p. 652Through the obedience of Yahweh’s “Righteous Servant,” and his sacrifice and intercession, a great change comes over Jerusalem. This is the natural sequel, and is the substance of the beautiful exhortation of Isaiah liv., “Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the Lord.”
There can be no doubt as to who is here addressed, for the apostle Paul has settled it in his quotation of the passage in his “allegory” in the epistle to the Galatians. Speaking of the Law of Moses, and the Abrahamic covenant of promise, he reminds the Galatians that Abraham had two sons, Ishmael and Isaac, one by a bondmaid (Hagar), and the other by a free woman (Sarah). But, says he, “He who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the free woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory; for these are the two covenants; the one from Mount Sinai which gendereth to bondage, which is Hagar. For this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem, which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above (and hereafter to be manifested from above), is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren, that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then, he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless, what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman p. 653 shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free” (Gal. iv. 23-31).
This passage, which is the key to the right understanding of Isa. liv., indicates with certainty that the New Jerusalem is the subject of the prophet’s exordium in this place; and that the good things promised are based upon “the new covenant” confirmed in the blood of Christ outside the walls of Jerusalem nearly nineteen centuries ago in fulfilment of the previous prophecy.
It is apparent from the apostolic use of the passage that the contrast is not between earth and heaven in the literal sense; but that it relates to time and condition and not to locality. The city that was (and is) “desolate” is the city to be comforted and glorified. “The desolate cities (are) to be inhabited” (v. 3). This, of course, excludes the literal idea of heaven that finds so large an illustration in popular theology, especially in hymns. The contrast is between “now is” and then shall be, the place remaining the same, but the time and conditions being changed.
Jerusalem was figuratively spoken of by God as being married to Him. A striking illustration of this is seen in Ezekiel xvi., where Jerusalem’s history is figuratively set forth by the word of the Lord from her wretched Amorite and Hittite infancy onwards, till God gave her into the hands of her enemies for her iniquities; not however without a promise of remembrance of “the everlasting covenant” at last.
Jerusalem’s barrenness relates to “the children of promise” and not to the Ishmael seed, of which there was no scarcity in Isaiah’s day and afterwards. In the history of Israel God had often interposed His providence in connection with barren women, so that the figure ought to have been appreciated in Jerusalem had any been “of quick understanding.” At the very start, the son of Abraham through whom the promise came was the son of a barren woman (Sarah). Rebecca was barren for twenty years before Esau and Jacob were born. The beloved and faithful Joseph was the son of a barren woman (Rachel). Samuel was the p. 654 son of a barren woman (Hannah); and Samson likewise, for Manoah’s wife was barren. John the Baptist, the Lord’s forerunner, was the son of a barren woman (Elizabeth); and Jesus himself was the son of a virgin.
In all this the power is of God, and “by promise,” and everything “after the flesh” is excluded. And it is so with “the children” spoken of in this prophecy, to whose number the above-named belong. Indeed, Hannah’s song at the dedication of Samuel (1 Sam. ii.) may be taken as an inspired commentary on the passage: “Yahweh killeth and maketh alive; he bringeth down to the grave and bringeth up. . . . He raiseth up the poor out of the dust . . . to make them inherit the throne of glory.”
The “children” of Jerusalem’s re-marriage after widowhood have already been referred to under Isa. xlix. 18-23. They are the children of the resurrection, now brought down to sheol, but to be brought up as Hannah prophesied, by the Lord’s Anointed in the latter day. They will awake to a new state of affairs altogether. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob will see the land of their sojournings transferred from the hands of the latter-day Canaanites, and made a Paradise in the hands of the Seed “which is Christ.” Moses will be permitted to enter at last, under the covenant of which not he, but the Prophet like him, is the Mediator. Samuel will forget the sad days of Saul in the glory of the Son of David. Noah will see the salvation of which his water-borne ark was but a figure. Daniel will inherit the kingdom of which he spoke so much, and Job will rejoice in a final deliverance from Satan in the presence of his “Redeemer.” And all others of whatever degree will “break forth into singing and cry aloud” for joy of heart in the realisation of hopes long deferred, but then attained in everlasting satisfaction.
