Isaiah 16:13 Comentariu

This chapter continues and concludes the burden of Moab. In it, I. The prophet gives good counsel to the Moabites, to reform what was amiss among them, and particularly to be kind to God's people, as the likeliest way to prevent the judgments before threatened (Isa 16:1-5). II. Fearing they would not take this counsel (they were so proud), he goes on to foretel the lamentable devastation of their country, and the confusion they should be brought to, and this within three years (Isa 16:6-14).

INTRODUCTION TO ISAIAH 16 This chapter is a continuation of the prophecy against Moab; in which the prophet gives good advice, but in case of a haughty neglect of it, which he foresaw, threatens with ruin, and fixes a time for it. He advises the Moabites to pay their tribute to the king of Judah, or otherwise they should be turned out of their land, as a bird out of its nest, Isa 16:1 to protect, and not betray the people of the Jews that should flee to them, because of the Assyrian army, Isa 16:3 and for this end gives a great character of the king of Judah, and assures them of the stability of his kingdom, Isa 16:5 but for their pride, wrath, and lying, they are threatened with destruction, and are represented as howling under it, Isa 16:6 because of the spoil of their cities, vineyards, and fields, so that they have no harvest, nor vintage, nor gathering of summer fruits, or joy on these accounts, Isa 16:8 for which even the prophet expresses a concern, Isa 16:11 and after having observed the application of the Moabites to their gods without success, Isa 16:12 the chapter is closed with an assurance of the certain ruin of Moab, and of the time when it should be, Isa 16:13.

This is the word that the Lord hath spoken concerning Moab,.... That is, this prophecy now delivered out is what comes from the Lord; it is the word of the Lord, and not of man, and so shall certainly come to pass; when this word was spoken follows: since that time; from eternity, as some, and so refer it to the decree of God within himself; or from the time that Moab was in being, or a nation, as others; or from the time that Balak hired Balaam to curse Israel, so Jarchi; or rather from the time that the Lord made known his mind and will, concerning this matter, to the prophet Isaiah: for it should be rendered, "this is that word which the Lord spake concerning Moab then" (i); that is, at the time or year in which Ahaz died, Isa 14:28 and is observed, to distinguish it from what the prophet spoke, or was about to speak, now or from this time, concerning him, as in the next verse Isa 16:14. (i) So Noldius, Ebr. Concord. Part. p. 473. No. 1586.

(Verse 13.) This is the word that the Lord spoke to Moab from that time. From when do you think? Obviously from the time that Moab was created. And the Lord says: The Moabites and Ammonites shall not enter into the Church of God (Deut. XXIII, 3). Whether we understand it from that time as referring to ancient times, which long ago this divine sentence was decreed, not that the foreknowledge of God brought about the cause of the devastation; but that the future devastation was foreknown to the majesty of God.

(Verse 13) And this is what it means: That word which the Lord spoke to Moab from that time, with the introductory statement in which he said, the word against Moab, or the burden, let us understand it as the conclusion, so that what he began there, he may complete here. From that time, however, we should understand from when he began to speak to him, that everything he said is one word of God, that is, one sentence.

Here is the epilogue. From that time, from the death of the king Achaz.

On account of the evils which threatened his country, the prophet is forbidden to encumber himself with a wife and family, or to bear any share in the little joys and sorrows of his neighbors, which were to be forgotten and absorbed in those public calamities, Jer 16:1-9, which their sins should draw on them, Jer 16:10-13. A future restoration however is intimated, Jer 16:14, Jer 16:15, after these calamities should be endured, Jer 16:16-18; and the conversion of the Gentiles is foretold, Jer 16:19-21.

