Charles Ellicott Commentary Isaiah 63

Who is this that cometh from Edom? ...—There is no apparent connection between Isaiah 63:1-6 and what precedes and follows. They must be dealt with, accordingly, as a separate section, though not, as some critics have suggested, by a different writer. To understand its relation to the prophet’s mind, we must remember the part Edom had taken during the history of which Isaiah was cognizant, perhaps also that which he foresaw they would take in the period that was to follow. That part had been one of persistent hostility.

They had been allied with the Tyrians against Judah, and had been guilty of ruthless atrocities (Amos 1:9–11). They had carried off Jewish prisoners as slaves (Obadiah 1:10–11). They had been allies of the Assyrian invaders (Psalms 83:6), and had struck Judah in the days of Ahaz (2 Chronicles 28:17). If we think of the prophet as seeing in spirit the working of the old enmity at a later period, we may extend the induction to their exultation at the capture of Jerusalem (Psalms 137:7; Lamentations 4:21).

The memory of these things sank deep into the nation, and the first words of the last of the prophets echo the old hatred (Malachi 1:2–4). In the later days of Judaism, when Rabbis uttered their curses against their oppressors, Edom was substituted for Rome, as John substitutes Babylon (Revelation 18:2).

Isaiah, possibly starting from the memory of some recent outrages in the reign of Hezekiah and taking Edom as the representative of all the nearer hereditary enemies of Israel, enters into an ecstasy of jubilation and sees the conquering king returning from his work of vengeance. The form is that of a warrior coming from the Idumean Bozrah (as distinct from that in the Haurân, Jeremiah 48:24) in bright-red garments. And the color is not that of the scarlet dress worn by soldiers (Nahum 2:3), but that of blood just shed.

Travelling.—The Hebrew verb (bending, or tossing the head) indicates the movement and gestures of a conqueror exulting in his victory.

I that speak ...—The hero-avenger, the righteous king who represents Jehovah, hears the wondering question, and answers for himself. “Righteousness” and “salvation,” which he claims as his attributes, show that he is none other than the ideal Servant of the Lord of Hosts, sharing His attributes.

Wherefore art thou red ... ?—The wondering question shows that the colour is not that of the warrior’s usual dress. The Hebrew word for “red” (âdom) connects itself with Edom , as batsir (“vintage”) probably with Bozrah.

I have trodden the winepress alone ... — The “winepress” here, as elsewhere (Joel 3:13; Lamentations 1:15; Revelation 14:18–20), is the accepted symbol of the carnage of battle. What the hero-conqueror asserts is that he fought the battle single-handedly. He had no human allies, but God was with him.

A slight change in the vowel-points, adopted by some interpreters, changes the verbs to the future tense: “I will tread ... will trample, ... ” as in the second clause of the Authorized Version. It is perhaps better to take the latter verb also as in the past. The work of slaughter is clearly thought of as accomplished before the warrior is seen.

The day of vengeance is. —Better, in both clauses, was, as pointing to the motive of the action, of which the blood-stained garments were the result.

The year of my redeemed ... —Better, the year of my redemption, namely, the work of redeeming my people.

I looked ... — As in Isaiah 1:2, the absolute isolation of the avenger and redeemer is emphasized again and again. Nothing but his own indomitable and righteous zeal against evil had sustained him.