p. 627Following the assurance that the afflicted city should “no more” drink of the cup of God’s fury, the prophet calls again to Zion:—“Awake! Awake! put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments; O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean” (Isa. lii. 1).
The language is to be taken both literally and figuratively—that is to say, the literal city Jerusalem is to arise from the dust of ages and be rebuilt upon her own heap, and the Gentiles cast out from possessing and defiling it with their rival superstitions; and the mystical “holy city,” or body of Christ, is to awake from the dust of death, and, putting on the strength and beauty of immortality, to take possession of the city and land for ever. Both elements must be kept in sight in their relation to the “covenants of promise” to the fathers, which are the foundation of all the promises in the prophets.
The “strength” of Zion is Yahweh, and the “putting on” of strength involves the “greatness of the Holy One of Israel in the midst of her” (Isa. xii. 2, 6). The Lord Jesus, who has “put on immortality,” returns and takes possession of the city. The “beautiful garments” of Zion are the immortal hosts of her true children. The wicked are like cast-off moth-eaten garments (l. 9: li. 8); but the righteous, when clothed upon with their house which is from heaven (2 Cor. v.) are like “beautiful garments.” God said by Jeremiah (ch. xiii.) that He had caused to cleave unto Him the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah, “as a girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man.” But this girdle was marred by the river Euphrates. A conqueror is said to array himself with a conquered land “as a shepherd putteth on a p. 628 garment” (Jer. xliii. 12). These figures show how, when the Lord Jesus and the saints return to Zion, and the Jews are regathered from their captivity, and the land wrested from Gog and “the terrible nations,” Zion may be said to have “put on her beautiful garments.”
“Ye have sold yourself for nought; and ye shall be redeemed without money.” Such is the promise of God in this place. This has been supposed by some to exclude the idea of any money basis in the pre-adventual colonization of Palestine by the Jews. But this is evidently not the scope of the prophecy. That colonization is by no means the redemption in question, but only the premonitory sign of it. The redemption in question involves the resurrection of the dead, the taking of the kingdom by the saints, and the expulsion of the enemy from Palestine.
Ascertain what the “selling for nought” was, and the antithetic redemption without money becomes visible. It was not that there was no monetary transaction in the “selling for nought”—far from it. Ahaz, for example, took the Lord’s silver and gold from the temple and presented it to the king of Assyria to secure his alliance against Syria. Proximately this was a buying of help from Assyria. Ultimately, however, this (and other iniquities of Ahaz), was a selling of the people for nothing into the hands of the Assyrian (2 Kings xvi.; 2 Chron. xxviii.). Later, Zion sold herself by her iniquities into the hands of the Romans, when her rulers bought Jesus for thirty pieces of silver and put him to death. When Israel “went down aforetime into Egypt” (Isa. lii. 4) the selling of Joseph into captivity was the iniquity by which they really sold themselves into Egyptian bondage for over two hundred years; at the end of which they were “redeemed without money” by God in the days of the Exodus under Moses. But even in Joseph’s day his brethren found themselves sold into his hands, to be by him redeemed and most graciously pardoned in the long-suffering and forbearance of God.
These things are illustrative of the present condition and future prospects of Zion and her children. Jesus, as another Joseph, and the “prophet like unto Moses,” is to redeem them without money, to their utter amazement. The present monetary p. 629 schemes in connection with Zionism, though they may forward the pre-adventual colonisation of the land, will only develop a more hopeless position than ever, in that they will furnish a tempting bait for the great Northern invader (Ezek. xxxviii.). He will come “like a cloud to cover the land,” and to take a spoil and prey of the regathered and defenceless people. And though Gog be antagonised by the lions of Tarshish, it is not these, but the Son of Man, who redeems Israel and destroys the hosts of the spoiler.
It was through the rulers of the people that they “sold themselves for nought,” and were “taken away for nought.” The influence and example of such men as Ahaz, Manasseh, Zedekiah, Caiaphas, and Herod was only such as “made the people to howl”! They “blasphemed the Name” continually every day, and involved themselves and the nation in ruin. Paul, who was contemporary with “the last days” of the Mosaic economy, quotes this passage in his epistle to the Romans. Apostrophising the Jews, he says: “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written” (Rom. ii. 24). How “blasphemed”? By transgression of the law; by profession of righteousness and practice of iniquity; by condemning sinners and doing the same things. The apostle argues that by such a course, circumcision in the flesh is “made uncircumcision,” that is, if a man walk according to the desires of the flesh and of the mind, the “token of the covenant” is meaningless in his case; he is “uncircumcised of heart and ears,” and is as truly one of “the uncircumcised and the unclean” (Isa. lii. 1) as any of the Gentiles who desecrate the Holy City.