Looking back thus, we see the “great cloud of witnesses,” of whom “the world was not worthy,” and can understand what “enlargement” of Jerusalem and her dominion will be necessary to fulfil the prophecy. In the context here it is described as a resettlement of the Land of Promise (“make the desolate cities to be inhabited”), and a world-wide empire spreading out from Jerusalem (“thy seed shall inherit the nations”). Isaiah had p. 655 already spoken of this many times, as for instance, concerning “the last days” (ch. ii.); or the great revival of “the land of Zion’s destruction” (ch. xlix.). It seems impossible that such terms should ever have been divorced from earth, and applied to “heaven beyond the skies”; but one false step has necessitated another, until, by the adoption of the Gentile doctrine of the immortality of the soul, popular religion has become a conglomeration of “lies and vanity and things wherein there is no profit” (Jer. xvi. 19).
The other prophets speak of the “enlargement” that is coming, notably Ezekiel, who in the last nine chapters of his book describes “the place of thy tent” very minutely. His visions show how that in “the city which was smitten” by Nebuchadnezzar in his own days, there is at last to arise a temple of such dimensions that it is a city in itself, “as the frame of a city” (xl. 2). He reports the word of the Lord which declares that it is the place of his throne, where he will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever (xliii. 7), and he tells the measure of “the breadth of the tent” (xli. 1). Further, he tells of the service, the rivers of water, the Prince and his portion, the new settlement of the tribes of Israel, all his revelation giving a literal geographical basis for the glory of the new Jerusalem which in the Apocalypse is said to come down from God out of heaven (Rev. xxi. 10).
New Jerusalem geographical and architectural is the basis for New Jerusalem, “the Bride, the Lamb’s wife,” the glorious community that is to be made “one spirit” with him in the divine nature as Eve was made “one flesh” out of Adam. The truth combines these two elements—“the house of God” in the sense of divine family, and “the house of God” in the sense of the temple in Jerusalem—without confusion. It is so in the prophecy of Isaiah, which is reproduced with other Old Testament revelations in the Apocalypse.
It goes on to say: “Fear not . . . For thy Maker is thy husband; the Lord of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; the God of the whole earth shall he be called.” The Maker of all things is God the Father, but upon earth p. 656 all things are by and for the Son of his love to the Father’s glory. The first husband and wife were a type of this. God created Adam from the dust, and then when it was manifest that it was not good for the man to be alone, God threw him into a deep sleep, and taking one of his ribs made an help meet for him, a woman, of whom when brought to the man it might have been said, subject to God’s appointment, “thy maker is thine husband,” and of whom Adam did say, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man” (Gen. ii. 23).
So in the case of the New Jerusalem, “the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” God created the second Adam, even Jesus; not from the dust, however, but of “the seed of Abraham”; and throwing him into the deep sleep of death by sacrifice on the cross, figuratively took from his side a rib which he is building into a “woman,” hereafter to be brought to the Man, and by him to be accepted as bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh. The apostle uses this expression concerning “the Lord and the Church.” “For we are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones” (Eph. v. 30). We are members now by faith and obedience, by belief of the gospel of the kingdom and baptism “into Christ.” But it remains for him to pronounce the sentence which shall bring about the consummation of union with him in the divine nature.
“The Lord of Hosts, Yahweh Tzvaoth, is his name.” Literally it means, He who shall be hosts, and expresses the purpose of the Father to be manifested in hosts, of whom the Lord Jesus is the head, and of whose “eternal salvation” he is said to have become “the Author,” having been made perfect by the Father through suffering (Heb. v. 8, 9). He is the “Redeemer” and “the Holy One of Israel,” being the Father in manifestation. And he is the God, Elohim, of the whole earth, the divine Head and Ruler the Father has given to this world over the “hosts” of its “redeemed.”
“For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee. In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer. For this is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters p. 657 of Noah should no more go over the earth, so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee nor rebuke thee. For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee” (v. 7-10).
These things are said “for the elect’s sake.” By comparison with the eternity of the prosperity of the New Jerusalem, the “forsaking” is truly “for a small moment.” “Our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory.” So an apostle speaks (2 Cor. iv. 17). And again, “I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us” (Rom. viii. 18). Even Jesus was “forsaken,” but only for a small moment. “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” This was his agonised cry on the cross. But after three days, “everlasting kindness” was his portion.
He himself speaks of “the waters of Noah” in connection with the end of the age. Sitting on the Mount of Olives, looking down upon the city where he was so soon to be crucified, he foretold to his disciples things shortly to come to pass in the end of the Mosaic economy, and things related to the end of the times of the Gentiles, when the restitution of all things Israelitish should become due. “As the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be” (Matt. xxiv. 37). This is true of both ends in question. The Son of Man came at the destruction of Jerusalem, though he did not then appear, and the gathering together of his elect was still a matter in the remote future.
