KINGDOM AND AGE
TO COME.
“And in their days, even of those kings, the God of heaven shall set up A KINGDOM which shall never perish, and A DOMINION that shall not be left to another people. It shall grind to powder and bring to an end all these kingdoms, and itself shall stand for ever.”—DANIEL.
THE BREAKING OF THE RUSSO-ASSYRIAN CLAY
THE REDEMPTION OF
New translations of Isaiah 18, by Lowth, the Bishop of Rochester, and Boothroyd—Their translations, and that of the Common Version rejected—A new translation by the Editor—Annotations establishing its correctness—Britain addressed, and her Steam Marine alluded to by Isaiah—The Lord Jesus in Zion sends forth a proclamation to the nations during a suspension of judgment, and subsequently to the fall of the Russian Gog—Israel, when their work is done, brought back in Britain’s ships, and in all sorts of land conveyance, as a present to the King of the Jews in Zion.
Speaking of the prophecy contained in the eighteenth chapter, Dr. Robert Lowth, Bishop of London, at the close of the eighteenth century, who undertook “to give an exact and faithful representation of the words, and of the sense of the prophet,” remarks concerning it, “this is one of the most obscure prophecies in the whole book of Isaiah. The subject of it,” he continues, “the end and design of it, the people to whom it is addressed, the history to which it belongs, the person who sends the messengers, and the nations to whom the messengers are sent; are all obscure and doubtful.” Thus writes the Bishop; and we may add, in vindication of the prophet, “obscure and doubtful,” verily to him.
As Mr. Lowth was, perhaps, the most, or one of the most, profound scholars of his day, the reader will no doubt be gratified in presenting to him what the doctor considers an exact and faithful representation of the most obscure and doubtful portion of the sure prophetic word. In his work he performs the part of a critical translator, and frequently of an interpreter; by which he reveals how little competent he was, notwithstanding his great attainment in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin tongues, to give “a close literal version” representative of the true sense of the prophecy. Yet he was profoundly skilled in “hermeneutics,” at least as much so as any “bible unionists” of our time, who are making so broad their phylacteries in new translationism, and the laws of exegesis! * We will, then, look at his translation first, and afterwards hear what he has to say of the subject of the chapter.
* “It is acknowledged by all Protestants,” writes the incarnation of the Bethanian divinity, “that in the bible alone we have the whole revelation of God to man, which his present condition requires, both with respect to the world that now is, and also to that which is to come. Its hermeneutics, or laws of interpretation, are now settled by such tribunals of literature and science as have the sanction of the educated world. No special tribunals are claimed—no new lawgivers are needed, to settle a single canon, or law of translation or interpretation. As other writings of the same age, language, and people, are interpreted, so the sacred writings of the Jewish age, and of the Christian age, are to be interpreted and understood. These are the decisions of all the literary tribunals of the age. We ask no more, and will concede no other canons to any one who seeks to unsettle Christian communities by private opinions or special pleadings for favoured hypothesis, or long-cherished idealities.” Millennium Harbinger Ser. iv. Vol. iii. No.1. —Thus decrees our magniloquent friend in the pride of his intellect and highmindedness. He is of course well-skilled in all the settled canons of translation and interpretation sanctioned by the Protestant educated world. So were Dr.Lowth, Dr. Boothroyd, the Bishop of Rochester, and their Protestant peers. But what has their skill resulted in? Just in leaving the true sense of the prophets and apostles in as much obscurity as before they began to work upon them with their hermeneutics. What feeblest ray of light has the President of Bethany College, shed upon a single obscurity of Moses and the prophets? Nay, what obscurity has he not deepened by his hermeneutics? Pshaw! What are “canons” worth that reduce the prophetic writings to a level with “an old Jewish almanac?” We pause for a reply.
LOWTH’S TRANSLATION.
Ho! To the land of the winged cymbal,
Which
borders on the rivers of
Which sendeth ambassadors on the sea,
And in vessels of papyrus on the face of the waters.
Go, ye swift messengers,
To a nation stretched out in length, and smoothed;
To a people terrible from the first, and hitherto;
A nation meted out by line, and trodden down;
Whose land the rivers have nourished.
Yea, all ye that inhabit the world, and that dwell on the earth,
When the standard is lifted up on the mountains, behold!
