Albert Barnes Commentary Isaiah 58

Cry aloud – Margin, ‘With the throat;’ that is, says Gesenius, with open throat, with full voice coming from the throat and breast; while one who speaks low uses only the lips and tongue (1 Samuel 1:13). The Chaldee here introduces the word prophet, ‘O prophet, cry aloud.’ The Septuagint renders it, ‘Cry with strength’ (ἐν ἰσχύΐ en ischui).

Spare not – That is, do not spare, or restrain the voice. Let it be full, loud, and strong.

Lift up your voice like a trumpet – Speak loud and distinct, so that the language of reproof may be heard. The sense is, the people are insensible and stupid. They need something to rouse them to a sense of their guilt. Go and proclaim it so that all may hear. Speak not in whispers; speak not to a part, but speak so earnestly that their attention will be arrested, and so that all shall hear .

And show my people. This either refers to the Jewish people in the time of the prophet; or to the same people in their exile in Babylon; or to the people of God after the coming of the Messiah.

Vitringa supposes that it refers to the nominally Christian Church when it should have sunk into the sins and formalities of the papacy, and that the direction here is to the true ministers of God to proclaim the sins of a corrupt and degenerate church. The main reason assigned by him for this is that there is no reference here to the temple, to the sacrifices, or to the idolatry which was the prevailing sin in the time of Manasseh. Rosenmuller, for a similar reason, supposes that it refers to the Jews in Babylon. But it has already been remarked (see the analysis to the chapter) that this reason does not appear to be satisfactory.

It is true that there is no reference here to the temple or to sacrifices, and it may be true that the main sin of the nation in the time of Manasseh was idolatry; but it is also true that formality and hypocrisy were prominent sins, and that these deserved reproof. It is true that while they adhered to the public forms of religion, their hearts were not in them. And while they relied on those forms, and were surprised that divine favor was not manifested to them on account of their observance, there was a good reason why that favor was withheld. Moreover, it was important that this reason should be stated clearly and fully.

It is probable, therefore, that the reference here is to the times of the prophet himself, and that the subject of rebuke is the formality, hypocrisy, and prevalent sins of the reign of Manasseh.

Yet they seek me daily - The whole description here is appropriate to the character of formalists and hypocrites; and the idea is that public worship by sacrifice was celebrated daily in the temple and was not discontinued. It is also not improbable that they kept up the regular daily service in their dwellings.

And delight to know my ways - Probably this means they profess to delight to know the ways of God; that is, his commands, truths, and requirements. A hypocrite has no real delight in the service of God, or in his truth, but it is true at the same time that there may be a great deal of professed interest in religion.

There may be a great deal of busy and bustling concern about the order of religious services, the external organization of the church, the ranks of the clergy, and the claims of a liturgy. There may be much pleasure in theological discussion, in the metaphysics of theology, and in the defense of what is deemed orthodoxy. There may also be much pleasure in the mere music of devotion, in the voice of a preacher, and in the power of his arguments.

And there may be much pleasure in the advancement of the denomination to which we are attached; the conversion of people not from sin, but from a side opposite to us; and not to holiness and to God, but to our party and denomination.

True delight in religion is in religion itself; in the service of God as such, and because it is holy. It is not mere pleasure in creeds, and liturgies, and theological discussions, and in the triumph of our cause, nor even in the triumph of Christianity as a mere party measure; but it is delight in God as he is, in his holy service, and in his truth.

As a nation that did righteousness - As a people would do who really loved the ways of righteousness.

They ask of me the ordinances of justice - Their priests and prophets consult about the laws and institutions of religion, as if they were really afraid of violating the divine commands. While they are full of oppression, strife, and wickedness, they are scrupulously careful about violating any of the commands pertaining to the rites of religion. These same people were later so conscientious that they did not dare to enter Pilate’s judgment hall, so that they would not disqualify themselves from partaking of the Passover, even while they were planning the death of their own Messiah and were actively engaged in a plot to secure his crucifixion! (John 19:28). It is often the case that hypocrites are most scrupulous and conscientious about forms precisely when they are planning some act of enormous guilt and accomplishing some scheme of deep depravity.

They take delight in approaching to God - There is a pleasure that even a hypocrite has in the services of religion, and we should not conclude that we are truly pious simply because we find pleasure in prayer and praise. Our pleasure may arise from many other sources than proper views of God or his truth, or from evidence that we are his friends.

Wherefore have we fasted - They had fasted much, evidently with the expectation of delivering themselves from impending calamities and securing divine favor. They are here introduced as saying that they had been disappointed. God had not intervened as they had expected. Chagrined and mortified, they now complain that He had not noticed their very conscientious and faithful regard for the duties of religion.

