BOOKS.

THE BOOK OF ISAIAH.*

Tars is a very attractive book. Mr. George Adam Smith has evidently such a mastery of the scholarship of his subject, that it would be a sheer impertinence for most scholars, even if tolerable Hebraists, to criticise his translations ; and certainly it is not the intention of the present reviewer to attempt anything of the kind, to which he is absolutely incom- petent. All we desire is to let English readers know how very lucid, impressive, and, indeed, how vivid a study of Isaiah is within their reach,—the fault of the book, if it has a fault, being rather that it finds too many points of connection between Isaiah and our modern world, than that it finds too few. In other words, no one can say that the book is not full of life. It might perhaps be said that occa- sionally,—very occasionally,—the life in it overshadows what we take to have been the true Isaiah, rather than brings him out into stronger relief. So far as we understand the prophet and statesman, the great object of Isaiah's work in the world was to keep the Jewish nation in that pure worship of Jehovah which was inconsistent with any close foreign alliances with such peoples as the Egyptians or the Assyrians, and, indeed, inconsistent with dependence on any human power. He wished to keep them true worshippers, and he held that all infection with the Egyptian or Assyrian habits of thought was incon- sistent with their being true worshippers. Moreover, he be- lieved, as divine inspiration taught him to believe, that God's providence could defend Judea from all the dangers of isola- tion, so long as isolation was caused by that absolute obedience to the holy will of Jehovah which it was to be the one function of the Jews' national life to testify to the world. In this, as • The Expositor's Bible. Edited by the Rev. W. Robertson M00% M.A.- The Book of Isaiah., By the Rev. George Adam Smith, M.A. London : Hodder and Stoughton.

we understand him, Mr. G. A. Smith fully concurs, and, indeed, we could quote many passages in which he sets forth this same drift very ably. But this divine purpose for the insulation of the Jews seems to us to open a wider gulf than Mr. Smith seems willing to allow between the aspect in which the world appeared to Isaiah, and the aspect in which it appears to modern, or comparatively modern, moralists and statesmen. We cannot say that we see any such analogy between Isaiah's great denunciation of the Assyrian alliance, and Cromwell's denunciation of the Scottish pedants who were anxious to save the kingship of Charles II. and to have their Westminster Confession too. As a matter of fact, that was what did actually happen after the Restoration, and without any fatal infidelity of the Scotch to their faith. Isaiah's denunciation of the covenant "with death and hell " was founded on principles which were not at stake when the Scotch wished to find some compromise which would at once save for them their Church and keep them in their old constitu- tional relation to the Crown of both Kingdoms. Of course, Cromwell thought that the same principle was at stake, and as he had for the moment the power of the sword as well as the greater power of character on his side, his mistake may have been excusable. But we very much doubt whether Mr. George Adam Smith does really illuminate Isaiah's position in denouncing the Assyrian alliance by quoting Cromwell's appeal to Isaiah before Musselburgh. Cromwell believed, no doubt, that it was almost as fatal to all sound evangelical faith, for Presbyterians to hold by an English dynasty which was not worthy of such trust, as Isaiah held it to be fatal to Jewish faith to hold by an Assyrian alliance. But in reality there was very little in common between the two situations. The Scotch Presbyterians knew that they had a guarantee in the religious feelings of the English people and the thorough English distrust of the Stuarts, against the con- cession of too much influence to that unworthy family, and they knew that their faith would in all probability be almost as safe with a Stuart on the throne as with a Protector; nor were they very much in error. Isaiah, on the other hand, knew that if Judah and Jerusalem were once absorbed into the heart of a great heathen Power like either Assyria or Egypt, the one purpose for which the people of Israel had been set apart from all other peoples would be defeated.