CONTINUATION OF THE PROPHECY AS TO MOAB. (Isa 16:1-14) lamb--advice of the prophet to the Moabites who had fled southwards to Idumea, to send to the king of Judah the tribute of lambs, which they had formerly paid to Israel, but which they had given up (Kg2 3:4-5). David probably imposed this tribute before the severance of Judah and Israel (Sa2 8:2). Therefore Moab is recommended to gain the favor and protection of Judah, by paying it to the Jewish king. Type of the need of submitting to Messiah (Psa 2:10-12; Rom 12:1). from Sela to--rather, "from Petra through (literally, 'towards') the wilderness" [MAURER]. "Sela" means "a rock," Petra in Greek; the capital of Idumea and Arabia-PetrÃ&brvbra; the dwellings are mostly hewn out of the rock. The country around was a vast common ("wilderness") or open pasturage, to which the Moabites had fled on the invasion from the west (Isa 15:7). ruler of the land--namely, of Idumea, that is, the king of Judah; Amaziah had become master of Idumea and Sela (Kg2 14:7).

since that time--rather, "respecting that time" [HORSLEY]. BARNES translates it, "formerly" in contrast to "but now" (Isa 16:14): heretofore former prophecies (Exo 15:15; Num 21:29) have been given as to Moab, of which Isaiah has given the substance: but now a definite and steady time also is fixed.

But just because this lion is Judah and its government, the summons goes forth to the Moabites, who have fled to Edom, and even to Sela, i.e., Petra (Wady Musa), near Mount Hor in Arabia Petraea, to which it gave its name, to turn for protection to Jerusalem. "Send a land-ruler's tribute of lambs from Sela desert-wards to the mountain of the daughter of Zion." This v. is like a long-drawn trumpet-blast. The prophecy against Moab takes the same turn here as in Isa 14:32; Isa 18:7; Isa 19:16., Isa 23:18. The judgment first of all produces slavish fear; and this is afterwards refined into loving attachment. Submission to the house of David is Moab's only deliverance. This is what the prophet, weeping with those that weep, calls out to them in such long-drawn, vehement, and urgent tones, even into the farthest hiding-place in which they have concealed themselves, viz., the rocky city of the Edomites. The tribute of lambs which was due to the ruling prince is called briefly car mōshēl-'eretz. This tribute, which the holders of the pasture-land so rich in flocks have hitherto sent to Samaria (Kg2 3:4), they are now to send to Jerusalem, the "mountain of the daughter of Zion" (as in Isa 10:32, compared with Isa 18:7), the way to which lay through "the desert," i.e., first of all in a diagonal direction through the Arabah, which stretched downwards to Aelath.