And when the trumpet is sounded, hear!
For thus hath Jehovah said unto me:
I will sit still, and regard my fixed habitation;
Like the clear heat after rain,
Like the dewy cloud in the day of harvest.
Surely before the vintage, when the bud is perfect,
When the blossom is become a swelling grape;
He shall cut off the shoots with pruning-hooks,
And the branches he shall take away, he shall cut down.
They shall be left together to the rapacious bird of the mountains;
And to the wild beasts of the earth:
And the rapacious bird shall summer upon it;
And every wild beast of the earth shall winter upon it.
At that time shall a gift be brought to Jehovah, the God of Hosts,
From a people stretched out in length, and smoothed;
A nation meted out by line, and trodden down;
And from a people terrible from the first, and hitherto;
Whose land the rivers have nourished;
To
the place of the name of Jehovah, God of Hosts, to
Such is his close adhesion to the letter of the text, which as it stands in his translation is as “obscure and doubtful” as could be wished by any hermeneutist, desirous of showing his skill in resolving doubts by the settled canons of his craft. Dr. Lowth saw that his “close literal version” had not rendered the prophecy so plain as that he who runs may read: he has, therefore, favoured us with some notes upon the phrases of his version to help us in their interpretation. We quote the following:
“If, therefore,” continues he, “the
words are rightly interpreted the winged cymbal, meaning the sistrum,
From these “hypotheses” and
supposings, the reader will see that the prophecy is regarded by Dr. Lowth as
long ago accomplished, and that consequently it retains no prophetic interest for
us—that being fulfilled, it is just a remarkable memorandum of the past, on the
old almanac of the Jewish nation. But to this I demur in toto, having satisfied
myself that the key to the passage is not contained in the hypothesis out of
which Dr. Lowth has extracted such a tinkling sound. We shall see in the
sequel, that it is all in the future, and one of the most interesting and
important prophecies in the book of God, Egypt being nowhere existent in the
premises. But assuming that it is the country addressed, Dr. Lowth indicates
the eastern branches of the
2.
VESSELS OF PAPYRUS—viklai-gome.
“This circumstance,” says he, “agrees perfectly well with
“Conseritur bibula Memphitis cymba papyro.”—Luc. Iv. 136.
This is very learned; but though
they might construct skiffs of porous papyrus reeds, it is a very remote
inference that the land of the winged cymbal sent its ambassadors over the sea
in such fragile barks, and that
3.
Go, ye swift messengers. —“To this nation before mentioned, who, by the
4. Stretched out in length. —“The fruitful part of Egypt, exclusive of the deserts on each side, is one long vale, through the middle of which runs the Nile, bounded on each side to the east and west by a chain of mountains, 750 miles in length; in breadth, from one to two or three day’s journey; even at the widest part of the Delta, from Pelusium to Alexandria, not above 250 miles broad.”
5. Smoothed. —“Either relating to the practice of the Egyptian priests, who made their bodies smooth by shaving off their hair; or rather to the country’s being made smooth, perfectly plain and level, by the overflowing of the Nile.”
6. Trodden down. —“Supposed to allude to a peculiar method of tillage in use among the Egyptians.”
7.
The rivers have
nourished. —A learned friend suggested to Dr.
Lowth, “nourished;” which, as it perfectly well suited his Nile theory, he
adopted in preference to “spoiled,” remarking that “nothing can be more
discordant than the idea of spoiling and plundering; for to the inundation of
the Nile Egypt owed everything—the fertility of the soil, and the very soil
itself. Besides, the overflowing of the
8.
A gift. —“The Egyptians were in alliance with the kingdom of Judah, and
were fellow-sufferers with the Jews under the invasion of their common enemy,
Sennacherib; and so were very nearly interested in the great and miraculous
deliverance of that kingdom, by the destruction of the Assyrian army. Upon
which wonderful event, it is said (2 Chronicles 32: 23), that ‘many brought
gifts unto Jehovah to Jerusalem, and presents to Hezekiah, king of Judah, so
that he was magnified of all nations from thenceforth.’ It is not to be
doubted, that among these the Egyptians distinguished themselves in their
acknowledgments on this occasion.”