Isaiah introduces the waters of Noah for the comfort of the elect, who like Noah and his family shall be saved in the coming overflowing of the wrath of God. Jesus introduces the matter with reference both to the attitude of the world and that of the elect, with an exhortation to the latter to take heed and “watch.” “Watch therefore, for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. . . . Be ready, for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of Man cometh.”
p. 658 The mountains that shall “depart” in that day are the Gentile dominions—the kingdoms of men (like Babylon, Jer. li. 25), while, by “the covenant of peace,” the mountain of the Lord’s house is to be “established in the top of the mountains, and exalted above the hills, (so that) all nations shall flow unto it” (Is. ii.). The Kingdom of God becomes a great mountain and fills the whole earth (Dan. ii. 35, 44, 45).
Then follows the description of the precious stones and foundations of afflicted and tempest-tossed Jerusalem; in which connection it is said, “All thy children shall be taught of the Lord, and great shall be the peace (prosperity) of thy children” (v. 13). What have precious stones and “foundations” to do with such divinely instructed children? The answer is prominently before us in the notable discourse of the Chief of them in the synagogue at Capernaum. Jesus, who is God’s tried and precious sure foundation stone, laid, and hereafter to be laid, in Zion (ch. xxviii. 16), applied this prophecy to himself when, after the miracle of the loaves and fishes, he spoke about the Manna and the “meat that endureth unto everlasting life.” When certain “children of the kingdom” in the lower sense “murmured” at his doctrine, he said, “Murmur not among yourselves. No man can come to me except the Father which hath sent me draw him; and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, And they shall all be taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard and hath learned of the Father cometh unto me” (John vi. 45).
Here, then, is the Lord’s own identification of “thy children.” Even his own disciples were at that time but imperfectly “taught of God,” as the context shows, for many “went back, and walked no more with him.” But the twelve, with the exception of Judas, who was a devil, remained with him, and were afterwards further “taught of God.” And many others in course of time were “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ being the chief corner stone” (Eph. ii. 20).
In the Revelation this feature of Isaiah’s prophecy is reproduced in the glorious description of “the holy city, New p. 659 Jerusalem”—“the Bride, the Lamb’s Wife.” It is said that “the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb” (Rev. xxi. 14). The precious stones which “garnished” the foundations are detailed in the same place (v. 19-21). They are “the precious sons of Zion comparable to fine gold” (Lam. iv. 2); and “jewels” (Mal. iii. 17). They are the garnishing of the apostles in that they are the crown of their rejoicing in the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ at his coming (1 Thess. ii. 19), precious stones built upon the Christ foundation (1 Cor. iii. 12), who abide the day of fiery trial at his coming.
Such are the elements of “the holy city” which shall be “far from oppression and from terror.” Not that there will be no attempt on the part of the rival “city” to strike terror into them. There will be such an attempt, as is here declared:—
“Behold they shall surely gather together but not by me: whosoever shall gather together against thee shall fall for thy sake. Behold I have created the smith that bloweth the coals in the fire, and that bringeth forth an instrument for his work; and I have created the waster to destroy. No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper, and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment shalt thou condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord” (v. 15, 17).
“They” of the opposition here are the hosts of Antichristendom, who gather together against Jerusalem in the latter days to frustrate the purpose of God. They are the ten kings of the habitable who seek to impose the dominion of “Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the earth” upon the New Jerusalem! (Rev. xvii. 5, 12-14). True, God gathered together the Assyrian, the Babylonian, the Roman against Jerusalem of old, but the time for that is passed. “The time to favour Zion” comes at length, and then Jerusalem becomes a burdensome stone to all the nations that burden themselves therewith (Zech. xii. 3). The Assyrian rod of chastisement was broken and thrown away when the Lord’s work with it was done (Isa. x. 12). The Babylonian and Roman likewise; and so p. 660 it will be with Antichristendom. It will be broken by terrible judgments, and at last subdued and blessed in the Kingdom of God when the kingdoms of this world shall have become Christ’s.
As an illustration of current misapplications of the words of the prophets, it may be mentioned that the Anglo-Israelite theory has applied this verse (17) to the British Power! But as was pointed out in debate, many weapons have prospered against this power, and will yet so prosper. Neither Britain nor any other Gentile dominion is addressed by the prophet, nor even Israel after the flesh. It is “the Servants of the Lord,” “the New Jerusalem,” the glorious community of every unit of which Jesus says, “I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, New Jerusalem, which cometh down from heaven from my God, even my new name” (Rev. iii. 12). This is promised “to him that overcometh.” And every one that hath an ear is invited to hear.