Blasphemy is but little understood by the people. It is not mere profanity, though that is a feature of it; it is a much wider and more insidious thing, and is found in quarters where most people never suspect it. A Name stands for a character and purpose. The Name of God is not an appellation to distinguish Him from some other gods; but is the memorial among men of His character and purpose, as may be seen from Ex. xxxiv. 6, 7 and other places. The name of God is said to be “in” the angels. They are His “ministering spirits” who excel in strength, hearkening p. 630 to the voice of His Word and doing His pleasure. They are the subordinate though immortal expressions of the divine character and purpose.
Men also, though mortal, may be “in God the Father, and in the Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess. i. 1), and therefore “in the Name.” Being so, they are expected to reflect the character of God and to conform to His purpose. If they do not so, but reflect the character of the devil and conform to this present evil world, they are guilty of blasphemy, which is really a bringing of discredit upon the Name. The contrary course may be antithetically described as euphemy—an adorning the doctrine of God, after the example of the Lord Jesus, and walking as a son who is a credit to his family.
That this is the true doctrine of the Scripture concerning “blasphemy” will be evident to those who study the New Testament. Jesus rebukes “the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews and are not, but do lie” (Rev. ii. 9); that is the ungodly walk and conversation of unworthy professors of the Name. Paul exhorts servants to honour their masters, “that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed” (1 Tim. vi. 1). Elsewhere he exhorts young women to be “discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed” (Titus ii. 5). Roman ecclesiasticism is symbolised by Jesus as “a scarlet coloured beast full of names of blasphemy” (Rev. xvii. 3: xiii. 1), because the faith and works of Popes, cardinals, priests, monks, and nuns are in every way an outrageous travesty of the Name.
It was so in Jerusalem when Isaiah spoke. Kings, priests and nobles profaned the Name in many ways, some of which the prophet specified from time to time, and which are sternly scheduled by another prophet (Ezek. xxii. 7-12) in a catalogue of the “abominations of the bloody city.”
Because of, or notwithstanding, the all-prevailing blasphemy, God proposed to manifest His Name in Jerusalem in a way never before seen:—“Therefore my people shall know my Name; therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold it is I” p. 631 (Isa. lii. 6). This is Immanuel, of previous prophetic promise in the days of Ahaz—God with Israel. The life and work of Jesus in Jerusalem and in all the land of Israel, is the making known of the Name of which Isaiah speaks thus beforehand. Jesus said “I am come in my Father’s Name,” and the Father proved the truth of his assertion by endorsement in audible voice from heaven, and by miracles, signs, and wonders.
In verse 7 the “I” of verse 6 becomes “him”: “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings.” The “I” is the speaker: “I am he that doth speak”; but the “him” is the mouth of the speaker of the good tidings. This is exactly what Jesus insisted. “If I say the truth why do ye not believe me? He that is of God heareth God’s words” (John viii. 46). “I have not spoken of myself, but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say and what I should speak” (John xii. 49). “I am in the Father and the Father in me. The words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself, but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works” (John xiv. 10).
Paul, who quotes this passage from Isa. lii. in Rom. x. 15, introduces by the Spirit a variation which enlarges our conceptions of the prophecy. He says, speaking of the apostolic proclamation of the gospel to Israel and the Gentiles, “How shall they preach except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace.” There are two ways of treating this—the Christ way, and the merely critical way. The Christ way is to regard the body of Christ as speaking Christ’s words, and Christ as speaking God’s words. “He that heareth you heareth me, and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me” (Luke x. 16). The critical way is to regard the apostolic variation as a “discrepancy,” and an evidence of human frailty and forgetfulness, and of no further use nor interest than as warning us that we must not become bibliolators, nor stand in the way of advancing human science! The Christ way leads us into the company of Christ and the apostles, and to the Father in heaven. The critical way leads us to destruction.
p. 632 The “beautiful feet” were God’s feet—whether of “him” or of “them.” God gave His only begotten Son, and he gathered round him a subordinate “body” of preachers of the glad tidings of the coming reign of Zion’s God in righteousness and peace. The prophecy is intelligible only in the light of the truth, in which all is of the Father, in whom “we live and move and have our being.” Men are “workers together with God” when they understand the gospel of His kingdom, and are baptised into His Name, in being baptised into Jesus Christ. Even now where such adorn the doctrine of God, and proclaim the things that Jesus preached, there are the “beautiful feet” of the prophecy, for they walk up and down in the earth with the same message, waiting for the same consolation of Israel.