On reading the above, few, I apprehend, will think much of Dr. Lowth as an interpreter of Isaiah. When we consider his pretensions, we are certainly justified in expecting better things. He styled himself (and his pretension to this was admitted by his contemporaries) “an ambassador of Jesus Christ,” a “successor of the apostles,” and “the right reverend father in God, Robert, Lord Bishop of London,” who, if he laid his hands upon the head of a candidate for “Holy Orders,” became the medium through which the Holy Spirit was transmitted into the aspirant’s soul, to qualify him for a priest in the house of God! Now, I say, from such a man we had a right to expect something better than learned nonsense, as the alleged true sense of a prophet. If an apostle were to give us such a specimen of hermeneutics with a grave face, it would be enough to set aside all his claims to infallibility in teaching. No one has any right to claim part in an apostolic successorship, who cannot hermeneuticise better than Dr. Lowth, and those who approve his exegesis. I am certain that Jehovah never would “send” such scholars to interpret his holy prophets. The foolishness of their interpretations is fatal to all their claims.
But here comes before us another of the Episcopal Bench, not so
highly salaried, or proximate to the archbishopric of
The bishop sets out with observing, “First, the prophecy indeed
predicts some woeful judgment; but the principal matter of the prophecy is not
judgment, but mercy; a gracious promise of the final restoration of the
Israelites. Secondly, the prophecy has no respect to
BISHOP OF
1.
Ho! Land spreading wide the
shadow of (thy) wings, which are beyond the rivers of
2. Accustomed to send messengers by sea, even in bulrush-vessels upon the surface of the waters! Go, swift messengers, unto a nation dragged away and plucked; unto a people wonderful from their beginning hitherto; a nation expecting, expecting, trampled under foot, whose land rivers have spoiled.
3. All the inhabitants of the world, and dwellers upon earth, shall see the lifting up, as it were, of a banner upon the mountains, and shall hear the sounding, as it were, of a trumpet.
4. For thus saith Jehovah unto me: I will sit still (but I will keep my eye upon my prepared habitation). As the parching heat just before lightning, as the dewy cloud in the heat of harvest.
5. For after the harvest, when the bud is coming to perfection, and the blossom is become a juicy berry, he will cut off the useless shoots with pruning-hooks, and the bill shall take away the luxuriant branches.
6. They shall be left together to the bird of prey of the mountains, and to the beasts of the earth. And upon it shall the bird of prey summer, and all the beasts of the earth upon it shall winter.
7. At that season a present shall be led to Jehovah of hosts, a people dragged away and plucked; even of a people wonderful from the beginning hitherto; a nation, expecting, expecting, and trampled under foot, whose land rivers have spoiled, unto the place of Jehovah of hosts, Mount Zion.
This translation is a decided improvement on Dr. Lowth’s. “Land
spreading wide the shadow of wings, which are beyond the rivers of
But the bishop of
Dr. Boothroyd’s is the latest translation of this remarkable portion
of the word I have seen. He renders the first two verses by “Ho! To the land
shadowing with wings, which borders on the rivers of
Here then we have Dr. Lowth, the Bishop of Rochester, Dr. Boothroyd, and the numerous scholars appointed by King James I to make our authorised version, who have all tried their hands upon this portion of the prophetic word, but have signally failed in presenting the English reader with a translation capable of being understood. Want of classical competency was not the cause of their failure, for of Roman, Greek, and Oriental literature, they had enough, and to spare. They were great hermeneutical philologists, but they were not “wise;” they erred not understanding the scriptures, which can alone make learned and unlearned men, truly wise in “the things of the Spirit of God.” Dr. Johnson gives about seventy meanings to our word “make.” A scholar may remember them all, and yet not have wisdom to select aright the meaning suitable to the word in a certain place. “To make” is to do, perform, practise, as well as to create. Suppose the sentence is, “God makes evil.” A foreigner examines his lexicon under the word “make,” and finds the above to be among the meanings, he understands the idiom and peculiarities of the language but imperfectly, so that being uncertain which is the most appropriate, he guesses that “do, perform, or practise will bring out the idea of the sentence, and he renders it, “God does, performs, or practises, evil,” which he supposes comprehends sin. Such a translation as this would evince want of wisdom in the use of words, which no hermeneutics or laws of interpretation could supply. Now the learned translators of the Scriptures have been hitherto very much in this fix. They get hold of a Hebrew word having a plurality of senses, several different meanings, and the question arises among them, which is the right one for the place? This can only be determined by a correct understanding of the context. This is a law, or settled canon, of interpretation, which, however, is of no use to the translator who is ignorant of that context. He may know the canon or rule, but can make no use of it because of his doctrinal ignorance. A man may be profoundly skilled in hermeneutics, and yet profoundly incompetent to translate and interpret the Scriptures correctly. He is like one who can name his tools, but knows not how to use them. The learned men above-mentioned, together with our contemporaries, who are swelling so immensely about conferring upon us Anglo-Saxons a correct version of the Bible, are too ignorant of the doctrine of the prophets and apostles to accomplish the work. They are doctrinally incompetent, being without intelligence in “the word of the kingdom.” The Bishop of Rochester’s exegesis is the best, because he perceived that Christ Jesus is to reappear in Mount Zion in person, and that the twelve tribes of Israel are at that time to be restored in the midst of judgment: but as for sky kingdomers giving us an improvement of King James’s version, we should as soon expect one from old Socrates, or His Roman Holiness of the Papal throne.
