Charles Ellicott Commentary Isaiah 2

The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw. — On the relation of this chapter to Isaiah 1, see Introduction. The moral and social state described in it points to an earlier date than the reformation of Hezekiah. The sins of the people are more flagrant, but there is not yet with them the added guilt of formal and ceremonial worship. The character of the king in Isaiah 3:12 corresponds with that of Ahaz. The influence of the Philistines, traceable in Isaiah 2:6, is probably connected with their invasion of Judah in that reign (2 Chronicles 28:18).

The mention of “ships of Tarshish” in Isaiah 2:16 points to a time when the commerce of the Red Sea (1 Kings 9:26; 1 Kings 22:48) was still in the hands of Judah, and therefore, before the capture of Elath by Rezin, king of Syria (2 Kings 16:6). We are able, therefore, with hardly a shadow of uncertainty, to fix the date of the whole section as belonging to the early years of the reign of Ahaz, with, perhaps, a backward glance at evils which also belonged to the reigns of Uzziah and Jotham. The title of the superscription unites in an exceptional form the two ideas of the prophet and of the seer. What follows is “the word” of Isaiah, but it is a word that he has seen.

It shall come to pass in the last days.—The three verses that follow are found in almost identical form in Micah 4:1-3, with the addition of a verse (Micah 4:4) which describes the prosperity of Judah—every man sitting under his vine and his fig-tree, as in the days of Solomon. It is a problem for which we have no adequate data for solving:

1. Did Isaiah borrow from Micah?
2. Did Micah borrow from Isaiah?
3. Did both borrow from some earlier prophet?
4. Or did each receive an independent yet identical revelation?

Micah prophesied, like Isaiah, under Ahaz, Jotham, and Hezekiah, and so either may have heard it from the other. On the other hand, the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem, on which these verses follow, in Micah 3:12, appears from Jeremiah 26:18 to have been spoken in the days of Hezekiah. On the whole, the third possibility mentioned above seems to have most to commend it. (See Introduction.)

For “in the last days” read latter or after days; the idea of the Hebrew words, as in Genesis 49:1 and Numbers 24:14, being that of remoteness rather than finality. For the most part (Deuteronomy 4:30; Deuteronomy 31:29) they point to the distant future of the true King, to the time of the Messiah.

The mountain of the Lord’s house.—The prophet’s vision of the far-off days sees, as it were, a transfigured and glorified Jerusalem. Zion, with the Temple, was to be no longer surrounded by hills as high as, or higher than, itself (Psalms 125:2), scorned by other mountains (Psalms 68:16–17); but was to be to Israel as a Sinai or a Lebanon, as a Mount Meru, or an Olympus, an exceeding high mountain (Ezekiel 40:2), whose physical elevation should answer to its spiritual. (Compare to Zechariah 14:10.)

So in that vision of the future, the waters of Shiloah, that went softly, were to become a broad and rushing river (Isaiah 33:21; Ezekiel 47:3–12). So, when men had been taught by experience that this ideal was to be realised in no Jerusalem on earth, the seer of Patmos saw a yet more transcendent vision of the glories of the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:10 to Revelation 22:5), and yet even these were but types and figures of divine and ineffable realities.

All nations shall flow unto it.—Better, all the nations—i.e., the heathen as distinct from Israel. The prophet sees and welcomes the approach of pilgrims from all regions of the earth to the new sanctuary. Thus early in his work was Isaiah (half unconsciously as to the manner in which his vision was to be realised) the prophet of a universal religion, of which the truths of Judaism were the centre, and of a catholic Church. In the admission of proselytes, commemorated in Psalm 87 (probably written about this time), we may see what may either have suggested the prophecy, or have seemed as the first-fruits of its fulfilment.

Many people shall go and say ...—What was precious to the prophet’s heart was the thought that these pilgrims from afar would not come with a formal worship like that of Isaiah 1:10-15, but, like the queen of Sheba (1 Kings 10:1–10), as seekers after truth, desiring to be taught . The “ways” and the “paths” are the great laws of righteousness, which lead to eternal life. The verb for “teach” is the root of the Hebrew for “law,” as the “teaching” of Jehovah.

Shall go forth the law ...—In the preaching of the Christ, in the mission of the Twelve, in the whole history of the Apostolic Church, we have, to say the least, an adequate fulfillment of the promise. The language of St. Paul, however, suggests that there may be in the future a yet more glorious mission, of which Jerusalem shall once more be the center (Romans 11:12–15).

He shall judge among the nations. —For “rebuke” understand decide or arbitrate. The ideal Divine King is to be all, and more than all, that Solomon had been (1 Kings 10:24). In reliance on His wisdom and equity, nations would refer their disputes to His decision instead of the arbitration of war. Here again we have a partial fulfillment, it may be hoped, a “springing and germinant accomplishment,” in the history of Christendom. So far as the teaching of Christ has influenced international polity and law, He has been the supreme arbitrator of their disputes.

And they shall beat their swords into plowshares. —The words invert the picture of an earlier prophet, who spoke of a time of war (Joel 3:10). Isaiah must have known that prediction, and yet he proclaims that peace, not war, is the ideal goal towards which the order of the Divine government is tending. (Luke 2:14.)

O house of Jacob...—The ideal of the future has been brought before Israel; but it is still far off, and the people must learn repentance, must themselves walk in the light of the Lord, before they can be as light-bearers to other nations. (Compare to the lines of thought in Romans 11:11-15.)