Albert Barnes Commentary Isaiah 49

Listen - This is the exordium, or introduction. According to the interpretation that applies this to the Messiah, it is to be regarded as the voice of the Redeemer calling the distant parts of the earth to pay respectful attention to the statement of his qualifications for his work, and to the assurances that his salvation would be extended to them .

The Redeemer here is to be regarded as having already come in the flesh, and as having been rejected and despised by the Jews , and as now turning to the Gentile world, and offering salvation to them.

The time when this is supposed to occur, therefore, as seen by the prophet, is when the Messiah had preached in vain to his own countrymen, and when there was an evident fitness and propriety in his extending the offer of salvation to the pagan world.

O isles - You distant lands (see the note at Isaiah 41:1). The word is used here, as it is used there, in the sense of countries beyond the sea; distant, unknown regions; the dark, pagan world.

You people from far - The reason why the Messiah thus addresses them is stated in Isaiah 49:6. It is because he was appointed to be a light to them, and because, having been rejected by the Jewish nation, it was determined to extend the offers and the blessings of salvation to other lands.

The Lord has called me from the womb - Yahweh has set me apart for this office from my very birth. The emphasis here is on the fact that he was thus called, and not on the particular time when it was done. The idea is that he had not presumptuously assumed this office; he had not entered on it without being appointed to it; he had been designated for it even before he was born .

A similar expression is used in respect to Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:5): Before I formed you in the belly, I knew you; and before you came forth out of the womb I sanctified you; and I ordained you a prophet unto the nations. Paul also uses a similar expression respecting himself (Galatians 1:15): But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb. That this actually occurred in regard to the Redeemer, it is not necessary to pause here to show .

From the bowels of my mother has he made mention of my name - This is another way of stating the fact that he had been appointed to this office from his very infancy. Many have supposed that the reference here is to the fact that Mary was commanded by the angel, before his birth, to call his name Jesus (Luke 1:31). The same command was also repeated to Joseph in a dream (Matthew 1:21). So Jerome, Vitringa, Michaelis, and some others understand it.

By others it has been supposed that the phrase ‘he has made mention of my name’ is the same as ‘to call.’

The Hebrew is literally, ‘He has caused my name to be remembered from the bowels of my mother.’ The Septuagint renders it, ‘He has called my name.’ Grotius renders it, ‘He has given to me a beautiful name, by which salvation is signified as about to come from the Lord.’ I see no objection to the supposition that this refers to the fact that his name was actually designated before he was born.

The phrase seems obviously to imply more than merely to call to an office. As his name was thus actually designated by God, and as God designed that there should be special significance and applicability in the name, there can be no impropriety in supposing that this refers to that fact. If so, the idea is that he was not only appointed to the work of the Messiah from his birth, but that he actually had a name given him by God before he was born, which expressed the fact that he would save people, and which constituted a reason why the distant pagan lands should listen to his voice.

And he has made my mouth - The idea here is, that he had qualified him for a convincing and powerful eloquence—for the utterance of words which would penetrate the heart like a sharp sword. The mouth here, by an obvious figure, stands for discourse. The comparison of words that are pungent, penetrating, powerful, to a sword, is common. Indeed the very terms that I have incidentally used, ‘pungent,’ ‘penetrating,’ are instances of the same kind of figure, and are drawn from a needle, or anything sharp and pointed, that penetrates. Instances of this occur in the following places in the Scriptures: The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies (Ecclesiastes 12:11). The word of God is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow (Hebrews 4:12). In Revelation 1:16, probably in reference to this passage, the Redeemer is represented as seen by John as having a sharp two-edged sword proceeding out of his mouth. So in Revelation 19:15: And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword.

The bold and striking metaphor of the sword and arrow applied to powerful discourse, has been used also by pagan writers with great elegance and force. In the passages quoted by Lowth, it is said of Pericles by Aristophanes:

‘His powerful speech
Pierced the hearer’s soul, and left behind
Deep in his bosom its keen point infixt.’

So Pindar, Olympian Odes 2.160:

‘Come on! your brightest shafts prepare,
And bend, O Muse, your sounding bow:
Say, through what paths of liquid air
Our arrows shall we throw?’
West

A similar expression occurs in a fragment of Eupolis, in Diodorus Siculus 12.40, when speaking of Pericles:

- καὶ μόνος τῶν ῥητόρων
τὸ κέντρον ἐγκατέλειπε τοῖς ἀκροωμένοις.
- kai monos tōn rētorōn
to kentron egkateleipe tois akroōmenois.