Nor can we, again, see any analogy so close as Mr. G. A. Smith discovers between Mazzini's discovery that instead of having inspired "young Italy" with all the deep enthusiasm which burned in his own soul for the renova- tion of his country, he had apparently made many of that party colder to the cause than they had been before they first joined him, and Ism' h's discovery that the most noticeable effect of his prophesying had been to make the heart of the people gross, and their ears dull of bearing, and their eyes shut against the light, lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and be converted to the divine cause. Of course, there is a certain analogy between the reaction which almost always follows the first unsuccessful effort put forth by any great moral influence and that which follows the similarly unsuccessful exertion of any other moral influence.

In all such cases there is a time of increased apathy, of almost angry revolt, when the " little pot " that, as the proverb says, is " soon hot " has boiled over, and only scalded the hands which filled it. But there was, we take it, a good deal more in Mazzini's fervid patriotism to excuse a certain reaction against it, than there was in Isaiah's. As Mazzini lent a sort of sanction to the violent removal of one of the few personal centres of Italian independence, in his disgust at Charles Albert's reluctance to plunge headlong into the patriotic cause, we must feel, we think, that great and pure as was his motive, it was not free from the kind of fanaticism which transgresses moral limits. Now, the very essence of Isaiah's prophetic teaching was to keep the moral and spiritual doctrine of Jehovah pure from political alloy.

Once more, we think that Mr. G. A. Smith errs on the side of a much too modern reading of Isaiah's inspiration, when he represents Isaiah's prophecy of the sudden raising of the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib as a mere consequence of his mastery of a spiritual principle :—

" The prediction of the sudden raising of this siege was the equally natural corollary to another religious conviction, which held the prophet with as much intensity, as that which possessed him with the need of Judith's punishment. Isaiah never slacked

his hold on the truth that in the end God would save Zion, and keep her for Himself. Through whatever destruction, a root and • remnant of the Jewish people must survive. Zion is impregnable because God is in her, and because her inviolateness is necessary for the continuance of true religion in the world. Therefore as confident as his prediction of the siege of Jerusalem is Isaiah's prediction of her delivery. And while the prophet wraps the fact in vague circumstance, while he masks, as it were, his ignorance of how in detail it will actually take place by calling up a great natural convulsion, yet he makes it abundantly clear—as, with his religious convictions and his knowledge of the Assyrian power, he cannot help doing—that the deliverance will be unexpected and unexplainable by the natural circumstances of the Jews them- selves, that it will be evident as the immediate deed of God. It is well for us to understand this. We shall get rid of the mechanical idea of prophecy, according to which prophets made exact pre- dictions of fact by some particular and purely official endowment. We shall feel that prediction of this kind was due to the most un- mistakable inspiration, the influence upon the prophet's knowledge of affairs of two powerful religious convictions, for which he him- self was strongly sure that he had the warrant of the Spirit of God."

