He was taken away by oppression and judgment. As for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living and stricken for the disobedience of my people?
Parallel Translations
-
He was taken away by oppression and judgment. As for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living and stricken for the disobedience of my people?
-
He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
-
By oppression and judgment he was taken away, and with his generation who did reason? for he was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due.
Cross-references (11)
Passages linked to Isaiah 53:8 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Acts 8:33 In his humiliation, his judgment was taken away. Who will declare His generation? For his life is taken from the earth.”
- 1 Peter 3:18 Because Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring you to God, being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit,
- Matthew 26:65-66 Then the high priest tore his clothing, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Behold, now you have heard his blasphemy. What do you think?” They answered, “He is worthy of death!”
- John 19:7 The Jews answered him, “We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.”
- Psalms 22:12-21 Many bulls have surrounded me. Strong bulls of Bashan have encircled me. They open their mouths wide against me, lions tearing prey and roaring. I am poured out like water. All my bones are out of joint. My heart is like wax. It is melted within me. My strength is dried up like a potsherd. My tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth. You have brought me into the dust of death. For dogs have surrounded me. A company of evildoers have enclosed me. They have pierced my hands and feet. I can count all of my bones. They look and stare at me. They divide my garments among them. They cast lots for my clothing. But don’t be far off, Yahweh. You are my help. Hurry to help me! Deliver my soul from the sword, my precious life from the power of the dog. Save me from the lion’s mouth! Yes, you have rescued me from the horns of the wild oxen.
- John 11:49-52 But a certain one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all, nor do you consider that it is advantageous for us that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish.” Now he didn’t say this of himself, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but that he might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.
- Isaiah 53:12 Therefore I will give him a portion with the great. He will divide the plunder with the strong; because he poured out his soul to death and was counted with the transgressors; yet he bore the sins of many and made intercession for the transgressors.
- Isaiah 53:5 But he was pierced for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities. The punishment that brought our peace was on him; and by his wounds we are healed.
- Daniel 9:26 After the sixty-two weeks the Anointed One will be cut off, and will have nothing. The people of the prince who come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end will be with a flood, and war will be even to the end. Desolations are determined.
- Romans 1:4 who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,
- Psalms 69:12 Those who sit in the gate talk about me. I am the song of the drunkards.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (18 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain From the cross and grave, after that he was…
From the cross and grave, after that he was condemned.
Though he died for sin, yet after his resurrection he shall live forever and this his death is to restore life to his members, Rom. 6:9.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Isa 53:8 He was taken from prison and from…
Isa 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
Ver. 8. He was taken from prison and from judgment.] Absque dilatione et citra iudicium raptus est, sc., ad crucem, so Vatablus rendereth it. He was hurried away to the cross without delay, and against right or reason, {a} Or, as others, he was taken from distress and torment into glory when he had cried, Consummatum est, It is finished; and, Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit. The Seventy render it somewhat otherwise, as may be seen, Act 8:33. The apostle Peter explaineth it, Act 2:24.
Read full note →
And who shall declare his generation?] Or, Who can reckon his age or his race? Or, Who can utter or describe his generation? i.e., the wickedness of the men of those times he lived in. Or, the history of his life and death. Some understand it to be his eternal generation. {Pro 8:24-25} Others of his incarnation, that great "mystery of godliness." Quantus enim Deus quantillus factus est homo! Others {b} of his holy seed, his cross being fruitful, and his death giving life to an innumerable generation. {Rev 7:9}
For he was cut off out of the land of the living.] Quasi arbor saevis icta bipennibus; as a tree that is hewn down. {2Ki 6:4}
For the transgression of my people.] Our iniquities were the weapons, and ourselves the traitors, that put to death the Lord of life; Judas and the Jews were but our workmen. This should draw dreary tears from us. {Zec 12:10}
{a} Inaudita causa for an unheard reason.
