John Calvin Commentary Isaiah 1

The vision of Isaiah. The Hebrew word חזון (chazon), though it is derived from חזה (chazah), he saw, and literally is a vision, yet commonly signifies a prophecy. For when Scripture mentions special visions that were presented to the prophets in a symbolic manner, when God willed that some extraordinary event should receive confirmation, in such cases the word מראה (mar'eh), vision, is used.

Not to multiply quotations, in a passage that relates to prophecy in general the writer says that the word of God was precious, because חזון (chazon), vision, was of rare occurrence (1 Samuel 3:1). A little later, the word מראה (mar'eh) is used to denote the vision by which God revealed Himself to Samuel (1 Samuel 3:13).

In distinguishing between two ordinary methods of revelation, a vision and a dream, Moses speaks of a vision (מראה) as the special method (Numbers 12:6). It is evident, however, that the seer, הראה (haro'eh), was the name formerly given to prophets (1 Samuel 9:9), preeminently so because God revealed His counsel to them in an intimate manner.

Regarding the present passage, this word unquestionably denotes the certainty of the doctrine, as if to say that everything contained in this book was made known to Isaiah by God Himself. The derivation of the word, therefore, deserves attention.

For by it we learn that the prophets did not speak of their own accord or draw from their own imaginations; rather, they were enlightened by God, who opened their eyes to perceive those things they otherwise would not have been able to comprehend by themselves. Thus, the inscription of Isaiah commends the doctrine of this book to us—as containing no human reasoning but the oracles of God—to convince us that it contains only what was revealed by the Spirit of God.

Concerning Judah. If we were to translate it as 'to Judah,' it would make little difference, for the preposition על (al) has both meanings. The meaning would still be that everything contained in this book belongs strictly to Judah and Jerusalem.

For although many things are scattered throughout it that relate to Babylon, Egypt, Tyre, and other cities and countries, it was not necessary for those places to be expressly enumerated in the title. It was only necessary to announce the principal subject and to explain to whom Isaiah was chiefly sent: that is, to Jerusalem and the Jews. Everything else contained in his prophecies may be considered incidental and not central to his primary commission.

And yet it was not inconsistent with his prophetic office to announce to other nations the calamities that would overtake them. For similarly, Amos did not go beyond the limits of his calling when he did not spare the Jews, though he was not sent to them (Amos 2:4–5).

A more familiar example is found in the calling of Peter and Paul; the former was appointed to the Jews and the latter to the Gentiles (Galatians 2:8). Yet Peter did not exceed the limits of his office by preaching to the Gentiles (for example, when he went to Cornelius; Acts 10:17), nor did Paul, when he offered his services to the Jews, whom he immediately approached upon entering any city (Acts 13:5; Acts 14:1; 17:2, 10; 18:4, 19).

We should view Isaiah in the same light. For while he is careful to instruct the Jews and directs his labors expressly toward that object, he does not transgress his proper limits when he also makes passing mention of other nations.

Judah and Jerusalem. He takes Judah to mean the whole nation and Jerusalem the chief city in the kingdom. He does not distinguish between Jerusalem and the Jews but mentions Jerusalem preeminently (κατ’ ἐξοχήν) as the capital, just as if a prophet today were to address the kingdom of France and Paris, its capital.

This was very important so that the inhabitants of Jerusalem might not consider themselves exempt—as if, due to their high rank, they were free from all blame or above the law—and thus send the common people to be instructed by less distinguished prophets.

It is a mistake, however, to suppose that Jerusalem is mentioned separately because it was situated in the tribe of Benjamin, for the half of that tribe that was subject to David’s descendants is included under the name Judah.

Hear, O heavens. Isaiah has here imitated Moses, as all the prophets are accustomed to do; and there cannot be a doubt that he alludes to that illustrious Song of Moses, in which, at the very commencement, he calls heaven and earth to witness against the people:

Give ear, O you heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. (Deuteronomy 32:1).

This is unquestionably a very severe protestation; for it conveys this meaning, that God turns to the elements which are dumb and devoid of feeling, because men now have no ears, or are bereft of all their senses. The Prophet, therefore, speaks of it as an extraordinary and monstrous thing, which ought to strike even the senseless elements with amazement. For what could be more shocking than that the Israelites should revolt from God, who had bestowed on them so many benefits? Those who think that by heaven are meant angels, and by earth men, weaken too much the import of those words, and thus destroy all their force and majesty.

