‏ Isaiah 49:1-6

Isa 49:1-3

The very same person who was introduced by Jehovah in Isa 42:1. here speaks for himself, commencing thus in Isa 49:1-3 : “Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye nations afar off: Jehovah hath called me from the womb; from my mother’s lap hath He remembered my name. And He made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of His hand hath He hid me, and made me into a polished shaft; in His quiver hath He concealed me. And He said to me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, thou in whom I glorify myself.” Although the speaker is called Israel in Isa 49:3, he must not be regarded as either a collective person representing all Israel, or as the collective personality of the kernel of Israel, which answered to its true idea. It is not the former, because in Isa 49:5 he is expressly distinguished from the nation itself, which is the immediate object of his special work as restorer and (according to Isa 49:8 and Isa 42:6) covenant-mediator also; not the latter, because the nation, whose restoration he effects, according to Isa 49:5, was not something distinct from the collective personality of the “servant of Jehovah” in a national sense, but rather the entire body of the “servants of Jehovah” or remnant of Israel (see, for example, Isa 65:8-16). Moreover, it cannot be either of these, because what he affirms of himself is expressed in such terms of individuality, that they cannot be understood as employed in a collective sense at all, more especially where he speaks of his mother’s womb. In every other case in which Israel is spoken of in this way, we find only “from the womb” (mibbeten, Isa 44:2, Isa 44:24; Isa 56:3, along with minnı̄ - racham; also Isa 48:8), without the addition of אם (mother), which is quite unsuitable to the collective body of the nation (except in such allegorical connections as Isa 51:1-2, and Eze 16:3). Is it then possibly the prophet, who is here speaking of himself and refers in Isa 49:1 to his own mother (compare אמּי in Jer 15:10; Jer 20:14, Jer 20:17)? This is very improbable, if only because the prophet, who is the medium of the word of God in these prophecies, has never placed himself in the foreground before. In Isa 40:6 he merely speaks of himself indirectly; in Isa 44:26, even if he refer to himself at all (which we greatly doubt), it is only objectively; and in Isa 48:16, the other person, into whose words the words of Jehovah pass, cannot be the prophet, for the simple reason that the transition of the words of Jehovah into those of His messenger is essentially different in this instance from the otherwise frequent interchange of the words of Jehovah and those of His prophet, and also because the messenger of Jehovah speaks of himself there, after the “former things” have come to pass, as the mediator (either in word or deed) of the “new things” which were never heard of before, but are to be expected now; whereas the author of these addresses was also the prophet of the “former things,” and therefore the messenger referred to rises up within the course of sacred history predicted by the author of these prophecies. Moreover, what the speaker in this case (Isa 49:1-2) says of himself is so unique, so glorious, that it reaches far beyond the vocation and performance of any single prophet, or, in fact, of any individual man subject to the limitations of human life and human strength.