A similar metaphor occurs frequently in Arabic poetry. ‘As arrows his words enter into the heart.’

In the shadow of his hand has he hid me - This passage has been very variously interpreted. Many have understood it as meaning that the shadow of the hand of God would cover or defend him—as a shade or shadow protects from heat. The word ‘shadow’ is used for protection in Isaiah 25:4; Psalms 17:8; Psalms 36:8. This is the interpretation which Gesenius adopts. Piscator says that it means that God protected him from the snares of the Scribes and Pharisees. Others suppose that it means that he was hidden or protected, as the sword is in the sheath, which is under the left hand, so that it can be easily drawn by the right hand. But Vitringa remarks that the figure here is that of a drawn sword, and he supposes that the meaning is, that the shadow of the hand of God is what covers and defends it, and serves, as it were, for a scabbard. Hengstenberg coincides with this opinion, and supposes that the image is taken from a dirk which a man carries in his hand, and which he suddenly draws forth in the moment of attack.

In the parallel member of the sentence, the Redeemer is represented as an arrow that is laid up in a quiver, ready to be drawn forth at any moment. Here, the image is that of a sword under the divine protection, and the idea is, that the shadow of the hand of God constitutes the protection, the covering of the sword. He is the defender of the Messiah, and of his words; and his hand shall guard him as the scabbard does the sword, or as the quiver does the arrow. The Messiah, like the sword, and the polished arrow, was suited for the execution of the plans of God, and was ready at any moment to be engaged in his cause.

His words, his doctrines, would be like the sharp sword and polished arrow. They would penetrate the heart of his foes, and by his doctrines, and the truths which he would teach, he would carry his conquests around the world.

And made me a polished shaft - The word rendered ‘polished’ (ברוּר bârûr), may mean either chosen, or polished. It properly means that which is separated, or severed from others; then select, chosen. Then it may mean anything which is cleansed, or purified, and here may denote an arrow that is cleansed from rust; that is, polished, or made bright.

The word ‘shaft’ (חץ chēts), means properly an arrow. The sense here is that the Messiah pierced the hearts of people like a pointed and polished arrow that is sped from the bow. In his quiver. The word ‘quiver’ means the covering that was made for arrows, and which was so slung over the shoulder that they could be readily reached by the hand as they should be needed.

Has he hid me - ‘Before his appearing,’ says Hengstenberg, ‘the Messiah was concealed with God like a sword kept in its sheath, or like an arrow lying in the quiver.’ But perhaps this is too much refined and forced. The meaning is, probably, simply that he had protected him. ‘God, by his own power,’ says Calvin, ‘protected Christ and his doctrine, so that nothing could hinder its course.’ Yet there is, undoubtedly, the idea that he was adapted to produce rapid and mighty execution; that he was fitted, like an arrow, to overcome the foes of God; and that he was kept in the ‘quiver’ for that purpose.

And said to me - That is, as I suppose, to the Messiah. God said to Him that He was His servant; He by whom He would be particularly glorified and honored.

You are my servant, O Israel - There has been great variety, as was intimated in the analysis of the chapter, in the interpretation of this verse. The question of difficulty is, to whom does the word ‘Israel’ refer? And if it refers to the Messiah, why is this name given to Him? There is no variety in the ancient versions or in the manuscripts. The opinions which have been maintained have been referred to in the analysis and are briefly these:

1. The most obvious interpretation of the verse, if it stood alone, would be to refer it to the Jews as ‘the servant of Jehovah,’ in accordance with (Isaiah 41:8), by whom He would be glorified in accordance with the declaration in (Isaiah 44:23). This is the opinion of Rosenmuller and of some others. But the objection to this is that the things which are affirmed of this ‘servant’ in no way apply to the Jews. It is evidently an individual that is addressed; and in no conceivable sense can that be true of the Jews at large which is affirmed of this person in (Isaiah 49:4 and following).

2. It has been referred to Isaiah. This was the opinion of Grotius, Dathe, Saadias, Doderlin, and others. Grotius supposes it means, ‘you are my servant for the good of Israel.’ So Dathe renders it: ‘It is for Israel’s benefit that I will glorify myself in you.’ Saadias renders it, ‘You are my ambassador to Israel.’ Aben Ezra says of the passage, ‘You are my servant, descended from Israel, in whom I will be glorified. Or, the sense is this: You who in my eyes are reputed as equal to all Israel.’

   But, as has been remarked in the analysis, this interpretation is attended with all the difficulty of the interpretation which refers it to the Messiah, and is inconsistent with the known character of Isaiah, and with the declarations made of the person referred to in the following verses.

