Albert Barnes Commentary Isaiah 65

I am sought of them that asked not for me — That is, by the Gentiles. So Paul applies it in (Romans 10:20). Lowth translates the word rendered ‘I am sought’ as ‘I am made known.’ Noyes translates it as ‘I have heard.’ The Septuagint renders it, Ἐμφανὴς ἐγενήθην (Emphanēs egenēthēn) — ‘I became manifest.’ Jerome translates, ‘They sought me who had not before inquired for me.’ The Chaldee states, ‘I am sought in my word by those who had not asked me before my face.’ The Hebrew word דרשׁ (dârash) properly means “to frequent a place, to search, or seek”; and in the Niphal—the form used here—it means “to be sought, to grant access to anyone; hence, to hear and answer prayer” (Ezekiel 14:3; Ezekiel 20:3–31).

Here there is not only the idea that he was sought, but that they obtained access to him, for he listened to their supplications. The phrase ‘that asked not for me’ means that they had not been accustomed to worship the true God. The idea is that those who had not been accustomed to call upon him had obtained mercy.

I am found of them — Paul has rendered this (Romans 10:20) as Ἐμφανὴς ἐγενόμην (Emphanēs egenomēn) — ‘I was made manifest.’ The idea is that they obtained his favor.

I said, Behold me, behold me — I offered them my favor, and invited them to partake of salvation. Paul has omitted this in his quotation.

Unto a nation — This does not refer to any particular nation, but to people who had never been admitted to favor with God.

That was not called by my name — (See the notes at Isaiah 63:19).

I have spread out my hands - To spread out the hands is an action denoting invitation or entreaty (Proverbs 1:24). The sense is, that God had constantly invited the Jews to partake of his favors, but they had been rebellious and had rejected his offers.

All the day - I have not ceased to do it. The Chaldee renders this, ‘I sent my prophets all the day to a rebellious people.’

Unto a rebellious people - (See the notes at Isaiah 1:2). Paul renders this, Πρὸς λαον ἀπειθοῦντα καὶ ἀντιλέγοντα Pros laon apeithounta kai antilegonta - ‘Unto a disobedient and gainsaying people;’ but the sense is substantially preserved.

Which walketh - In what way they did this, the prophet specifies in the following verse. This is the general reason why he had rejected them, and why he had resolved to make the offer of salvation to the Gentiles.

This, at first, was a reason for the calamities which God had brought upon the nation in the suffering of the exile, but it also contains a general principle of which that was only one specimen. They had been rebellious, and God had brought this calamity upon them. It would be also true in future times, that he would reject them and offer salvation to the pagan world, and would be found by those who had never sought for him or called on his name.

A people - This verse contains a specification of the reasons why God had rejected them and brought the calamities upon them.

That provokes me to anger - That is, by their sins. They give constant occasion for my indignation.

Continually - (תמיד tâmı̂yd). It is not once merely, but their conduct as a people is constantly such as to excite my displeasure.

To my face - There is no attempt at concealment. Their abominations are public. It is always regarded as an additional affront when an offense is committed in the very presence of another, and when there is not even the apology that it was supposed he did not see the offender. It is a great aggravation of the guilt of the sinner that his offense is committed in the very presence, and under the very eye, of God.

That sacrifices in gardens - (See the notes at Isaiah 1:29).

And burns incense - On the meaning of the word ‘incense,’ see the notes at Isaiah 1:13.

Upon altars of brick - Margin, ‘Bricks.’ The Hebrew is simply, ‘Upon bricks.’ The command of God was that the altars for sacrifice should be made of unhewn stone (Exodus 20:24–25). But the pagan had altars of a different description, and the Jews had sacrificed on those altars. Some have supposed that this means that they sacrificed on the roofs of their houses, which were flat and paved with brick, tile, or plaster. That altars were sometimes constructed on the roofs of their houses, we know from 2 Kings 23:12, where Josiah is said to have beaten down the altars that were on the top of the upper chamber of Ahaz, which the king of Judah had made. But it is not necessary to suppose that such sacrifices are referred to here.

They had disobeyed the command of God, which required that the altars should be made only of unhewn stone. They had built other altars and had joined with the pagan in offering sacrifices on them. The reason why God forbade that the altar should be made of anything but unhewn stone is not certainly known and is not necessary to be understood to explain this passage. It may have been for the following reasons:

1. In order to separate his people effectually from all others, as well in the construction of the altar as in anything and everything else.
2. Because various inscriptions and carvings were usually made on altars, and as this tended to superstition, God commanded that the chisel should not be used at all in the construction of the altars where his people should worship.

Which remain among the graves - That is, evidently for purposes of necromancy and divination. They do it to appear to hold converse with the dead, and to receive communications from them. The idea in necromancy was that departed spirits must be acquainted with future events, or at least with the secret things of the invisible world where they lived, and that certain persons, by various arts, could become intimate with them, or ‘familiar’ with them, and, by obtaining their secrets, be able to communicate important truths to the living. It seems to have been supposed that this acquaintance might be increased by lodging in the tombs and among the monuments, so that they might thus be near to the dead and have more intimate communion with them (compare the notes at Isaiah 8:19-20).