{b} Augustine.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain He was taken from prison and from judgment: these…
He was taken from prison and from judgment: these words are understood either,
1. Of Christ’s humiliation or suffering; and then the words are to be thus rendered,
Read full note →
He was taken away (to wit, out of this life, as this word is used, Psa 31:13; Pro 1:19, and elsewhere; he was put to death) by distress (or violence, or tyranny, as this word is used with this preposition before it, Psa 107:39) and judgment; by oppression and violence, under a form and pretence of justice. Or rather,
2. Of Christ’s exaltation, because of the following clause; which is not unseasonably mentioned in the midst of his sufferings, to take off the scandal which might have arisen from Christ’s sufferings, if there had not been a prospect and assurance of his victoriousness over them, and his glory after them; and so the words may be rendered, He was taken up (or, taken away, freed or delivered) from prison (i.e. from the grave, which being called a house, Job 30:23, and a pit, in which men are shut up Psa 69:15, may fitly be called a prison; or, from distress or affliction, or oppression, from the power and malice of his enemies, and from the torments of his own soul, arising from the sense of men’s sins and God’s displeasure) and from judgment, i.e. from all the sufferings and punishments inflicted upon him, either by the unrighteous judgment of men, or by the just judgment of God, punishing him for those sins which he had voluntarily taken upon himself; or, which is the same tiling, from the sentence of condemnation, and all the effects of it; for in this sense judgment is very commonly taken both in Scripture and other authors.
Who shall declare? who can declare it? the future being taken potentially, as it is frequently; no words can sufficiently express it.
His generation; either,
1. His age, or the continuance of his life. So the sense is, that he shall not only be delivered from death, and all his punishments, but also shall be restored to an inexpressible or endless life; and to an everlasting kingdom. Thus great interpreters understand it; with whom I cannot comply, because I do not find this Hebrew word to be ever used in Scripture of the continuance of one man’s life. Or rather,
2. His posterity; and so this word is unquestionably used, Gen 15:16; Exo 20:5; Deu 23:2,3,8, and in many other places. And so the sense of the place is this, that Christ’s death shall not be unfruitful, and that when he is raised from the dead, he shall have a spiritual seed, as is promised, Isa 53:10; a numberless multitude of those who shall believe in him, and be regenerated and adopted by him into the number of his children, and of the children of God, Joh 1:12; Heb 2:10,13,14. He was cut off, to wit, by a violent death. And this may be added as a reason, both of his exaltation, and of the blessing of a numerous posterity conferred upon him, because he was willing to be cut off for the transgression of his people; and, as it followeth, Isa 53:10, made his soul an offering for sin; Christ’s death being elsewhere declared to be the only way and necessary means of obtaining both these ends. Luk 24:26,46; Joh 12:24,32,33; Php 2 8,9. But these words may be rendered, although he was cut off, to signify that his death should not hinder these glorious effects.
For the transgression of my people was he stricken: this is repeated again, as it was fit it should be, to prevent men’s mistakes about and stumbling at the death of Christ, and to assure them that Christ did not die for his own sins, but only for the sins and salvation of his people.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain He was taken from prison, and from judgment,.... After…
He was taken from prison, and from judgment,.... After he had suffered and died, and made satisfaction to divine justice; or after he had been arrested by the justice of God, and was laid in prison, and under a sentence of condemnation, had judgment passed upon him, and that executed too; he was taken in a very little time from the prison of the grave where he lay, and from the state of condemnation into which he was brought, and was acquitted, justified, and declared righteous, and his people in him; a messenger was sent from heaven to roll away the stone, and set him free: though some render it,
he was taken by distress and judgment; that is, his life was taken away in a violent manner, under a pretence of justice; whereas the utmost injustice was done him; a wrong charge was brought against him, false witnesses were suborned, and his life was taken away with wicked hands; which sense seems to be favoured by the quotation in Act 8:32 "in his humiliation his judgment was taken away": he had not common justice done him:
Read full note →
and who shall declare his generation? which is not to be understood of his divine generation, as the Son of God, which is in a way ineffable and inconceivable; nor of his human generation, as the Son of Man, which is unaccountable, being born of a virgin; nor of the duration of his life after his resurrection, he dying no more, but living for ever, which is more probable; nor of the vast number of his spiritual offspring, the fruit of his sufferings, death, and resurrection; but of the age, and men of it, in which he lived, whose barbarity to him, and wickedness they were guilty of, were such as could not be declared by the mouth, or described by the pen of man. The Targum is,
"and the wonderful things which shall be done for us in his days, who can declare?''