This eighteenth chapter of Isaiah is part of a prophecy
relating to that crisis in
This victory accomplished, a signal, or banner, is exalted on the
mountains of
During the stillness of this awful pause, not a gleam of sunshine for a moment penetrates the impending gloom; not a breath stirs; not a leaf wags; not a blade of grass is shaken; no rippling wave curls upon the sleeping surface of the waters; the black ponderous cloud, covering the whole sky, seems to hang fixed and motionless as an arch of stone. Nature seems benumbed in all her operations. Such is the condition of the torpid atmosphere before the bursting forth of a raging tempest, employed by the spirit to illustrate the trumpet interval before the terrible and sudden irruption of Jehovah’s fury against the nations; which, instead of fearing God and giving glory to him—Revelation 14: 6-7, assemble themselves together, to give battle against his king—Revelation 19: 19; 17: 14.
Christ’s proclamation from
With respect to the papal governments of
This being the doctrine of the prophets and the apostles, and
reflected from the seventeenth and eighteenth of Isaiah, it is clear that
sky-kingdom speculators who believe nothing of the kind, must of necessity be
confounded when they encounter such passages as that before us. No skill in
hermeneutics is of any avail to an immortal-soul sky-kingdom-gospeller; and he
that understands “the word of the kingdom” may discern the truth though
scholastically ignorant of interpretation-laws, as a man may reason correctly
though unacquainted with the logician’s rules. The learned foolishness
published by proficients in hermeneutics is enough to fill all ingenuous minds
with contempt at the tools by which they have elaborated their prosy
disquisitions. Read Moses Stuart on Daniel if you desire to behold the light of
darkness made as darkness itself! Yet this man was “great,” “a father in
Hopeless then of light from that quarter, I have essayed to help
myself on the principle that God aids them who help themselves. Far inferior to
them as a Hebraist, I freely admit; but this shall not discourage me from
invading their province, and trying to perfect that wherein they have failed.
David slew Goliath with a sling-stone in the name of
THE EDITOR’S TRANSLATION OF ISAIAH.
From Chapter
Hark! A multitude of many peoples making an uproar as the noise of seas. Hark! A tumult among peoples, roaring as a tumult of mighty waters; they rage against peoples like a roar of many waters: but HE shall rebuke him, and he shall flee afar off; and He shall chase him as the chaff of the mountains before the wind, and as stubble before the whirlwind. Behold also at evening time sudden destruction; and before dawn he is not. This is the portion of our spoilers, and a lot for them who scatter us.
Ho! Land of widely o’ershadowing
wings extending from beyond to rivers of
All the inhabitants of the world, and dwellers of the earth, at the lifting up of an ensign on the mountains, shall tremble, and at the sounding of a trumpet, shall hear. For thus said Jehovah to me, I will be still (yet in my dwelling place I will be without fear) as dry heat impending lightning, as a cloud of dew in the heat of harvest. For before harvest as the perfecting of fruit when sour grapes are ripening, there shall be a blossom: and He will cut (it) off as vine-shoots by pruning hooks, and luxuriant twigs are lopped away. They shall be left together for the carrion-bird of the mountains, and the wild beast of the land; and the bird of prey shall destroy upon it, and every wild beast of the land shall ravin upon it.