Almost all the commentators consider the clause to end with the words, for the Lord has spoken; as if the Prophet had intimated that as soon as the Lord opens His sacred mouth, all ought to be attentive to hear His voice. And certainly this meaning has the appearance of being more full; but the context demands that we connect the words in a different manner, so as to make the word "hear" refer, not in a general manner to any discourse whatever, but only to the expostulation which immediately follows. The meaning therefore is: Hear the complaint which the Lord brings forward, I have nourished and brought up children, etc. For he relates a prodigy, which fills him with such horror that he is compelled to summon dead creatures as witnesses, contrary to nature.

That no one may wonder at the circumstance of his addressing dumb and lifeless objects, experience very clearly shows that the voice of God is heard even by dumb creatures. The order of nature is nothing else than the obedience which is rendered to Him by every part of the world, so that everywhere His supreme authority shines forth. For at His bidding the elements observe the law laid down to them, and heaven and earth perform their duty. The earth yields her fruits; the sea flows not beyond her settled boundaries; the sun, moon, and stars perform their courses; the heavens, too, revolve at stated periods; and all with wonderful accuracy, though they are destitute of reason and understanding.

But man, endowed with reason and understanding, in whose ears and in whose heart the voice of God frequently sounds, remains unmoved, like one bereft of his senses, and cannot bend the neck to submit to Him. Against obstinate and rebellious men shall dumb and lifeless creatures bear testimony, so that they will one day feel that this protestation was not in vain.

I have nourished. Literally it runs, I have made them great; but as he is speaking about children, we cannot obtain a better rendering than I have nourished, or, I have brought up. For instead of the verb "to nourish," the Latins employ the phrase, to bring up children. But he afterwards mentions other benefits which He had bestowed on them in rich abundance; as if He had said, that He not only had performed the part of a kind father, by giving them food and the ordinary means of support, but had labored to raise them to an honorable rank. For in every sort of kindness towards them He had, as it were, exhausted Himself, as He elsewhere reproaches them,

What could have been done to my vineyard that I have not done? (Isaiah 5:4).

A similar charge the Lord might indeed have brought against all nations; for all of them He feeds, and on all He confers great and multiplied benefits. But He had chosen the Israelites in a peculiar manner, had given them a preference above others by adopting them into His family, had treated them as His most beloved children, had tenderly cherished them in His bosom, and, in a word, had bestowed on them every kind of blessing.

To apply these observations to our own times, we ought to consider whether our condition is not equal, or even superior, to that which the Jews formerly enjoyed. Their adoption into the family of God bound them to maintain the purity of His worship. Our obligation is twofold; for not only have we been redeemed by the blood of Christ, but He who once redeemed us is pleased to favor us with His Gospel, and in this manner prefers us to all those whom He still allows to remain blinded by ignorance. If we do not acknowledge these things, how much severer punishment shall we deserve? For the more full and abundant the grace of God which has been poured out on us, the higher will be the ingratitude of which it shall convict us.

They have revolted. Jerome translates it, they have despised; but it is plain enough, from many passages, that פשע (pashang) means something more, namely, revolt. God declares that by no acts of kindness could they be kept in a state of obedience, that they were utterly disaffected and estranged, like a son who leaves his father’s house, and thus makes manifest that there remains no hope of his improvement.

It is indeed a monstrous thing that children should not be obedient to their father, and to a Father who is so kind, and who gives unceasing attention to His family. Lycurgus refused to enact a law against ungrateful persons, because it was monstrously unnatural not to acknowledge a benefit received.

A child who is ungrateful to his father is therefore a double monster; but a child who is ungrateful to a kind and generous father is a threefold monster. For He employs the word children, not for the purpose of treating them with respect, but in order to exhibit that revolt in a more striking manner, and in more hateful colors.

The ox knows his owner. This comparison marks more strongly the criminality of the revolt. The Lord might have compared his people to the Gentiles, but he is even more severe when he compares them to mute animals and pronounces them to be more stupid than the animals are.

Though animals lack reason and understanding, they are still capable of being taught, at least to the extent of recognizing those who feed them.

Since, therefore, God had not only fed this people at a stall but had also nourished them with all the kindness a father usually shows his sons, and had not only filled their stomachs but supplied them daily with spiritual food, perceiving them to be so exceedingly sluggish, he justly considers that they deserve to be taught in the school of animals, not of humans. Therefore, he sends them to the oxen and asses to learn from them what their duty is.

Nor should we wonder at this, for animals frequently observe the order of nature more correctly and display greater kindness than humans themselves.

Without multiplying instances, it will be sufficient to note what Isaiah mentions here: that animals, though they are exceedingly dull and stupid, nevertheless obey their masters and those who care for them. But if we choose to consider other ways in which they excel humans, how many will we discover?