It should be remembered that tombs among the ancients, and especially in Eastern countries, were commonly excavations from the sides of hills, or frequently were large caves. Such places would provide spacious lodging for those who chose to reside there, and were, in fact, often resorted to by those who had no houses, and by robbers (Mark 5:3).

And lodge in the monuments - Evidently for some purpose of superstition and idolatry. There is, however, some considerable variety in the interpretation of the word translated here ‘monuments,’ as well as in regard to the whole passage. The word translated ‘lodge’ (ילינוּ yâliynû), means properly to pass the night, and refers not to a permanent dwelling in any place, but to remaining overnight; and the probability is that they went to the places referred to, to sleep—in order that they might receive communications in their dreams from idols, by being near them, or in order that they might have communication with departed spirits.

The word translated ‘monuments’ (נצוּרים netsûrı̂ym) is derived from נצר nâtsar—to watch, to guard, to keep; then to keep from view, to hide—and means properly hidden recesses and dark and obscure retreats. It may be applied either to the adyta or secret places of pagan temples where their oracles were consulted and many of their rites were performed; or it may be applied to sepulchral caverns, the dark and hidden places where the dead were buried.

The Septuagint translates it, ‘They sleep in tombs and in caves (ἐν τοῖς σπηλαίοις en tois spēlaiois) for the purpose of dreaming’ (διὰ ἐνύπνια dia enupnia); in allusion to the custom of sleeping in the temples, or near the oracles of their gods, for the purpose of obtaining from them communications by dreams. This custom is frequently alluded to by ancient writers. An instance of this kind occurs in Virgil:

- huc dona sacerdos
Cum tulit, et caesarum ovium sub nocte silenti
Pellibus incubuit stratis, somnosque petivit:
Multa modis simulacra videt volitantia miris,
Et varias audit voces, fruiturque Deorum,
Colloquio, atque imis Acheronta affatur Avernis.
Aeneid, vii. 86-91.

‘Here in distress the Italian nations come,
Anxious to clear their doubts and earn their doom;
First on the fleeces of the slaughter’d sheep,
By night the sacred priest dissolves in sleep;
When in a train before his slumbering eye,
Their airy forms and wondrous visions fly:
He calls the powers who guard the infernal floods,
And talks inspired familiar with the gods.’
Pitt

In the temples of Serapis and Asclepius, it was common for the sick and infirm who came there to be cured, to sleep there, with the belief that the proper remedy would be communicated by dreams.

‘The following places may also be referred to as illustrating this custom: Pausan. Phoc. 31; Cic. Divin. i. 43; Strabo vi. 3, 9; S. H. Meibom. De incubatione in fanta Deorum olim facta. Helmst. 1659, 4.’

Lowth and Noyes translate it, ‘In caverns.’ The Chaldee translates it, ‘Who lived in houses which are built of the dust of sepulchres, and remain with the dead bodies of dead people.’ There can be no doubt that the prophet here alludes to some such custom of sleeping in the tombs, for the alleged purpose of conversing with the dead, or in temples for the purpose of communion with the idols by dreams, or with the expectation that they would receive responses by dreams (compare the notes at Isaiah 14:9).

Which eat swine’s flesh - This was expressly forbidden by the Jewish law (Leviticus 11:7), and is held in abomination by the Jews now. Yet the flesh of the swine was freely eaten by the pagan; and when the Jews conformed to their customs in other respects, they undoubtedly also forgot the law commanding a distinction to be made in meats.

Antiochus Epiphanes compelled the Jews to eat swine’s flesh as a token of their submission and of their renouncing their religion. The case of Eleazar, who chose to die as a martyr rather than give such a proof that he had renounced his religion, and who preferred death rather than dissemble, is recorded in 2 Maccabees 6:19-31. See also the affecting case of the mother and her seven sons, who all died in a similar manner, in 2 Maccabees 7.

Yet it seems that, in the time of Isaiah, they had no such devotion to their national religion.

They freely conformed to the nations around them and thus publicly demonstrated that they disregarded the commands of Yahweh. It should also be noted that swine were often sacrificed by the pagan and were eaten in their feasts in honor of idols. The crime here referred to, therefore, was not merely that of eating the flesh, but it was that of joining with the pagan in idolatrous sacrifices. Thus Ovid says:

Prima Ceres avidae gavisa est sanguine porcae,
Ulta suas merita caede nocentis opes.
Fasti, i. 349

So Horace:

- immolet aequis
Hic porcum Laribus -
Sermones, ii. 164

Thus, Varro (De Re Rustica ii. 4) says, ‘The swine is called in Greek ὗς hus (formerly θῦς thus), and was so called from the word which signifies to sacrifice (θύειν thuein), for the swine seem first to have been used in sacrifices. Of this custom we have vestiges in the fact that the first sacrifices to Ceres are of the swine; and that in the beginning of peace, when a treaty is made, a hog is sacrificed; and that in the beginning of marriage contracts in Etruria, the new wife and the new husband first sacrifice a hog. The primitive Latins, and also the Greeks in Italy, seem to have done the same thing.’