At that time a present shall be diligently brought to Jehovah of armies, a people carried away and oppressed even of a people terrible from this (time) and onward; a nation prostrate and trodden down, whose land rivers have spoiled; to the dwelling-place of the NAME of Jehovah of armies, Mount Zion.
ANNOTATIONS.
Hark! —Hui, pronounced
Masoretically ho, is the interjection with which Isaiah,
The victory being thus gained by the
Name of Jehovah who comes from far (chapter 30: 27,) he takes up his abode in
the City of
“But He shall rebuke him”—ugar bo,
pronounced ve-gah-ar bo. The common version reads, “but God
shall rebuke them”: Dr. Lowth, “but he shall rebuke them”;
while Boothroyd agrees with the common version. “God” is not in the
Hebrew text. The Holy One of Israel, who bears the name of Jehovah, is
doubtless the rebuker, as appears from the Psalm already quoted; and the
additional testimony of Micah in chapter 4: 3, and chapter 5: 2, 5-6: —“He
shall rebuke strong nations afar off.” “Out of
The translators referred to, not
understanding the teaching of the prophets concerning the Assyrian of the
latter days, could not discern the propriety of bo in the text, as no
single individual had been mentioned, or alluded to, in the context. Instead,
therefore, of rendering the words gahar bo, rebuke him, they nullified
the prophet’s significant allusion to
“At evening time * * * and
before the dawn.” This interval between the evening and dawn is styled
in Daniel, “the time of the end.” We are now in the evening time of the
day of salvation—the “today” of the times of the Gentiles. About half an
hour of the period remains ere the Assyrian obtains
At evening time brightness shall shine forth. That is, at the close of it. When the light shines, the dawn has passed, and the darkness chased away. The day of glory shines upon the world, and the earth becomes full of the knowledge of it. The interval between the rebuke of the Assyrian by Christ Jesus, and the shining forth of His day, will be, I take it, about forty years. This will be the most extraordinary period of the world’s history. The reappearance of Christ, the resurrection of the saints, the dashing in pieces of the goat-governments as a potter’s vessel, the restoration of Israel, the manifestation of Paradise in the Holy Land, and the regeneration of the nations, are the events characteristic of the period. Who would not pray, “Thy kingdom come?”
“Before the dawn he is
not,” beterem boquer ainennu. Boothroyd has it, “they are no
more;” Dr. Lowth, “he is no more;” but the common version correctly, “he
is not.” In answer to the question, “Who is not?” we have, “he whom the
Ruler of
“Land of widely o’ershadowing
wings,” eretz tziltzal kenahphahyim. These are the words rendered by Dr.
Lowth “land of the winged cymbal.” He says tziltzal is never used to
signify shadow. This may be granted, without admitting that it has no
relation to shadow at all. The Robinson-Gesenius Lexicon translates the phrase
“land of the whizzing of wings; that is, land of the clangor of armies;
full of armies (wings) clanging their arms, viz.,
Eretz and tziltzal,
are both in regimen, and should therefore be literally rendered, land of the
widely o’ershadowing of wings. This seems to bring out more forcibly the
wings as the overshadowing agents. The proclamation is to a land of wings,
not folded up as a bird at rest; but spread out, or extended widely, and
therefore capable of affording protection to peoples inhabiting countries far
distant from the throne of its power. “A land of wings” is a figurative
expression, like that of “wings of the God of
“Extending from beyond to”—ashr maivr le, pronounced asher mai-aiver le. ASHER is the relative pronoun who, which, that, singular and plural, masculine and feminine; and agrees with its antecedent kenahphahyim, wings. Hence, literally, wings that from beyond to, that is “wings extending from beyond to,” as I have given it in the text.
Maivr comes from the root ahvar; without the points ovr, pronounced over; from which originates our English word over. Hence, as a verb, “over with you,” that is, pass over or beyond, which is the import of the root ahvar. With the prefix m, from, it becomes a preposition, as m-ovr, Masoretically maiaiver, and signifies from over or from beyond; and followed by le meaning to.