Why is it that scarcely any animal is cruel to its own species and recognizes its own likeness in another? Why is it that all animals commonly bestow so much care in raising their young, while it frequently happens that human mothers, forgetting the voice of nature and humanity, forsake their children?

Why is it that they are accustomed to take no more food and drink than what is sufficient to sustain their life and strength, while humans gorge themselves and utterly ruin their health? In short, why is it that they do not, in any respect, transgress the laws nature has prescribed for them?

The Papists, who are accustomed to disregard the true meaning of the Scriptures and to corrupt all the mysteries of God with their own foolish ideas, have here invented an absurd fable. For they have falsely alleged that the oxen and asses in the stall worshipped Christ when he was born, by which they show themselves to be egregious asses.

(And indeed I wish they would imitate the ass which they have invented, for then they would be asses worshipping Christ, and not lifting up the heel against his divine authority.) For here the Prophet is not speaking of miracles, but of the order of nature, and declares that those who overturn that order may be regarded as monsters.

We must not invent new miracles to add to the authority of Christ. For by mixing the false with the true, there is a danger that both will be disbelieved, nor can there be any doubt that if such a miracle had occurred, the Evangelists would have recorded it in writing.

Israel does not know. The name Israel, which he contrasts with those animals, is emphatic. We know how honorable it was for the descendants of Abraham to be known by this name, which God had bestowed on the holy patriarch because he had vanquished the angel in wrestling (Genesis 32:28). So much the more dishonorable was it for unworthy and rebellious children to boast falsely of that honor.

This dishonor is apparent in two main ways:

1. There is an implied reproof: not only do those who fail to resemble the holy man at all do wrong in assuming his name, but they are also ungrateful to God, from whom they had received most valuable blessings.
2. An indirect comparison is also conveyed. For the higher their rank was, being far exalted above all other nations, the greater the disgrace is now intended to be expressed by distinguishing them from other nations under the honorable designation of Israel.

The Greek translators have added the word me; but I prefer to repeat what he had said before, Israel does not know his Owner, that is, God; nor his crib, that is, the Church, in which he had been brought up, and to which he should be drawn. While those animals, on the other hand, recognize the master by whom they are nourished and willingly return to the place where they have been fed.

Ah sinful nation! Though he had already reproved their crime with sufficient severity, yet, for the purpose of exposing it still more, he adds an exclamation, by which he expresses still more strongly his abhorrence of such base ingratitude and wickedness. Some are of the opinion that the particle הוי (hoi) denotes grief; Jerome renders it vae (Wo to); but for my part, I consider it sufficient to say that it is an exclamation, suggested partly by astonishment and partly by sorrow. For we burst into loud cries when the disgracefulness of the action is such that it cannot be expressed in plain terms, or when we lack words to correspond to the depth of our grief. What we have rendered wicked nation, the Greeks have translated ἁμαρτωλὸν, that is, a sinner; and such is likewise the rendering of the Vulgate. But the Hebrew word denotes those who are abandoned to crime; and the Prophet unquestionably charges them with abandoned wickedness.

A people laden with iniquity. The force of the metaphor should be observed; for not only does he mean that they are sunk in their iniquity, as in a deep mire, but he also brings a charge against them, that they sin, not through mistake or thoughtlessness, as frequently happens with those who are easily led astray, but that they pursue their rebellion with a firm resolve, as if he were saying that they were the slaves of sin, or sold to act wickedly.

When he adds, a seed of evil-doers, he means a wicked seed. Others, with greater ingenuity, consider this passage to mean that they are declared to be unworthy to hold a place among the children of Abraham, because they are bastards and not related to him; as they are elsewhere called the seed of Canaan, and are reproached with being uncircumcised (Jeremiah 9:26), as if they had been the descendants of heathens and foreigners. But it is customary for the Hebrews to employ the phrase “children of the good” for “good children,” a mode of expression which has been imitated by the Greeks.

Degenerate children. The word משחיתים (mashchithim) literally means corrupting, and accordingly translators supply the word themselves, or, their pursuits. But I consider that degenerate is a more appropriate rendering, for the Prophet means that they are so depraved as to be altogether unlike their parents.

The four epithets which he here bestows on his nation are far from being honorable and are widely different from the opinion which they had formed about themselves. For this is the manner in which we must arouse hypocrites; and the more they flatter themselves, and the further they are from being regulated by the fear of God, the more we should wield against them the thunderbolts of words.

On such persons, a milder form of instruction would produce no effect, and an ordinary exhortation would not move them. It is also necessary to remove that false conviction of their holiness, righteousness, and wisdom, which they commonly employ as a disguise and as the ground of idle boasting.

