-13 | KD | STEP | The promise is now continued in the third strophe ( ), and increases more and more in the distinctness of its terms; but just as in , it opens with a reproof of that pusillanimity ( ; cf., ; ; ), which goes so far to complain of the ways of Jehovah. “Woe to him that quarreleth with his Maker - a pot among the pots of earthenware? Can the clay indeed say to him that shapeth it, What makest thou? and thy work, He hath no hands? Woe to him that saith to his father, What begettest thou? and to the woman, What bringest thou forth?” The comparison drawn between a man as the work of God and the clay-work of a potter suggested itself all the more naturally, inasmuch as the same word yootseer was applied to God as Creator, and also to a potter ( figulus ). The word cheres signifies either a sherd, or fragment of earthenware ( ), or an earthenware vessel ( ; ). In the passage before us, where the point of comparison is not the fragmentary condition, but the earthen character of the material () 'adâmâh ), the latter is intended: the man, who complains of God, is nothing but a vessel of clay, and, more than that, a perishable vessel among many others of the very same kind. The questions which follow are meant to show the folly of this complaining. Can it possibly occur to the clay to raise a complaint against him who has it in hand, that he has formed it in such and such a manner, or for such and such a purpose (compare , “Why hast thou made me thus”)? To the words “or thy work” we must supply num dicet (shall it say); pō‛al is a manufacture, as in Isa 1:31. The question is addressed to the maker, as those in are to the husbandman: Can the thing made by thee, O man, possibly say in a contemptuous tone, “He has no hands?” - a supposition the ridiculous absurdity of which condemns it at once; and yet it is a very suitable analogy to the conduct of the man who complains of God. In a woe is denounced upon those who resemble a man who should say to his own father, What children dost thou beget? or to a wife, What dost thou bring forth? ( techı̄lı̄n an emphatic, and for the most part pausal, fut. parag. , as in Rth 2:8; Rth 3:18). This would be the rudest and most revolting attack upon an inviolably tender and private relation; and yet Israel does this when it makes the hidden providential government of its God the object of expostulation.

‏ Isaiah 45:9-13

The promise is now continued in the third strophe (Isa 45:9-13), and increases more and more in the distinctness of its terms; but just as in Isa 29:15-21, it opens with a reproof of that pusillanimity (Isa 40:27; cf., Isa 51:13; Isa 49:24; Isa 58:3), which goes so far to complain of the ways of Jehovah. “Woe to him that quarreleth with his Maker - a pot among the pots of earthenware? Can the clay indeed say to him that shapeth it, What makest thou? and thy work, He hath no hands? Woe to him that saith to his father, What begettest thou? and to the woman, What bringest thou forth?” The comparison drawn between a man as the work of God and the clay-work of a potter suggested itself all the more naturally, inasmuch as the same word yootseer was applied to God as Creator, and also to a potter (figulus). The word cheres signifies either a sherd, or fragment of earthenware (Isa 30:14), or an earthenware vessel (Jer 19:1; Pro 26:23). In the passage before us, where the point of comparison is not the fragmentary condition, but the earthen character of the material ()'adâmâh), the latter is intended: the man, who complains of God, is nothing but a vessel of clay, and, more than that, a perishable vessel among many others of the very same kind. ^{▼▼The Septuagint reads shin for sin in both instances, and introduces here the very unsuitable thought already contained in Isa 28:24, “Shall the ploughman plough the land the whole day?”}

The questions which follow are meant to show the folly of this complaining. Can it possibly occur to the clay to raise a complaint against him who has it in hand, that he has formed it in such and such a manner, or for such and such a purpose (compare Rom 9:20, “Why hast thou made me thus”)? To the words “or thy work” we must supply num dicet (shall it say); pō‛al is a manufacture, as in Isa 1:31. The question is addressed to the maker, as those in Isa 7:25 are to the husbandman: Can the thing made by thee, O man, possibly say in a contemptuous tone, “He has no hands?” - a supposition the ridiculous absurdity of which condemns it at once; and yet it is a very suitable analogy to the conduct of the man who complains of God. In Isa 45:10 a woe is denounced upon those who resemble a man who should say to his own father, What children dost thou beget? or to a wife, What dost thou bring forth? (techı̄lı̄n an emphatic, and for the most part pausal, fut. parag., as in Rth 2:8; Rth 3:18). This would be the rudest and most revolting attack upon an inviolably tender and private relation; and yet Israel does this when it makes the hidden providential government of its God the object of expostulation. Isa 45:11-12

After this double woe, which is expressed in general terms, but the application of which is easily made, the words of Jehovah are directly addressed to the presumptuous criticizers. Isa 45:11 “Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker, Ask me what is to come; let my sons and the work of my hands be committed to me!” The names by which He calls Himself express his absolute blamelessness, and His absolute right of supremacy over Israel. שׁאלוּני is an imperative, like שׁמעוּני in Gen 23:8; the third person would be written שׁאלוּני. The meaning is: If ye would have any information or satisfaction concerning the future (“things to come,” Isa 41:23; Isa 44:7), about which ye can neither know nor determine anything of yourselves, inquire of me. צוּה with an accusative of the person, and על of the thing, signifies to commit anything to the care of another (1Ch 22:12). The fault-finders in Israel were to leave the people of whom Jehovah was the Maker (a retrospective allusion to Isa 45:10 and Isa 45:9), in the hands of Him who has created everything, and on whom everything depends. Isa 45:12 “I, I have made the earth, and created men upon it; I, my hands have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I called forth.” ידי אני, according to Ges. §121, 3, is equivalent to my hands, and mine alone - a similar arrangement of words to those in Gen 24:27; 2Ch 28:10; Ecc 2:15. Hitzig is wrong in his rendering, “all their host do I command.” That of Ewald is the correct one, “did I appoint;” for tsivvâsh, followed by an accusative of the person, means to give a definite order or command to any one, the command in this case being the order to come into actual existence (= esse jussi, cf., Psa 33:9). Isa 45:13

He who created all things, and called all things into existence, had also raised up this Cyrus, whose victorious career had increased the anxieties and fears of the exiles, instead of leading them to lift up their heads, because their redemption was drawing nigh. “I, I have raised him up in righteousness, and all his ways shall I make smooth: He will build my city, and release my banished ones, not for price nor for reward, saith Jehovah of hosts.” All the anxieties of the exiles are calmed by the words “in righteousness,” which trace back the revolutions that Cyrus was causing to the righteousness of Jehovah, i.e., to His interposition, which was determined by love alone, and tended directly to the salvation of His people, and in reality to that of all nations. And they are fully quieted by the promise, which is now expressed in the clearest and most unequivocal words, that Cyrus would build up Jerusalem again, and set the captivity free (gâlūth, as in Isa 20:4), and that without redemption with money (Isa 52:3) - a clear proof that Jehovah had not only raised up Cyrus himself, but had put his spirit within him, i.e., had stirred up within him the resolution to do this (see the conclusion to the books of Chronicles, and the introduction to that of Ezra). This closes the first half of our sixth prophecy.