And thou seest not? - All had been in vain. Calamities still impended; judgments threatened; and there were no tokens of divine approval. Hypocrites depend on their fastings and prayers as laying God under obligation to save them. If He does not intervene, they complain and murmur. When fasting is the result of a humble and broken heart, it is acceptable; when it is instituted as a means of purchasing divine favor and as laying God under obligation, it can be followed by no happy result to the soul.

Have we afflicted our soul - By fasting. Twenty-one manuscripts (six ancient), says Lowth, have this in the plural number—‘our souls’—and so the Septuagint, Chaldee, and the Vulgate. The sense is not materially affected, however. It is evident here that they regarded their numerous fastings as laying the foundation of a claim on the favor of God, and that they were disposed to complain when that claim was not acknowledged. Fasting, like other religious duties, is proper; but in that, as in all other services of religion, there is danger of supposing that we bring God under obligations, and that we are laying the foundation of a claim to His favor.

Thou takest no knowledge - You do not regard our numerous acts of self-denial.

Behold, in the day of your fast you find pleasure - The prophet here proceeds to state the reasons why their fastings were not followed by divine favor, as they had supposed. The first reason he states is that even when they were fasting, they were giving full indulgence to their depraved appetites and lusts. The Syriac has well rendered this, ‘In the day of your fasting you indulge your lusts, and draw near to all your idols.’ This also was evidently the case with the Jews in the time of the Saviour. They were characterized repeatedly by Him as ‘an evil and adulterous generation,’ and yet no generation perhaps was ever more punctual and strict in the external duties of fasting and other religious ceremonies.

And exact all your labors - This is the second reason why their fasting was not followed by more positive results. The margin renders this ‘griefs,’ or ‘things with which you grieve others.’ Lowth renders it, ‘All your demands of labor you rigorously exact.’ Castellio renders it, ‘And all things which are due to you, you exact.’ The word rendered here ‘labors’ usually denotes hard and painful labor, toil, travail, etc. The Septuagint renders it here, ‘And goad (ὑπονύσσετε huponussete) all those who are under your control’ (τοὺς ὑποχειρίους ὑμῶν tous hupocheirious humōn). The idea seems to be that they were at that time oppressive in exacting all that was due to them; they remitted nothing, they forgave nothing. Alas, how often is this still true!

People may be most diligent in the external duties of religion; most abundant in fasting and in prayer, and at the same time most unyielding in demanding all that is due to them. Like Shylock—another Jew like those in the time of Isaiah—they may demand ‘the pound of flesh,’ at the same time that they may be most formal, punctual, precise, and bigoted in the performance of the external duties of religion. The sentiment taught here is that if we desire to keep a fast that will be acceptable to God, it must be one that will cause us to unbind heavy burdens from the poor and to lead us to relax the rigor of the claims that would be oppressive to those who are subject to us .

Behold, you fast for strife and debate – This is a third characteristic of their manner of fasting, and a third reason why God did not regard and accept it. They were divided into parties and factions, and probably made their fastings an occasion of increased contention and strife. How often has this been seen! Contending denominations of Christians fast, not laying aside their strife; contending factions in the church fast in order to strengthen their party with the solemn sanctions of religion.

One of the most certain ways for bigots to excite persecution against those who are opposed to them is to proclaim a fast; and when together, their passions are easily inflamed, their flagging zeal excited by inflammatory harangues, and their purpose formed to regard and treat their dissenting brethren as incorrigible heretics and irreconcilable enemies. It may be added, also, that it is possible thus to prostitute all the sacred institutions of religion for party and inflammatory purposes.

Even the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper may be thus abused, and violent partisans may come around the sacred memorials of a Savior’s body and blood, to bind themselves more closely together in some deed of persecution or violence, and to animate their drooping courage with the belief that what has in fact commenced with a view to power, is carried on from a regard for the honor of God.

And to smite with the fist of wickedness – Lowth renders this, in accordance with the Septuagint, ‘To smite with the fist the poor;’ but this translation can be obtained only by a most violent and wholly unauthorized change in the Hebrew text. The idea is plain, that even when fasting they were guilty of strife and personal combats. Their passions were unsubdued, and they gave vent to them in disgraceful personal encounters.

This manifests a most extraordinary state of society and is a most melancholy instance to show how much people can maintain the forms of religion, and even be punctual and exact in them, when the most violent and ungovernable passions are raging in their hearts, and when they seem to be unconscious of any discrepancy between the religious service and the unsubdued passions of the soul.

You shall not fast ... – It is not acceptable to God. It must be offensive in His sight.

To make your voice to be heard on high – That is, in strife and contention. So to contend and strive, says Grotius, that your voice can be heard on the mountain top. Rosenmuller, however, supposes that it means that their fast was so conducted that they could not expect that their prayers would ascend to heaven and be heard by God. But it seems to me that the former is the correct interpretation. Their fastings were accompanied with the loud and hoarse voice of contention and strife, and on that account could not be acceptable to God.