“Extending from beyond to,”
is a geographical phrase. To understand it aright, we must remember that it was
not penned by one in
“Rivers of Cush,” nhri kush,
pronounced naharai koosh.
“
The rivers of Cush are those
enumerated by Moses in Genesis 2: 11—the Pishon winding through the whole land
of Havilah, a son of Cush; the Gihon through Cush’s land more specially; the
Hiddekel or Tigris, which flows before Assyria; and the Euphrates. The
To return then to the text. The
dominion-wings extend from beyond to the
“Which sendeth by sea,” hshlch
byym, pronounced hassholaiach byyom. The wing of the land, or its
dominion, being so wide-spreading from tip to tip, it is obliged to communicate
with its possessions under their shadow, “by sea.” This character in the
text shows that the overshadowing land is a maritime power. It is
neither
* * *
“Which sendeth by sea whirling
things even upon vessels of fleetness on the surface of waters.” Tzirim
uvkli-gma ol-pni-mim, pronounced tzirim uviklai gome al-penai-mayim. —This
is the original which I have rendered “whirling things even upon vessels of
fleetness on the surface of waters.” Could any thing be more descriptive of
steamers as they appear to a spectator when gliding over the water? He sees a
vessel moving with rapidity, and observes something on its sides whirling with
remarkable velocity. After beholding such a vessel for the first time in motion
from a position exterior to it, its fleetness and whirling things
would be the two characteristics by which he would describe it to others. I do
not doubt that the prophet understood that in the evening time there would be a
great maritime power sending swift vessels by sea to its possessions in
These whirling things on vessels of
fleetness, Dr. Lowth styles “ambassadors on the sea in vessels of papyrus!” The
bishop of
The word tzirim is a noun masculine plural from tzir, “to go in a circle, to revolve.” It has probably some affinity to the obsolete root tznr, pronounced tzahnar, to whirr, or whizz, especially expressive of the rushing sound of water falling from a wheel in rapid motion. Revolvers, or whirling things, tzirim, is the Spirit’s word for what we term paddle-wheels, which are things going in a circle. Tzir is indeed properly rendered ambassador or messenger in Jeremiah 49: 14, and Obadiah 1; but still the radical idea is retained of one going in a circle, or making a circuit of the nations. The tzirim of our text, however, cannot be things going in a circle in an ambassadorial circuit; for they are tzirim-viklai-gome “on vessels of fleetness,” performing their circuits on their sides. The translators referred to, did not perceive the application of tzirim to the paddle-wheels of vessels; for, with the exception of Dr. Boothroyd, there were no such things in the range of their observation or knowledge.
“Fleetness,” gome. —This is rendered by the hermeneutists, “papyrus,” “bulrush,” and bulrushes.” Moses was exposed on the margin of Sihor in tavath gome, an ark, or water-tight basket, of bulrush, or papyrus reed. The word is indeed applied to the bulrush, or papyrus reed; but then it is a question, why it is so applied? If we can ascertain this, we may find that it has a more appropriate signification for Isaiah 18: 2.
The word gimai is both a noun and a verb. The Masorites, whose points are convenient, but without authority, distinguish the noun from the verb by their punctuation, which expresses their opinion of what the word ought to be in certain places. They call the verb gahmah, and the noun gome; but on the Hebrew text they are written both the same. It is the infinitive of Piayl in construction, in the text before us, placed there to give prominence to the idea contained in the finite verb. Its punctuation should therefore be gimai and not gome. It stands as a verbal substantive in the construct case.
The word signifies “to absorb, to drink up, to swallow.” Now, the Egyptian papyrus nilotica, and the bulrush, especially the former, are of a very porous nature, absorbing or drinking up moisture copiously. Hence the papyrus is styled bibulous, bibula papyrus by Lucan, and gma by the Hebrew. The Egyptians made from it garments, shoes, baskets, vessels of various kinds, skiffs, &c. —articles of the water-drinking reed.