The watchmen of Zion still have some representatives in the land of the living. Wherever the same glad tidings are believed, and the same “hope of Israel” held fast, there they are, and the promise is to them as to all of the same class who have gone before: “They shall see eye to eye when the Lord shall bring again Zion” (Isa. lii. 8). They shall “see” in the sense not merely of witness, but “know,” “enjoy,”—see, not “through a glass, darkly,” but “face to face,” being made like Christ, partakers of the divine nature. In the language of the Psalm (xlviii.), which will doubtless be used in the temple courts of the coming house of God in Jerusalem, it will be said by these who now only see by faith and hope: “As we have heard, so have we seen in the city of the Lord of Hosts, in the city of our God: God will establish it for ever.” And again (Isa. lxvi. 14), “When ye see this, your heart shall rejoice and your bones shall flourish like an herb,” like the incorruptible “flesh and bones” of the Lord Jesus himself (Lu. xxiv. 39).
But all the ends of the earth are to see the salvation of God. That, however, will be upon another and inferior principle, though multitudes will attain to immortality at “the end” appointed. The nations will “see” in the way that Egypt saw at the Exodus, and in the way that the Queen of Sheba saw in the days of Solomon, only on an incomparably grander scale in p. 633 both cases. They will first be made to see against their will, for the Lord is to be known by the judgments he executes. But when the nations have learned righteousness under compulsion, they will “see” with a clearer vision than ever, and, perceiving the beauty and goodness of Yahweh’s appointments, will confess unto him from the ends of the earth and say: “Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit” (Jer. xvi. 19). They will learn of his ways and walk in his paths in righteousness and peace and long life, marvelling at the blindness and wickedness of their ancestors who opposed the establishment of such a Kingdom.
Following upon the declaration of the joy and redemption of Jerusalem by God’s judgments and the manifestation of the truth to all the nations, comes a proclamation of another exodus: “Depart ye! Depart ye! go ye out from thence; touch no unclean thing. Go ye out of the midst of her; be ye clean that bear the vessels of the Lord. For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight: for the Lord will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rereward” (verses 11, 12).
This cannot refer to “the holy city,” the redemption of which has just been proclaimed. It is not “the clean,” but “the uncircumcised and the unclean,” that are to depart out of her in that day. The point of departure here is the rival city—Babylon the Great, and the prophecy doubtless finds an incipient fulfilment in the restoration from Babylon in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah. But Jerusalem was only partially redeemed then, and “all the nations” did not see, and have not yet seen, “the salvation of our God.” Further, the Exodus from Egypt was “with haste,” and the return from Babylon was not without fear though overruled by God.
The second exodus will fulfil all the conditions specified. The watchmen of Zion themselves in their later generations will have “come out” from Babylon the Great, like Abram of old (Gen. xii.). They will have come out from country and kindred for the sake of God’s covenant, and will at last come into immortal inheritance of the land. And of the day of Zion’s redemption and the fall of Babylon the Great (Rev. xviii. 4), p. 634 it is said that the apostle heard in vision a voice from heaven saying: “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” The holy apostles and prophets rejoice over her in that day, because God has avenged his people on her (verse 20).
And the scattered children of Zion in the sense of the outcast and persecuted Jews, of whom Jesus once spoke as “the children of the kingdom,” will, under the leadership of new “kings and priests,” depart from the lands of their dispersion and persecution, especially those European countries called Christendom by the Roman and Greek churches, but “Babylon” and “Sodom and Egypt” by Jesus in the Revelation. The prophet Ezekiel (ch. xx.) tells how God will bring them out from all countries, and purge out the rebels as in the wilderness of old. These things were indeed unintelligible “parables” to those of the Babylonian captivity; but now, after two thousand five hundred years, they are much more intelligible, and so much the more as the day of Zion’s vindication draws on. All things point to the coming of Yahweh’s Servant, and the astonishment of the kings of the earth in his presence.