Now, as we know, Jerusalem was not always relieved in this way from the consequences of foreign invasion. It was taken, it was destroyed; and its taking and destruction were perfectly consistent with,—nay, as we now see, contributory to,—the designs of God in the education and discipline of the Jewish people. How could Isaiah have known, on the mere strength of the abstract principle, that the taking of Jerusalem by Sennacherib might not have been part of God's design for the propagation of the Jewish faith ? So far as this principle went, it would have justified later prophets in denying that Jerusalem should ever be stormed and destroyed, though that fate overtook it more than once. Surely this wish to confine prophetic insight to purely moral and spiritual insight, is entirely inconsistent with the whole tenor of the Hebrew prophets' vision. It must, we think, be conceded that some of these visions were never realised, while others of them were most wonderfully realised. But we cannot believe for a moment that prophetic vision was confined to the appli- cation of moral and spiritual principles in the field of history, or that the prophets themselves ever for a moment supposed that that was the only source of their discernment of the future. On the contrary, as Mr. G. A. Smith shows in a very powerful passage, the Jewish conception of the Holy Spirit was in a very much higher degree an intellectual as distinguished from a moral and spiritual conception, than it is now at all the theological fashion to conceive it. As we have alluded to this fine passage in his book, we must gratify our readers by quoting a portion of it. It is a comment on Isaiah xi., 2 and 3: " The spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord :"— " The Spirits of the Lord mentioned by Isaiah are prevailingly intellectual ; and the mediaeval Church, using the details of this passage to interpret Christ's own intimation of the Paraclete as the Spirit of truth,—remembering also the story of Pentecost, when the Spirit bestowed the gifts of tongues, and the case of Stephen, who, in the triumph of his eloquence and learning, was said to be full of the Holy Ghost,—did regard, as Gregory of Tours expressly declared, the Holy Spirit as the God of the intellect more than of the heart.' All Councils were opened by a mass to the Holy Ghost, and few, who have examined with care the win- dows of mediaeval churches, will have failed to be struck with the frequency with which the Dove is seen descending upon the heads of miraculously learned persons, or presiding at discussions, or hovering over groups of figures representing the sciences. To the mediaeval Church, then, the Holy Spirit was the Author of the intellect, more especially of the governing and political intellect ; and there can be little doubt, after a study of the variations of this doctrine, that the first five verses of the eleventh of Isaiah formed upon it the classical text of appeal. To Christians, who have been accustomed by the use of the word Comforter to asso- ciate the Spirit only with the gentle and consoling influences of heaven, it may seem strange to find His energy identified with the stern rigour of the magistrate. But in its practical, intelligent, and reasonable uses the mediaeval doctrine is greatly to be pre- ferred, on grounds both of Scripture and common-sense, to those two comparatively modern corruptions of it, one of which empha- sises the Spirit's influence in the exclusive operation of the grace of orders, and the other, driving to an opposite extreme, dissipates it into the vaguest religiosity. It is one of the curiosities of Christian theology that a divine influence, asserted by Scripture and believed by the early Church to manifest itself in the success- ful conduct of civil offices and the fullness of intellectual learning, should in these latter days be so often set up in a sort of super- natural' opposition to practical wisdom and the results of science. But we may go back to Isaiah for the same kind of correction on this doctrine as he has given us on the doctrine of faith ; and while we do not forget the richer meaning the New Testament bestows on the operation of the Divine Spirit, we may learn from the

Hebrew prophet to seek the inspiration of the Holy Ghost in all the endeavours of science, and not to forget that it is His guidance alone which enables us to succeed in the conduct of our offices and fortunes."

That is finely said. And, for our parts, we do not hesitate to assert that Isaiah regarded his own insight into the future as a special intellectual illumination by the divine mind, even more than he regarded it as a legitimate inference from the principles of God's moral and spiritual teaching.

What makes this book so delightful, is in part the very fine renderings of passages in Isaiah which we have all of us hitherto found obscure, and partly the vivid feeling for reality which makes Mr. G. A. Smith contend against allegorical inter- pretations of the prophet, and insist on those simple and literal meanings which are not only much more natural in themselves, but much more in keeping with the convictions and predis-

positions of Christian Churches. We will give an example of both aspects of this most fascinating book. Let us take the passage which Cromwell quoted in his letter from Musselburgh, the passage referring to the reliance of the Jewish politicians on the Assyrian alliance, in the 28th chapter (verses 9-13), a chapter over which many of us may have stumbled. It follows immediately on the denunciation of the drunkards of Ephraim and the prophecy of the disaster which is to come upon them. After this Isaiah turns back to the priests and prophets of Jerusalem, and says that they also have erred from the same habits of intoxication, and the passage in our Autho- rised Version proceeds as follows :—" Whom shall he teach knowledge ? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine ? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the