There is nothing else left, therefore, than to suppose that the idea implied in the expression “servant of Jehovah” is condensed in this instance, as in Isa 42:1., into that of a single person. When it is expanded to its widest circumference, the “servant of Jehovah” is all Israel; when it only covers its smaller and inner circle, it is the true people of Jehovah contained within the entire nation, like the kernel in the shell (see the definition of this at Isa 51:7; Isa 65:10; Psa 24:6; Psa 73:15); but here it goes back to its very centre. The “servant of Jehovah,” in this central sense, is the heart of Israel. From this heart of Israel the stream of salvation flows out, first of all through the veins of the people of God, and thence through the veins of the nations generally. Just as Cyrus is the world-power in person, as made subservient to the people of God, so the servant of Jehovah, who is speaking here, is Israel in person, as promoting the glorification of Jehovah in all Israel, and in all the world of nations: in other words, it is He in whom the true nature of Israel is concentrated like a sun, in whom the history of Israel is coiled up as into a knot for a further and final development, in whom Israel’s world-wide calling to be the Saviour of mankind, including Israel itself, is fully carried out; the very same who took up the word of Jehovah in Isa 48:16, in the full consciousness of His fellowship with Him, declaring Himself to be His messenger who had now appeared. It must not be forgotten, moreover, that throughout these prophecies the breaking forth of salvation, not for Israel only, but for all mankind, is regarded as bound up with the termination of the captivity; and from this its basis, the restoration of the people who were then in exile, it is never separated. This fact is of great importance in relation to the question of authorship, and favours the conclusion that they emanated from a prophet who lived before the captivity, and not in the midst of it. Just as in chapter 7 Isaiah sees the son of the virgin grow up in the time of the Assyrian oppressions, and then sees his kingdom rising up on the ruins of the Assyrian; so does he here behold the servant of Jehovah rising up in the second half of the captivity, as if born in exile, in the midst of the punishment borne by his people, to effect the restoration of Israel. At the present time, when he begins to speak, coming forward without any further introduction, and speaking in his own name (a unique instance of dramatic style, which goes beyond even Psa 2:1-12), he has already left behind him the commencement of his work, which was directed towards the salvation of mankind. His appeal is addressed to the “isles,” which had been frequently mentioned already when the evangelization of the heathen was spoken of (Isa 42:4, Isa 42:10, Isa 42:12; cf., Isa 24:15), and to the “nations from afar,” i.e., the distant nations (as in Isa 5:26; compare, on the other hand, Jer 23:23). They are to hear what he says, not merely what he says in the words that follow, but what he says generally. What follows is rather a vindication of his right to demand a hearing and obedience, then the discourse itself, which is to be received with the obedience of faith; at the same time, the two are most intimately connected. Jehovah has called him ab utero, has thought of his name from the bowels of his mother (מעי as in Psa 71:6), i.e., even before he was born; ever since his conception has Jehovah assigned to him his calling, viz., his saving calling. We call to mind here Jer 1:5; Luk 1:41; Gal 1:15, but above all the name Immanuel, which is given by anticipation to the Coming One in Isa 7:14, and the name Jesus, which God appointed through the mouth of angels, when the human life of Him who was to bear that name was still ripening in the womb of the Virgin (Mat 1:20-23). It is worthy of notice, however, that the great Coming One, though he is described in the Old Testament as one who is to be looked for “from the seed of David,” is also spoken of as “born of a woman,” whenever his entrance into the world is directly referred to. In the Protevangelium he is called, though not in an individual sense, “the seed of the woman;” Isaiah, in the time of Ahaz, mentions “the virgin” as his mother; Micah (Mic 5:2) speaks of his יולדה; even the typical psalms, as in Psa 22:10-11, give prominence to the mother. And is not this a sign that prophecy is a work of the Spirit, who searches out the deep things of the counsel of God?

In Isa 49:2 the speaker says still further, that Jehovah has made his mouth kecherebh chaddâh (like a sharp sword), namely, that he may overcome everything that resists him as if with a sharp sword, and sever asunder things that are bound up together in a pernicious bond (Isa 11:4; Rev 1:16; Heb 4:12); also that He has made him into chēts bârūr (not βέλος εκλεκτόν, lxx, but, as in Jer 51:11, cleaned,
The comparison to purus is one that naturally suggests itself; but this, like putus, is derived from a root .
polished, sharpened, pointed), namely, to pierce the hearts (Psa 45:6), and inflict upon them the most wholesome wounds; and again, that Jehovah has hidden him under the shadow of His almighty hand, and kept him concealed in the quiver of His loving counsel, just girt as men keep their swords and arrows in sheaths and quivers ready for the time when they want to use them, in order that in the fulness of time He might draw out this His sword, and put this His arrow to the bow. The question whether the allusion here is to the time preceding the foreknown period of his coming, or whether it is to eternity that the words refer, does not present any great dilemma; at the same time, the prophecy in this instance only traces back the being of the person, who now appears, to the remotest point of his historical coming. Isa 49:3 describes, without any figure, what Jehovah has made him. He has said to him (cf., Psa 2:7): Thou art my servant; thou art Israel, in whom (in quo, as in Isa 44:23) I glorify myself. Schenkel’s exposition is grammatically impossible: “(It is) in Israel that I will glorify myself through thee.” The servant himself is called Israel. We call to mind here the expression in Mat 16:18, “Thou art Peter;” and the use of the name “Israel,” as the individuation of a generic name, reminds us of the fact that the kings of a nation are sometimes called by the name of the nation itself (e.g., Asshur, Isa 10:5.). But Israel was from the very first the God-given name of an individual. Just as the name Israel was first of all given to a man, and then after that to a nation, so the name which sprang from a personal root has also a personal crown. The servant of Jehovah is Israel in person, inasmuch as the purpose of mercy, upon the basis of which and for the accomplishment of which Jehovah made Jacob the father of the twelve-tribed nation, is brought by him into full and final realization. We have already seen that Israel, as an entire nation, formed the basis of the idea contained in the term “servant of Jehovah;” Israel, regarded as a people faithful to its calling, the centre; and the personal servant of Jehovah its apex. In the present instance, where he is called distinctly “Israel,” the fact is clearly expressed, that the servant of Jehovah in these prophecies is regarded as the kernel of the kernel of Israel, as Israel’s inmost centre, as Israel’s highest head. He it is in whom (i.e., on whom and through whom) Jehovah glorifies Himself, inasmuch as He carried out through him the counsels of His love, which are the self-glorification of His holy love, its glory and its triumph.
Isa 49:4