Spencer (De Legibus Hebraeorum i. 7) supposes that this was done often in caves and dark recesses, and that the prophet refers to this custom here.

If this view is correct, then the offense consisted not merely in eating swine’s flesh, but in eating it in connection with sacrifices, or joining with the pagan in their idolatrous worship.

And broth of abominable things - Margin, ‘Pieces.’ Lowth says that this was for ‘lustrations, magical arts, and other superstitious and abominable practices.’ The word translated here ‘broth,’ and in the margin ‘pieces’ (פרק pârâq), is derived from the verb פרק pâraq—to break (from which the Latin frango; the Goth. brikan; the Germ. breoken; and the English break), and means that which is broken, or a fragment; and hence, broth or soup, from the fragments or crumbs of bread over which the broth is poured.

The Septuagint translates this, ‘And all their vessels are polluted.’ It is not improbable that the broth or soup used here was in some way employed in arts of incantation or necromancy. Compare Shakespeare’s account of the witches in Macbeth:

1. 1. Witch: Where have you been, sister?
2. 2. Witch: Killing swine.

Act I, Scene 3.

Hec: Your vessels and your spells provide,
Your charms, and everything beside.
Act III, Scene 5.

1. Witch: Round about the caldron go,
In the poison’d entrails throw,
Toad that under the cold stone,
Days and nights has thirty-one,
Fillet of a finny snake,
In the caldron boil and bake,
Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog,
Adder’s fork, and blind worm’s sting,
Lizard’s leg, and howlet’s wing,
For a charm of powerful trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.
Act IV, Scene 1.

It seems probable that some such magical incantations were used in the time of Isaiah. Such things are known to have been practiced in regions of idolatry (see Marco Polo, De Regionibus Orientalibus, iii. 24).

‘When the priests of the idol,’ he says, ‘wish to engage in sacred things, they call the consecrated girls, and with them, in the presence of the idols, they engage in the dance, and sing aloud. These girls bear with them vessels of food, which they place on the table before the idols, and they entreat the gods to eat of the food, and particularly they pour out broth made of flesh before them, that they may appease them.’

The whole scene here described by the prophet is one connected with idolatry and magical incantations; and the prophet means to rebuke them for having forsaken God and fallen into all the abominable and stupid arts of idolaters.

It was not merely that they had eaten the flesh of swine, or that they had made broth of unclean meats—which would have been minor, though real offenses—it was that they had fallen into all the abominable practices connected with idolatry and necromancy.

Which say, Stand by thyself - Those who engage in these abominations at that time are distinguished by spiritual pride. The most worthless people are commonly the most proud, and those who have wandered farthest from God generally have the most exalted idea of their own goodness. It was a characteristic of a large part of the Jewish nation, and especially of the Pharisees, to be self-righteous and proud.

A striking illustration of this is found in the following description of the Hindu yogis by Roberts: ‘Those men are so isolated by their superstition and penances that they have little contact with the rest of mankind. They wander about in the dark in the place of burning the dead, or among the graves; there they pretend to converse with evil and other spirits, and there they pretend to receive intimations about the destinies of others. They will eat things that are religiously clean or unclean; they neither wash their bodies, nor comb their hair, nor cut their nails, nor wear clothes. They are considered most holy among the people and are looked upon as beings of another world.’

These are a smoke in my nose - Margin, ‘Anger.’ The word translated ‘nose’ (אף 'aph) sometimes means nose (Numbers 11:20; Job 40:24), and sometimes ‘anger,’ because anger is shown by hard breathing.

The Septuagint renders this, ‘This is the smoke of my anger.’ But the correct idea is probably that their conduct was offensive to God, just as smoke is unpleasant or painful in the nostrils, or as smoke excites irritation when breathed, so their conduct excited displeasure (Rosenmuller).

Or it may mean, as Lowth suggests, that their conduct kindled a smoke and a fire in his nose as the emblems of his wrath. There is probably an allusion to their sacrifices here; the smoke of their sacrifices constantly ascending was unpleasant and provoking to God.

A fire that burneth all the day - The idea here is probably that their conduct kindled a fire of indignation that was continually breathed out upon them. A similar figure occurs in Deuteronomy 32:22: For a fire is kindled in mine anger, or in my nose (באפי b^e'appı̂y), and shall burn unto the lowest hell. So in Psalm 18:8:

There went up a smoke out of his nostrils,
And fire out of his mouth devoured.

Compare to Ezekiel 38:18.