breasts ? For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept ; line upon line, line upon line ; here a little, there a little : for with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest ; and this is the refreshing : yet they would not hear. But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line ; here a little, there a little ; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken." This passage, as it strikes the ordinary reader, might well remind him of the remark made by a divine of our own day, still living, who, when a child, told his father and mother that while they had been at worship, he had read through the whole of Isaiah, " skipping the nonsense ;" and doubtless this passage, full of vivid meaning as it is, was one of those which came under his childish condemnation as devoid of meaning. Now listen to Mr. Smith's explanation :— " But Isaiah has cast his pearls before swine. The men of Jerusalem, whom he addresses, are too deep in sensuality to be roused by his noble words. Even priest and prophet stagger through strong drink ; and the class that should have been the conscience of the city, responding immediately to the word of God, reel in vision and stumble in judgment. They turn upon Isaiah's earnest message with tipsy men's insolence. Verses 9 and 10 should be within inverted commas, for they are the mocking reply of drunkards over their cups. Whom is he going to teach knowledge, and upon whom is he trying to force the Message,' as he calls it? Them that are weaned from the milk and drawn from the breasts V Are we school-children, that he treats us with his endless platitudes and repetitions—precept upon precept and precept upon precept, line upon line and line upon line, here a little and there a little? So did these bibulous prophets, priests, and politicians mock Isaiah's messages of judgment, wagging their heads in mimicry of his simple, earnest tones. We must conceive the abrupt, inten- tionally short, reiterated, and almost childish words of verse 10 as spoken in mimicry, with a mocking motion of the head, and in a childish, stammering, taunting tone.' But Isaiah turns upon them with their own words You call me, Stammerer ! I to ll you that God, Who speaks through me, and Whom in me you mock, will one day speak again to you in a tongue that shall indeed sound stammering to you. When those far-off barbarians have reached your walls, and over them taunt you in uncouth tones, then shall you hear how God can stammer. For these shall be the very voice of Him, and as He threatens you with captivity it shall be your bitterness to remember how by me He once offered you a rest and refreshing, which you refused. I tell you more. God will not only speak in words, but in deeds, and then truly your nickname for His message shall be fulfilled to you. Then shall the word of the Lord be unto you precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon tine, here a little and there a little. For God shall speak with the terrible simplicity and slowness of deeds, with the gradual growth of fate, with the monotonous stages of decay, till step by step you go, and stumble backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. You have scorned my instruction as mono- syllables fit for children ! By irritating monosyllables of gradual penalty shall God instruct you the second time."

That certainly is clear enough and scathing enough, though

it would not be easy for an ordinary reader of the Bible to get at its drift, even from the Revised Version.

As an illustration of Mr. Smith's rooted objection to alle- gorical interpretation, let us take a fragment only of the beautiful passage in which he contends that Isaiah's prophecy of that restoration of Nature that shall enable a little child to play with the fiercest of the wild beasts without danger, is to be taken literally and not allegorically. It is, declares Mr. Smith, a promise of an ultimate redemption of Nature from that blood-thirst with which our modern poets reproach her :—

" But Isaiah will not be satisfied with the establishment of a strong government in the land and the redemption of human society from chaos. He prophesies the redemption of all nature as well. It is one of those errors, which distort both the poetry and truth of the Bible, to suppose that by the bears, lions, and reptiles which the prophet now sees tamed in the time of the re- generation, he intends the violent human characters which he so often attacks. When Isaiah here talks of the beasts, he means the beasts. The passage is not allegorical, but direct, and forms a parallel to the well-known passage in the eighth of Romans. Isaiah and Paul, chief apostles of the two covenants, both inter- rupt their magnificent odes upon the outpouring of the Spirit, to remind us that the benefits of this will be shared by the brute and unintelligent creation. And, perhaps, there is no finer con- trast in the Scriptures than here, where beside so majestic a description of the intellectual faculties of humanity Isaiah places so charming a picture of the docility and sportfulness of wild animals,—And a little child shall lead them."

Mr. Smith would confer a still greater benefit on his readers if he would prefix to some future edition of this volume a translation of the first thirty-nine chapters arranged in the order in which he has here commented upon them and assumed that they ought to be read. It is a little confusing to follow him from one part of Isaiah to another in search of the order in which he decides that it is best to arrange the prophecies; nor is the impression left on our minds half so clear as it would be if we could read and re-read the prophecies in something like their true chronological order.