In the next v. the speaker meets the words of divine calling and promise with a complaint, which immediately silences itself, however. “And I, I said, I have wearied myself in vain, and thrown away my strength for nothing and to no purpose; yet my right is with Jehovah, and my reward with my God.” The Vav with which the v. opens introduces the apparent discrepancy between the calling he had received, and the apparent failure of his work. אכן, however, denotes the conclusion which might be drawn from this, that there was neither reality nor truth in his call. The relation between the clauses is exactly the same as that in Psa 31:23 and Jon 2:5 (where we find אך, which is more rarely used in this adversative sense); compare also Psa 30:7 (but I said), and the psalm of Hezekiah in Isa 38:10 with the antithesis in Psa 38:15. In the midst of his activity no fruit was to be seen, and the thought came upon him, that it was a failure; but this disturbance of his rejoicing in his calling was soon quieted in the confident assurance that his mishpât (i.e., his good right in opposition to all contradiction and resistance) and his “work” (i.e., the result and fruit of the work, which is apparently in vain) are with Jehovah, and laid up with Him until the time when He will vindicate His servant’s right, and crown his labour with success. We must not allow ourselves to be led astray by such parallels as Isa 40:10; Isa 62:11. The words are not spoken in a collective capacity any more than in the former part of the verse; the lamentation of Israel as a people, in Isa 40:27, is expressed very differently.
Isa 49:5-6

The expression “and now” (ועתּה), which follows, evidently indicates a fresh turn in the official life of the person speaking here. At the same time, it is evident that it is the failure of his labours within his own people, which has forced out the lamentation in Isa 49:4. For his reason for addressing his summons in Isa 49:1 to the world of nations, is that Jehovah has not guaranteed to him, the undaunted one, success to his labours among his own people, but has assigned him a mission extending far beyond and reaching to all mankind. “And now, saith Jehovah, that formed me from the womb to be His servant, to bring back Jacob to Him, and that Israel may be gathered together to Him; and I am honoured in the eyes of Jehovah, and my God has become my strength. He saith, It is only a small thing that thou becomest my servant, to set up the tribes of Jacob, and to bring back the preserved of Israel. I have set thee for the light of the Gentiles, to become my salvation to the end of the earth.” Both shōbhēbh and hâshı̄bh unite within themselves the meanings reducere (Jer 50:19) and restituere. On לא = לו generally, see at Isa 9:2; Isa 63:9. Jerome is wrong in his rendering, et Israel qui non congregabitur (what could a prophecy of the rejection of the Jews do here?); so also is Hitzig’s rendering, “since Israel is not swept away;” and Hofmann’s, “Israel, which is not swept away.” In the present instance, where the restoration of Israel is the event referred to, אצף must signify “the gathering together of Israel,” as in Isa 11:12. לו (parallel אליו) points to Jehovah as the author of the gathering, and as the object of it also. The transition from the infinitive of design to the finite verb of desire, is the same as in Isa 13:9; Isa 14:25. The attributive clause, added to the name Jehovah, expresses the lofty mission of the servant of God with regard to Israel. The parenthesis, “I have honour in the eyes of Jehovah, and my God has become my strength, i.e., has become mighty in me, the apparently weak one,” looks beyond to the still loftier mission, by which the former lofty one is far surpassed. On account of this parenthetically inserted praise of Jehovah, the אמר is resumed in ויּאמר. Instead of נקל היותך (compare 1Ki 16:31), i.e., it is a small thing that thou shouldst be, we have it here, as in Eze 8:17, with a comparative min, which must not, however, be logically pressed: “It is smaller than that,” i.e., it is too small a thing that thou shouldst be. The netsı̄rē (Keri, netsūrē) of Israel are those who have been preserved in exile (Eze 6:12); in other cases, we find שׁאר, שׁארית, or פּלטה. Not only is the restoration of the remnant of Israel the work of the servant of Jehovah; but Jehovah has appointed him for something higher than this. He has given or set him for the light of the heathen (“a light to lighten the Gentiles,” Luk 2:32), to become His salvation to the end of the earth (lxx: τοῦ εἶναι σε εἰς σωτηρίαν ἕως ἐσχάτου τῆς γῆς). Those who regard Israel as a nation as speaking here (e.g., Hitzig, Ewald, Umbreit, etc.) go right away from this, which is the most natural sense of the words, and explain them as meaning, “that my salvation may be, reach, or penetrate to the end of the earth.” But inasmuch as the servant of Jehovah is the light of the world, he is through that very fact the salvation of the world; and he is both of these through Jehovah, whose counsels of ישׁוּעה are brought by him into historical realization and visible manifestation.
Copyright information for KD