for he was cut off out of the land of the living; was not suffered to live, was taken off by a violent death; he was cut off in a judiciary way, as if he had been a malefactor; though lest it should be thought it was for his own sins he was cut off, which is denied, Dan 9:26 it is added,
for the transgression of my people was he stricken; that is, either through the malice and wickedness of the people of the Jews, whom the prophet calls his people, he was stricken, not only with the scourges of the whip, but with death itself, as the efficient cause thereof; or rather because of the transgressions of God's elect, in order to make satisfaction for them, he was stricken by divine justice, and put to death, as the meritorious cause thereof; and so they are the words of God the Father; and this, with the preceding clause, give a reason, showing both why he was taken from the prison of the grave, acquitted, and exalted, and why the wickedness of his age could not be declared; he being stricken and cut off in such a manner, when he was an innocent person; and since it was only for the transgressions of others, even of God's covenant people, the people he chose, and gave to Christ, Mat 1:21.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain Taken away - Out of this life. By distress…
Taken away - Out of this life. By distress and judgment - By oppression and violence. and a pretense of justice. His generation - His posterity. For his death shall not be unfruitful; when he is raised from the dead, he shall have a spiritual seed, a numberless multitude of those who shall believe in him. Cut off - By a violent death. And this may be added as a reason of the blessing of a numerous posterity conferred upon him, because he was willing to be cut off for the transgression of his people.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 8. And who shall declare his generation -…
Verse 8. And who shall declare his generation - "And his manner of life who would declare"] A learned friend has communicated to me the following passages from the Mishna, and the Gemara of Babylon, as leading to a satisfactory explication of this difficult place. It is said in the former, that before any one was punished for a capital crime, proclamation was made before the prisoner by the public crier, in these words: כל מי שיודע לו זכות יבא וילמד עליו col mi shioda lo zachoth yabo vayilmad alaiv, "whosoever knows any thing of this man's innocence, let him come and declare it." Tract. Sandhedrim. Surenhus. Part iv. p. 233. On which passage the Gemara of Babylon adds, that "before the death of Jesus this proclamation was made for forty days; but no defense could be found." On which words Lardner observes: "It is truly surprising to see such falsities, contrary to well-known facts." Testimonies, Vol. I. p. 198. The report is certainly false; but this false report is founded on the supposition that there was such a custom, and so far confirms the account given from the Mishna. The Mishna was composed in the middle of the second century according to Prideaux; Lardner ascribes it to the year of Christ 180.
Casaubon has a quotation from Maimonides which farther confirms this account: - Exercitat. in Baronii Annales, Art. lxxvi. Ann. 34. Num. 119. Auctor est Maimonides in Perek xiii. ejus libri ex opere Jad, solitum fieri, ut cum reus, sententiam mortis passus, a loco judicii exibat ducendus ad supplicium, praecedoret ipsum חכרוז κηρυξ, praeco; et haec verba diceret: Ille exit occidendus morte illa, quia transgressus est transgressione illa, in loco illo, tempore illo, et sunt ejus ret testes ille et ille. Qui noverit aliquid ad ejus innoeentiam probandam, veniat, et loquatur pro eo. "It was customary when sentence of death was passed upon a criminal, and he was led out from the seat of judgment to the place of punishment, a crier went before, and spoke as follows: - 'This man is going out to suffer death by _____ because he has transgressed by _____ such a transgression, in such a place, in such a time; and the witnesses against him are _____. He who may know any thing relative to his innocence let him come and speak in his behalf.'"