   There is certainly no more reason why the name ‘Israel’ should be given to Isaiah than there is why it should be given to the Messiah; and it is certain that Isaiah never arrogated to himself such high honor as that of being a light to the Gentiles, and a covenant of the people, and as being one before whom kings would rise up, and to whom princes would do homage.

3. Gesenius supposes that the word ‘Israel’ is not genuine, but has come by error into the text. But for this there is no authority except one manuscript, to which he himself attaches no weight.

4. The only other interpretation, therefore, is that which refers it to the Messiah. This, which has been the common exposition of commentators, very clearly agrees with the verses which follow, and with the account which occurs in the New Testament.

The account in (Isaiah 49:4–8) is such as can be applied to no one else but Him, and is as accurate and beautiful a description of Him as if it had been made by one who had witnessed His labors and heard from Him the statement of His own plans.

But still, a material question arises: why is this name ‘Israel’ applied to the Messiah? It is applied to Him nowhere else, and it is certainly remarkable that a name should be applied to an individual which is usually applied to an entire people. To this question the following answers, which are, indeed, little more than conjectures, may be returned:

1. Lowth and Vitringa suppose that it is because the name, in its full import and signification, can be given only to Him; and that there is a reference here to the fact recorded in (Genesis 32:28), where Jacob is said to have wrestled with God, and prevailed, and was, in consequence of that, called Israel. The full import of that name, says Lowth, pertains only to the Messiah, ‘who contended powerfully with God in behalf of mankind.’

2. It is common in the Scriptures to use the names which occurred in the history of the Jews as descriptive of things which were to occur in the times of the Messiah, or as representing in general events that might occur at any time. Thus the names, Moab, Edom, Ashur, were used to denote the foes of God in general; the name of Elijah was given to John the Baptist (Hengstenberg).

3. In accordance with this, the name David is often given to the Messiah, and He is spoken of under this name, as He was to be his descendant and successor.

4. For the same reason, the name Israel may be given to Him—not as the name of the Jewish people—but the name of the illustrious ancestor of the Jewish race, because He would possess his spirit, and would, like him, wrestle with God. He was to be a prince having power with God , and would prevail. In many respects there would be a resemblance between Him and this pious and illustrious ancestor of the Jewish people.

In whom I will be glorified - This means that the result of the Redeemer’s work would be such as highly to honor God. He would be glorified by the gift of such a Savior, by His instructions, His example, the effect of His ministry while on earth, and by His death.

The effect of the work of the Messiah as adapted to glorify God is often referred to in the New Testament (John 13:31–32; John 14:13; John 16:14; John 17:1–5).

Then I said - I, the Messiah. In the previous verses He speaks of His appointment to the office of Messiah and of His dignity. The design here is to prepare the way for the announcement of the fact that He would make known His gospel to the nations and would be a light to the Gentiles. For this purpose, He speaks of His labors among His own countrymen; He laments the little success that met His work at the commencement but consoles Himself with the reflection that His cause was with God and that His labors would not go unrewarded.

I have labored in vain - This is to be regarded as the language of the Messiah when His ministry would be met with comparatively little success. In view of that fact, He would commit Himself to God and resolve to extend His gospel to other nations. The expression used here is not to be taken absolutely, as if He had no success in His work. It means that He had comparatively no success; He was not received and welcomed by the people as a whole; He was rejected and despised by them as a whole.

It is true that the Savior had success in His work—far more success than is commonly supposed (see the notes at 1 Corinthians 15:6). But it is also true that by the nation at large He was despised and rejected. The idea here is that there were not results in His ministry at all commensurate with the severity of His labors and the strength of His claims.

I have spent my strength for nought - Comparatively for nothing. This does not mean that He would not be ultimately as successful as He desired to be (compare the notes at Isaiah 53:11); but it means that in His personal ministry He had exhausted His strength and seen comparatively little fruit of His toils.

Yet surely my judgment is with the Lord - My cause is committed to Him, and He will regard it. This expresses the confidence of the speaker that God approved of His work and that He would ultimately give such effect to His labors as He had desired. The sense is, ‘I know that Jehovah approves my work, and that He will grant me the reward of my toils and my sufferings.’

And my work with my God - Margin, ‘Reward’ (see the notes at Isaiah 40:10). The idea is that He knew that God would own and accept His work though it was rejected by mankind.

This indicates perfect confidence in God and a calm and unwavering assurance of His favor, though His work was comparatively unsuccessful—a spirit which, it is needless to say, was demonstrated throughout the whole life of the Redeemer. Never did He doubt that God approved His work; never did He become disheartened and desponding, as if God would not ultimately give success to His plans and to the labors of His life. He calmly committed Himself to God.