The word in the Piayl conjugation is used poetically of the horse swallowing, as it were, the ground, in his eagerness and fleetness; as in Job 39: 24, igm artz, Masoretically, yegamme-ahretz, “he swalloweth diligently of the ground,” as much as to say, he runs away with it, so great is his fleetness. When a traveller by rail looks at the ground in advance of the train, as it rushes along, he sees the idea represented by the phrase, “swallowing diligently of the ground.” By the same metaphor, and with equal propriety, a ship may be said to drink up of the water diligently, as for a horse or train to swallow diligently of the ground. They are both poetical expressions for a fleet horse, a rapid train, and a fast ship. Hence, as the papyrus literally absorbs copiously of moisture, so poetically or figuratively, a fast vessel drinks rapidly of the water, and a fleet horse diligently of the ground; therefore, the papyrus, the ship, and the horse, are all subjects of one common idea, and that is expressed by the word gma. The phrase kli-gma, pronounced kelai-gome, is then literally translatable, vessels of to drink up diligently; but this very literal rendering is itself metaphorical: diligent drinking up is quick, or rapid drinking; ships rapidly drinking up of the surface of waters, are vessels rapidly diminishing distance: they are fleet vessels, or “vessels of fleetness,” kelai-gome, but of no matter-like affinity to the bulrushes of the Nile.
The Bishop of Rochester had some
idea that there was something figurative connected with his “bulrush-vessels,”
expressive of the fleetness of the shadowing lands’ marine; but as he had never
seen a steamship, the fleetness of his bulrush vessels was confined to their
fast sailing. “If the country spoken to,” says he, “be distant from
“Swiftly.” The verb leku is used intensively, as, “to go swiftly, to rush;” and comports well with the sort of vessels commonly sent “express” by the overshadowing land.
“Fleet messengers”—mlakim klim, pronounced malakim kallim. The word malahk signifies “one sent” from lahak, he sent; therefore, a messenger; and in Greek, an angelos, a word transferred into English with the loss of the last syllable. The word is in the plural in the text. “Fleet,” kallim, from kahlal, to be swift. The rapidity of the vessels is affirmed of the messengers sent by them. They are to go express, or without unnecessary delay, as the crisis demands energy, promptness, and dispatch.
“To a nation carried away and
oppressed,” el goi memusshahk umorat. Boothroyd renders this, “to a nation
extended and fierce.” Dr. Lowth has it, “to a nation stretched out in length
and smoothed.” The Bishop of Rochester renders it, “unto a nation dragged away
and plucked.” James’s translators do better than any of these in the sentence, “to
a nation scattered and peeled;” but then they were not satisfied with it,
but tried to amend it on the margin by “outspread and polished.” In Robinson’s
Gesenius the lexicographer renders goi mmshk umorat, “a people drawn
out, or extended, i.e., tall of stature and naked!” They all agree that
a drawing out is the radical idea of memusshahk; but what sort of a
drawing out it is, they are not agreed. As we have seen, Dr. Lowth explains it
of the stretching out of
The word is used in several places
intensively for taking away, removing, by violence, destroying. “Dragged
away” is the sense of the word in the text, as given by
A smoothed, plucked, or peeled, nation, to say the least of it, is not euphonious. Dr. Lowth styles his stretched-out nation, “smoothed” in the sense of being clean shaven or made smooth by mud-sediment! But whether smoothed by mud or lather he cannot tell! If the nation were alluded to under the figure of a bird, “plucked,” would very well express the idea of its being stripped of all its glory and left naked. Without hair, beard, or feathers, the nation would doubtless have become as “polished” as shaving and plucking could make it! The King’s translators do not tell us in what other sense it was “polished,” but leave us to our own inferences. I do not see in what sense a nation skinned or peeled can be “polished.” It would certainly not improve its manners. But we must turn from these awkward words, so expressive of the uncertainty of the hermeneutists, and find one more in harmony with the text.
Morat is participle of Pual from mrt, pronounced mahrat, to polish, to sharpen, and to make smooth. It is used in the sense of making the head smooth, or bald, by tearing out the hair in chastisement; or to cause a peeling of the shoulder by bearing heavy burdens. The oppressing of the shoulder results in the peeling off of the skin. Hence a peeled shoulder, and a smoothed and polished head, becomes an oppressed shoulder, and a plucked head. A nation peeled and smoothed, plucked and polished, or moratised, is a torn and oppressed people. The effect of an action is put for the cause of it, so that the figurative sense of morat is really the most literal in regard to the text in hand. I have therefore rendered it by “oppressed,” which accords exactly with the condition of the nation to which the messengers are sent.