Read full note →
Now it is plain from the history of the four Evangelists, that in the trial and condemnation of Jesus no such rule was observed; though, according to the account of the Mishna, it must have been in practice at that time, no proclamation was made for any person to bear witness to the innocence and character of Jesus; nor did any one voluntarily step forth to give his attestation to it. And our Saviour seems to refer to such a custom, and to claim the benefit of it, by his answer to the high priest, when he asked him of his disciples and of his doctrine: "I spoke openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. Why askest thou me? ask them who heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said," Joh 18:20-21. This, therefore, was one remarkable instance of hardship and injustice, among others predicted by the prophet, which our Saviour underwent in his trial and sufferings.
St. Paul likewise, in similar circumstances, standing before the judgment seat of Festus, seems to complain of the same unjust treatment; that no one was called, or would appear, to vindicate his character. "My manner of life (την βιωσιν μου, דורי dori, 'my generation') from my youth, which was at the first among my own nation at Jerusalem, know all the Jews, who knew me from the beginning, if they would testify; that after the straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee;" Ac 26:4-5.
דור dor signifies age, duration, the time which one man or many together pass in this world, in this place; the course, tenor, or manner of life. The verb דור dor signifies, according to Castell, ordinatam vitam sive aetatem egit, ordinavit, ordine constituit. "He passed a certain course of life, he ordained," c. In Arabic, curavit, administravit, "he took care of, administered to."
Was he stricken - "He was smitten to death"] The Septuagint read למות lemaveth, εις θανατον, "to death." And so the Coptic and Saidic Versions, from the Septuagint MSS. St. Germain de Prez.
"Origen," (Contra Celsum, lib. i. p. 370, edit. 1733,) after having quoted at large this prophecy concerning the Messiah, "tells us, that having once made use of this passage in a dispute against some that were accounted wise among the Jews, one of them replied, that the words did not mean one man, but one people, the Jews, who were smitten of God and dispersed among the Gentiles for their conversion; that he then urged many parts of this prophecy to show the absurdity of this interpretation, and that he seemed to press them the hardest by this sentence, απο των ανομιων του λαου μον ηχθη εις θανατον, 'for the iniquity of my people was he smitten to death.'" Now as Origen, the author of the Hexapla, must have understood Hebrew, we cannot suppose that he would have urged this last quotation as so decisive if the Greek Version had not agreed here with the Hebrew text; nor that these wise Jews would have been at all distressed by this quotation, unless their Hebrew text had read agreeably to εις θανατον, "to death," on which the argument principally depended; for, by quoting it immediately, they would have triumphed over him, and reprobated his Greek version. This, whenever they could do it, was their constant practice in their disputes with the Christians. Jerome, in his Preface to the Psalms, says, Nuper cum Hebraeo disputans, quaedam pro Domino Salvatore de Psalmis testimonia protulisti: volensque ille te illudere, per sermones fere singulos asserebat, non ita haberi in Hebraeo, ut tu de LXX. opponebas. "Lately disputing with a Hebrew, - thou advancedst certain passages out of the Psalms which bear testimony to the Lord the Saviour; but he, to elude thy reasoning, asserted that almost all thy quotations have an import in the Hebrew text different from what they had in the Greek." And Origen himself, who laboriously compared the Hebrew text with the Septuagint, has recorded the necessity of arguing with the Jews from such passages only as were in the Septuagint agreeable to the Hebrew: ̔να προς Ιουδαιοις διαλεγομενοι μη προφερωμεν αυτοι τα μη κειμενα εν τοις αντιγραφοις αυτων, και ἱνα συγχρησωμεθα τοις φερομενοις παρ' εκεινοις. See Epist. ad African. p. 15, 17. Wherefore as Origen had carefully compared the Greek version of the Septuagint with the Hebrew text, and speaks of the contempt with which the Jews treated all appeals to the Greek version where it differed from their Hebrew text; and as he puzzled and confounded the learned Jews by urging upon them the reading εις θανατον, "unto death," in this place; it seems almost impossible not to conclude, both from Origen's argument and the silence of his Jewish adversaries, that the Hebrew text at that time actually had למות lemaveth, "to death," agreeably to the version of the Septuagint. - Dr. Kennicott.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain Isa 53:8. He was taken from prison and from…