He did not attempt to avenge Himself for being rejected or for any of the injuries done to Him. But He left His name, His character, His reputation, His plans, His labors, all with God, believing that His cause was the cause of God and that He would yet be abundantly rewarded for all His toils. This verse teaches:

1. That the most faithful labors, the most self-denying toil, and the efforts of the most holy life may be for a time unsuccessful. If the Redeemer of the world had occasion to say that He had labored in vain, surely His ministers should not be surprised that they have occasion to use the same language.

   It may be no fault of the ministry that they are unsuccessful. The world may be so sinful, and opposition may become so formidable, as to frustrate their plans and prevent their success.

2. Yet, though at present unsuccessful, faithful labor will ultimately do good and be blessed. In some way, and at some period, all honest effort in the cause of God may be expected to be crowned with success.

3. Those who labor faithfully may commit their cause to God, with the assurance that they and their work will be accepted. The ground of their acceptance is not the success of their labors. They will be acceptable in proportion to the amount of their fidelity and self-denying zeal (see the notes at 2 Corinthians 2:15–16).

4. The ministers of religion, when their message is rejected and the world turns away from their ministry, should imitate the example of the Redeemer and say, ‘My judgment is with Jehovah. My cause is His cause; and the result of my labors I commit to Him.’

   To do this as He did, they should labor as He did; they should honestly devote all their strength, talent, and time to His service. Only then can they confidently commit all to Him, and only then will they find peace, as He did, in the assurance that their work will be ultimately blessed and that they will find acceptance with Him.

And now, says the Lord that formed me - This verse contains the reason why he cherished the hope that his work would not be unaccepted. The reason is, that Yahweh had said to him that he should be glorious in his eyes, and that he would be his strength. He stood so high in his favor, and he had such assurances of that favor, that he could confidently commit himself to his care.

That formed you from the womb - Who appointed me before I was born to the office of a servant to accomplish important purposes (see the notes at Isaiah 49:1).

To bring Jacob again to him - To recover the Jewish people again to the pure worship of Yahweh. To them the Messiah was first to be sent, and when they rejected him, he was to proffer the same salvation to the Gentiles . Accordingly the Savior spent his life in preaching to the Jews, and in endeavoring to bring them back to God, and for this purpose he regarded himself as sent (Matthew 15:24).

Though Israel be not gathered - This metaphor is taken from a scattered flock which a shepherd endeavors to gather, or collect to himself.

There is great variety in the interpretation of this expression. The margin reads it, ‘That Israel may be gathered to him, and I may’ be glorious. So Lowth, ‘That Israel unto him may be gathered.’ So Noyes, ‘To gather Israel to him.’ Jerome renders it, ‘Israel shall not be gathered.’ The Septuagint renders it, ‘To gather Jacob unto him, and Israel.’ The Syriac, ‘That I may gather Jacob unto him, and assemble Israel.’ This variety has arisen from the different readings in the Hebrew text.

The reading in the text is לא lo' (“not”); but instead of this the marginal reading, or the Qere of the Masoretes is, לו lô — “to him.” ‘Five manuscripts (two ancient),’ says Lowth, ‘confirm the Qere’, or marginal construction of the Masoretes; and so read Aquila, and the Chaldee, Septuagint, and Arabic.’ Gesenius and Rosenmuller adopt this, and suppose that לא lo' is only a different form of writing לו lô. Grotius and Hengstenberg render it as it is in our version.

It is impossible to determine the true reading; and the only guide is the context, and the views which will be entertained of the design of the passage. To me it seems that the parallelism demands that we should adopt the reading of the Keri, the Septuagint, the Chaldee, and the Syriac, and which has been adopted by Lowth. According to this, it means that he had been appointed to gather in the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and gave his life to it.

Other parts of this statement (Isaiah 49:4–6) show, that by them he was rejected, and that then salvation was sent to other parts of the world. Luther renders it, ‘That Israel be not carried away.’

Yet shall I be - Or, “and” (ו ve) I shall be glorious. The sense is, that as the result of this appointment he would be in some way glorious in the sight of Yahweh. Though he would be rejected by the nation, yet he would be honored by God. He would not only approve his character and work, but would secure his being honored among people by making him the light of the Gentiles .

And my God shall be my strength - He might be rejected by the people, but in God he would find an unfailing source of support and consolation. It is not necessary to say, that this applies most accurately to the character of the Redeemer as exhibited in the New Testament.