“Terrible from this and onward,”
al-om nora mn-hua uhlah, pronounced el-am norah min-hu wahhahleah. “Terrible
from their beginning hitherto;” “terrible from the first and hitherto;”
“wonderful from their beginning hitherto”—are the renderings of the several
translations before us. These versions affirm the terribleness or wonderfulness
of the nation during the whole of its existence. This, however, cannot be
predicated of
Gesenius renders the text, “a people
terrible and farther off than he.” In this he renders “wahhahleah,” and
farther off, or beyond, as of space; and min-hu, by “than he.” But
in this he entirely mistakes the whole matter. The construction is well
illustrated by the phrase—mhiom hhua uhlah, pronounced, maihyyom hahu
wahhahleah, “from that day forward.” The radical idea of hahleah is
“to a distance, thither-away,” and may be applied to either time
or space. But from what point of time doth the to or thither, the onward,
commence? The answer is min-hu—“min” being the preposition from;
and “hu,” the demonstrative this. “Hu” points out a
definite person or thing already mentioned, or well-known from the context. We
may then inquire “from this” what? From the evening-tide destruction of
Israel’s Assyrian spoiler by their King; when under his banner “Judah fights
at Jerusalem,” and “their governors become like a hearth of fire among
the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the
people round about on the right hand and on the left”—Zechariah 12: 5-6;
14: 14. From this onward, shall
“A nation prostrate and trodden
down,” goi kav-kahv umvusahh. The renderings of these words are also
various. “A nation meted out and trodden down;” “a nation that meteth out and
treadeth down;” “a nation of line, line, and treading under foot;” “a nation
meted out by line, and trodden down;” “a nation expecting, expecting, trampled
under feet;” “a nation that useth the line, and treadeth down;” and “a nation
most mighty.” Surely here are diversities enough to make darkness visible! What
a nation this is made to be! Dr. Robinson of
Kav is a noun, and signifies
a measuring line. The repetition of the word thus, kav kahv, is
intensive, and imports a continued stretching of the measuring line over any
thing. “Jehovah hath purposed to destroy the wall of the daughter of Zion: he
hath stretched out a line, he hath not withdrawn his hand from destroying.”
Thus, to stretch out a line upon a wall indicates its overthrow, that the
measuring line may be extended over the levelled site. If the line be employed
with reference to a nation, it imports the levelling of that nation, that it
may be trampled under foot. A nation intensely lined is one long prostrate, the
idea of prostration being necessary to a being trodden under foot.
“Whose land rivers have spoiled.”
Rivers overflowing their banks represent invading armies. Speaking of
the ten tribes in hostility against Jerusalem and the house of David, Isaiah
saith, “Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go
softly, and rejoice in Retzin and Remaliah’s son; now therefore, behold,
Jehovah bringeth up upon them the waters of the river (Euphrates) strong
and many, even the King of Assyria and all his glory; and he shall come up over
all his channels, and go over all his banks: and he shall pass through Judah;
he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck,” Jerusalem
alone of all the land being the head out of the water.
“I will be still (yet in my dwelling-place I will be without fear).” In the common version it reads “I will take my rest, and I will consider in my dwelling-place,” or marginally, “regard my set dwelling.” The text places the considering person in the dwelling, and at rest there; the margin, makes him exterior to it, and looking at it. A very important difference this, when we come to understand the locality of the dwelling-place. “I will sit still and regard my own abode; I will be to it as the clear heat after rain.” This is Dr. Boothroyd’s rendering of the words, ashkuth vabith bmkuni kkhm tzk oliaur, pronounced eshkahtah veavbitah vimkoni kekhom tzach alai-or. “I will be to it” are his own words to make what he supposes is the sense. All the translations I have seen make the considerant sitting, not in, but off at a distance, from the dwelling-place; consequently, “the dry heat impending lightning” is made a state of things preceding Jehovah’s entrance into his dwelling-place, instead of, as it really is, a state of the political atmosphere immediately following his entrance, and, for a short time, continuous with his residence there. The atmospheric condition portends a storm about to burst upon “the blossom” and