Isa 53:8. He was taken from prison and from judgment — As we do not find that imprisonment was any part of Christ’s sufferings, the marginal reading seems to be preferable here. He was taken away by distress and judgment; that is, he was taken out of this life by oppression, violence, and a pretence of justice: or, as Bishop Lowth has it, By an oppressive judgment he was taken off. In Act 8:33, where we find this passage quoted, the reading of the LXX. is followed exactly, Εν τη ταπεινωσει η κρισις αυτου πρθη, In his humiliation his judgment was taken away; that is, in his state of humiliation he had no justice shown him; to take away a person’s judgment, being a proverbial phrase for oppressing him. Or, as Dr. Doddridge explains it, “Jesus appeared in so humble a form, that, though Pilate was convinced of his innocence, he seemed a person of so little importance that it would not be worth while to hazard any thing to preserve him.” They who prefer the translation given in our text, as Beza and many other commentators do, think the words refer to Christ’s being taken, by his resurrection, from his confinement in the grave, (which they suppose to be here called a prison, as it is termed a house, Job 30:23, and a pit, Psa 69:15,) and from the judgment, or sentence, which had been executed upon him: “agreeable to which Mr. L’Enfant renders it, His condemnation was taken away by his very abasement; that is, his stooping to death gave occasion to his triumph.” And who shall declare his generation — “This is one of the many passages of the Old Testament prophecies,” says Dr. Doddridge, “in which it is not so difficult to find a sense fairly applicable to Christ, as to know which to prefer of several that are so. Many ancient, as well as modern writers, have referred it to the mystery of his Deity,” his eternal generation, “or his incarnation,” his miraculous conception. “But Calvin and Beza say, this was owing to their ignorance of the Hebrew, the word דורnot admitting such a sense; and it is certain it very ill suits the connection with the following clause.” Some understand it as referring to his not having any witnesses to appear for him and give an account of his life and character. This interpretation is preferred by Bishop Lowth, who therefore renders the clause, And his manner of life who would declare? Others again, among whom are Calvin and Beza, think it is as if the prophet had said, “Who can declare how long he shall live and reign, or count the numerous offspring that shall descend from him?” But, “not to say that this idea is much more clearly expressed by the prophet, Isa 53:10, which, on this interpretation, is a tautology,” it does not appear that דור, generation, and זרע, seed, are ever used as synonymous terms. The former of these words, in the Hebrew, signifies the same with a generation of men, in English, who are contemporaries; (see Gen 7:1; Jdg 2:10; Psa 95:10; Psa 109:13;) and γενεα, in the LXX., by which it is here rendered, has most frequently this sense. “Therefore, I suppose,” says Dr. Doddridge, “with Dr. Hammond, the sense to be, ‘Who can describe the obstinate infidelity and barbarous injustice of that generation of men, among whom he appeared, and from whom he suffered such things?’” For he was cut off — Namely, by a violent death; out of the land of the living — By the wicked hands of those whom he came to save: see Act 2:23. For the transgression — Or, as some render, מפשׁע עמי, By the transgression of my people was he stricken — Hebrew, נגע למו, the stroke was on him; that is, he was stricken, was crucified and slain, by or through the wickedness of the Jews. The former, however, is doubtless the sense intended, for, as the angel testified to Daniel, (Dan 9:24; Dan 9:26,) the Messiah was to be cut off, not for himself, but for the sins and salvation of mankind. And this, though asserted Isa 53:4-6, is here repeated as a doctrine that cannot be too frequently inculcated, or too much regarded; and to prevent men’s mistakes about, or stumbling at, the humiliation of Christ, as though he had suffered and died for his own sins.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain He was taken from prison - Margin, ‘Away by…
He was taken from prison - Margin, ‘Away by distress and judgment.’ The general idea in this verse is, that the sufferings which he endured for his people were terminated by his being, after some form of trial, cut off out of the land of the living. Lowth renders this, ‘By an oppressive judgment he was taken off.’ Noyes, ‘By oppression and punishment he was taken away.’ The Septuagint renders it, ‘In his humiliation (ἐν τῇ ταπεινώσει en tē tapeinōsei), his judgment (ἡ κρίσις αὐτοὺ hē krisis autou), (his legal trial. Thomson), was taken away;’ and this translation was followed by Philip when he explained the passage to the eunuch of Ethiopia Act 8:33. The eunuch, a native of Ethiopia, where the Septuagint was commonly used, was reading this portion of Isaiah in that version, and the version was sufficiently accurate to express the general sense of the passage, though it is by no means a literal translation.