Is it such a fast that I have chosen? – Is this such a mode of fasting as I have appointed and as I approve?

A day for a man to afflict his soul? – Margin, ‘To afflict his soul for a day.’ The reading in the text is the more correct; and the idea is that the pain and inconvenience experienced by abstinence from food was not the end in view in fasting. This seems to have been the mistake they made: they supposed there was something meritorious in the very pain incurred by such abstinence. Is there not danger of this now? Do we not often feel that there is something meritorious in the very inconveniences we suffer in our acts of self-denial?

The important idea in the passage before us is that the pain and inconvenience we may endure by the most rigid fasting are not meritorious in the sight of God. They are not what He aims at by the appointment of fasting.

He aims at justice, truth, benevolence, holiness (Isaiah 58:6–7); and He esteems the act of fasting to be of value only as it will be the means of leading us to reflect on our faults and to amend our lives.

Is it to bow down his head – A bulrush is the large reed that grows in marshy places. It is, says Johnson, without knots or joints. In the midst of water it grows luxuriantly, yet the stalk is not solid or compact like wood, and, being unsupported by joints, it easily bends over under its own weight. It thus becomes the emblem of a man bowed down with grief.

Here it refers to the sanctimoniousness of a hypocrite when fasting – a man without real feeling who puts on an air of affected solemnity and appears to others to fast. Against that the Savior warned His disciples, and directed them, when they fasted, to do it in their ordinary dress and to maintain an aspect of cheerfulness (Matthew 6:17–18). The hypocrites in the time of Isaiah seemed to have supposed that the object was gained if they assumed this affected seriousness.

How much danger is there of this now! How often do even Christians assume, on all the more solemn occasions of religious observance, a forced sanctimoniousness of manner; a demure and dejected air; indeed, an appearance of melancholy – which is often understood by the world to be misanthropy, and which easily slides into misanthropy! Against this we should guard.

Nothing more injures the cause of religion than sanctimoniousness, gloom, reserve, coldness, and the conduct and deportment which, whether right or wrong, will be construed by those around us as misanthropy. Let it not be forgotten that the seriousness which religion produces is always consistent with cheerfulness and is always accompanied by benevolence; and the moment we feel that our religious acts consist in merely bowing down the head like a bulrush, that moment we may be sure we shall do injury to all with whom we come in contact.

And to spread sackcloth and ashes under him – On the meaning of the word ‘sackcloth,’ see the notes on Isaiah 3:24. It was commonly worn around the loins in times of fasting and of any public or private calamity. It was also customary to sit on sackcloth, or to spread it under oneself either to lie on, or to kneel on in times of prayer, as an expression of humiliation. Thus in Esther 4:3, it is said, and many lay on sackcloth and ashes; or, as it is in the margin, sackcloth and ashes were laid under many (compare 1 Kings 21:27).

A passage in Josephus strongly confirms this, in which he describes the deep concern of the Jews for the danger of Herod Agrippa, after having been stricken suddenly with a violent disorder in the theater of Caesarea. ‘Upon the news of his danger, immediately the multitude, with their wives and children, sitting upon sackcloth according to their country rites, prayed for the king; all places were filled with wailing and lamentation; while the king, who lay in an upper room, beholding the people below thus falling prostrate on the ground, could not himself refrain from tears’ (Antiquities xix. 8. 2). We wear crepe – but for a somewhat different object. With us it is a mere sign of grief; but the wearing of sackcloth or sitting on it was not a mere sign of grief but was regarded as tending to produce humiliation and mortification.

Ashes also were a symbol of grief and sorrow. The wearing of sackcloth was usually accompanied with ashes (Daniel 9:3; Esther 4:1, 4:3). Penitents, or those in affliction, either sat down on the ground in dust and ashes (Job 2:8; Job 42:6; Jonah 3:6); or they put ashes on their head (2 Samuel 13:19; Lamentations 3:16); or they mingled ashes with their food (Psalms 102:9). The Greeks and the Romans had also the same custom of strewing themselves with ashes in mourning. Thus Homer (Iliad, xviii. 22), speaking of Achilles bewailing the death of Patroclus, says:

Cast on the ground, with furious hands he spread
The scorching ashes o’er his graceful head,
His purple garments, and his golden hairs;
Those he deforms, and these he tears.

Laertes (Odyssey xxiv. 315), shows his grief in the same manner:

Deep from his soul he sighed, and sorrowing spread
A cloud of ashes on his hoary head.

So Virgil (Aeneid x. 844), speaking of the father of Lausus, who was brought to him wounded, says:

Canitiem immundo deformat pulvere.

Wilt thou call this a fast? – Will you suppose that these observances can be such as God will approve and bless? The truth here taught is that no mere outward expressions of penitence can be acceptable to God.