For they have forsaken the Lord. He assigns the reason why he reproves them with such sharpness and severity. It is so that they may not complain, as they are accustomed to do, of being treated with excessive harshness and rigor.

And first he upbraids them with that which is the source of all evils: their revolt from God. For, as it is the highest perfection of righteousness to cleave to God, agreeably to those words of Moses, Now, Israel, what doth thy God require from thee but that thou shouldst cleave to him? so, when we have revolted from him, we are utterly ruined. The design of the Prophet is not to convince the Jews that they are guilty of a single crime, but to show that they are wholly apostates.

The following words, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel, whether the Hebrew word is rendered provoke or despise (the latter of which I prefer), are undoubtedly added to place their sin in an even stronger light. For it was shamefully base to treat with contempt the favor of him who had chosen them alone out of all the nations to be adopted into his family.

This is also the reason why God is called the Holy One of Israel: because, by admitting them to alliance with him, he had at the same time adorned them with his holiness. For wherever this name occurs, it is ascribed to him on account of the effect.

What barbarous pride it was to despise so great an honor! If anyone prefers to render the word provoke, the meaning will be that they rejected God as if they expressly intended to provoke his anger, which shows how detestable their apostasy is.

They are gone away backward. The meaning is that when the Lord laid down for them a fixed way and rule of living, they were hurried along by their sinful passions. But he confirms the statement which he had just made, that their licentiousness was so unbridled that they utterly revolted from God and deliberately turned aside from that course to which their life should have been directed.

Why should you be stricken any more? Some render it, Upon what? or, On what part? They interpret the passage as if the Lord had said that he had no other scourge left, because he has attempted to bring them back to the path of duty by such various methods that no other way of chastising them remains to be tried. But I prefer to render it Why? because this corresponds to the Hebrew word and agrees better with the context. It is equivalent to phrases in daily use: To what purpose? For what object?

He means that the Jews have proceeded to such a pitch of wickedness and crimes that it is impossible to believe that chastisements will do them any good. For when desperate men have been hardened, we know that they will rather be broken to shreds than submit to correction. He complains of their prodigious obstinacy, like a physician who would declare that every remedy had been tried and that his skill was now exhausted.

At the same time, he charges them with extreme malice. For when ungodly men are not even humbled by punishments, they have arrived at the very height of wickedness. It is as if the Lord had said, "I see that I would do you no good if I were to chastise you." For although chastisements and afflictions are the remedies God employs for curing our vices, when they are found to be of no advantage to us, we are past hope.

True, indeed, God does not on that account cease to punish us; on the contrary, his wrath against us is more inflamed, for God abhors such obstinacy above all other things. But he justly says that his labor is lost when he does not succeed in bringing us to repentance, and that it is useless to apply remedies to those who cannot be cured.

Thus, he does not fail to double their chastisements and afflictions and to try the very utmost of what can be done, and he is even compelled to take this course until he absolutely ruins and destroys them. But in all this, he does not fulfill the role of a physician; rather, what he laments is that the chastisements he inflicts will be of no avail to his people.

You will yet grow more faithless. This is a confirmation of the former statement, and therefore I separate it from the former clause, though some put them together. It is as if he had said, "Still you will not cease to practice treachery; indeed, you will add to your crimes. For I perceive that you rush to commit iniquity as if you had banded yourselves together for that purpose, so that we can no longer hope that you will slow down in your course." God's design is to exhibit their incorrigible disposition, so that they may be left without excuse.

The whole head is sick. Others translate it every head and suppose that those terms denote the princes and nobles of the nation. I rather agree with the opinion of those who render it the whole head, for I consider it to be a plain comparison taken from the human body: the body is so severely afflicted that there is no hope of returning health.

He points out two principal parts on which the health of the body depends, thus showing the extent of the disease. He tells us this disease has infected this wretched people to such a degree that they are wasting away. The disease exists not in a single member or in the extremities of the body, but the heart itself has been wounded, and the head is severely afflicted. In short, the vital parts, as they are called, are so much injured and corrupted that it is impossible to heal them.

But here also commentators differ, for some view this state of disease as referring to sins, and others to punishments. Those who view it as referring to sins interpret it thus: "You are like a rotten and stinking body, in which no part is sound or healthy. Crimes of the worst description prevail among you, by whose infection everything is corrupted and debased."

But I choose rather to interpret it as referring to punishments. For unquestionably, God still proceeds with this complaint: that the nation is so obstinate as to be incapable of being cured by any chastisements. This is because, though it has been beaten almost to death, or at least has been maimed and frightfully torn by repeated blows, it is still not reformed. Such too is the import of this.