The massa is now brought to a close, and there follows an epilogue which fixes the term of the fulfilment of what is not predicted now for the first time, from the standpoint of the anticipated history. "This is the word which Jehovah spake long ago concerning Moab. And now Jehovah speaketh thus: In three years, like years of a hireling, the glory of Moab is disgraced, together with all the multitude of the great; a remnant is left, contemptibly small, not great at all." The time fixed is the same as in Isa 20:3. Of working time the hirer remits nothing, and the labourer gives nothing in. The statement as to the time, therefore, is intended to be taken exactly: three years, not more, rather under than over. Then will the old saying of God concerning Moab be fulfilled. Only a remnant, a contemptible remnant, will be left (וּשׁאר, cf., וּמשׂושׂ, Isa 8:6, in sense equivalent to ושׁאר); for every history of the nations is but the shadow of the history of Israel. The massa in Isaiah 15:1-16:12 was a word that had already gone forth from Jehovah "long ago." This statement may be understood in three different senses. In the first place, Isaiah may mean that older prophecies had already foretold essentially the same concerning Moab. But what prophecies? We may get an answer to this question from the prophecies of Jeremiah concerning Moab in Jer 48. Jeremiah there reproduces the massa Moab of the book of Isaiah, but interweaves with it reminiscences (1.) out of the mâshal on Moab in Num 21:27-30; (2.) out of Balaam's prophecy concerning Moab in Num 24:17; (3.) out of the prophecy of Amos concerning Moab (Amo 2:1-3). And it might be to these earlier words of prophecy that Isaiah here refers (Hvernick, Drechsler, and others). But this is very improbable, as there is no ring of these earlier passages in the massa, such as we should expect if Isaiah had had them in his mind. Secondly, Isaiah might mean that Isa 15:1. contained the prophecy of an older prophet, which he merely brought to remembrance in order to connect therewith the precise tenor of its fulfilment which had been revealed to him. This is at present the prevailing view. Hitzig, in a special work on the subject (1831), as well as in his Commentary, has endeavoured to prove, on the ground of Kg2 14:25, that in all probability Jonah was the author of the oracle which Isaiah here resumes. And Knobel, Maurer, Gustav Baur, and Thenius agree with him in this; whilst De Wette, Ewald, and Umbreit regard it as, at any rate, decidedly non-Messianic. If the conjecture that Jonah was the author could but be better sustained, we should heartily rejoice in this addition to the history of the literature of the Old Testament. But all that we know of Jonah is at variance with such a conjecture. He was a prophet of the type of Elijah and Elisha, in whom the eloquence of a prophet's words was thrown altogether into the shade by the energy of a prophet's deeds. His prophecy concerning the restoration of the kingdom of Israel to its old boundaries, which was fulfilled by the victories of Jeroboam II, we cannot therefore imagine to have been so pictorial or highly poetical as the massa Moab (which would only be one part of that prophecy) really is; and the fact that he was angry at the sparing of Nineveh harmonizes very badly with its elegiac softness and its flood of tears. Moreover, it is never intimated that the conquerors to whom Moab was to succumb would belong to the kingdom of Israel; and the hypothesis is completely overthrown by the summons addressed to Moab to send tribute to Jerusalem. But the conclusion itself, that the oracle must have originated with any older prophet whatever, is drawn from very insufficient premises. No doubt it is a thing altogether unparalleled even in Isaiah, that a prophecy should assume so thoroughly the form of a kinah, or lamentation; still there are tendencies to this in Isa 22:4 (cf., Isa 21:3-4), and Isaiah was an inexhaustible master of language of every character and colour. It is true we do light upon many expressions which cannot be pointed out anywhere else in the book of Isaiah, such as baalē goyim, hedâd, yelâlâh, yâra‛, yithrâh, mâhir, mētz, nosâphoth, pekuddâh (provision, possession); and there is something peculiar in the circular movement of the prophecy, which is carried out to such an extent in the indication of reason and consequence, as well as in the perpetually returning, monotonous connection of the sentences by ci (for) and ‛al-cēn (lâcēn, therefore), the former of which is repeated twice in Isa 15:1, three times in Isa 15:8-9, and four times in succession in Isa 15:5-6. But there is probably no prophecy, especially in chapters 13-23, which does not contain expressions that the prophet uses nowhere else; and so far as the conjunctions ci and a‛ l-cēn (lâcēn), are concerned, Isaiah crowds them together in other passages as well, and here almost to monotony, as a natural consequence of the prevailing elegiac tone. Besides, even Ewald can detect the characteristics of Isaiah in Isa 16:1-6; and you have only to dissect the whole rhetorically, syntactically, and philologically, with the carefulness of a Caspari, to hear throughout the ring of Isaiah's style. And whoever has retained the impression which he brought with him from the oracle against Philistia, will be constrained to say, that not only the stamp and outward form, but also the spirit and ideas, are thoroughly Isaiah's. Hence the third possible conjecture must be the correct one. Thirdly, then, Isaiah may mean that the fate of Moab, which he has just proclaimed, was revealed to him long ago; and the addition made now is, that it will be fulfilled in exactly three years. מאז does not necessarily point to a time antecedent to that of Isaiah himself (compare Isa 44:8; Isa 48:3, Isa 48:5, Isa 48:7, with Sa2 15:34). If we assume that what Isaiah predicts down to Isa 16:12 was revealed to him in the year that Ahaz died, and that the epilogue reckons from the third or tenth year of Hezekiah, in either case the interval is long enough for the mê'âz (from of old). And we decide in favour of this. Unfortunately, we know nothing certain as to the time at which the three years commence. The question whether it was Shalmanassar, Sargon, or Sennacherib who treated the Moabites so harshly, is one that we cannot answer. In Herodotus (ii. 141), Sennacherib is called "king of the Arabians and Assyrians;" and Moab might be included in the Arabians. In any case, after the fulfilment of Isaiah's prophecy in the Assyrian times, there was still a portion left, the fulfilment of which, according to Jer 48, was reserved for the Chaldeans.