The Chaldee renders this verse, ‘From infirmities and retribution he shall collect our captivity, and the wonders which shall be done for us in his days who can declare? Because he shall remove the dominion of the people from the land of Israel; the sins which my people have sinned shall come even unto them.’ The Hebrew word which is here used (עצר ‛otser, from עצר ‛âtsar, “to shut up, to close,” means properly “a shutting up,” or “closure”; and then constraint, oppression, or vexation. In Psa 107:39, it means violent restraint, or oppression. It does not mean prison in the sense in which that word is now used. It refers rather to restraint, and detention; and would be better translated by confinement, or by violent oppressions. The Lord Jesus, moreover, was not confined in prison. He was bound, and placed under a guard, and was thus secured. But neither the word used here, nor the account in the New Testament, leads us to suppose that in fact he was incarcerated. There is a strict and entire conformity between the statement here, and the facts as they occurred on the trial of the Redeemer (see Joh 18:24; compare the notes at Act 8:33).
Read full note →
And from judgment - From a judicial decision; or by a judicial sentence. This statement is made in order to make the account of his sufferings more definite. He did not merely suffer affliction; he was not only a man of sorrows in general; he did not suffer in a tumult, or by the excitement of a mob: but he suffered under a form of law, and a sentence was passed in his case (compare Jer 1:16; 2Ki 25:6), and in accordance with that he was led forth to death. According to Hengstenberg, the two words here ‘by oppression,’ and ‘by judicial sentence,’ are to be taken together as a hendiadys, meaning an oppressive, unrighteous proceeding. So Lowth understands it. It seems to me, however, that they are rather to be taken as denoting separate things - the detention or confinement preliminary to the trial, and the sentence consequent upon the mock trial.
And who shall declare his generation? - The word rendered ‘declare’ means to relate, or announce. ‘Who can give a correct statement in regard to it’ - implying either that there was some want of willingness or ability to do it. This phrase has been very variously interpreted; and it is by no means easy to fix its exact meaning. Some have supposed that it refers to the fact that when a prisoner was about to be led forth to death, a crier made proclamation calling on anyone to come forward and assert his innocence, and declare his manner of life. But there is not sufficient proof that this was done among the Jews, and there is no evidence that it was done in the case of the Lord Jesus. Nor would this interpretation exactly express the sense of the Hebrew. In regard to the meaning of the passage, besides the sense referred to above, we may refer to the following opinions which have been held, and which are arranged by Hengstenberg:
1. Several, as Luther, Calvin, and Vitringa, translate it, ‘Who will declare the length of his life?’ that is, who is able to determine the length of his future days - meaning that there would be no end to his existence, and implying that though he would be cut off, yet he would be raised again, and would live forever. To this, the only material objection is, that the word דור dôr (generation), is not used elsewhere in that sense. Calvin, however, does not refer it to the personal life of the Messiah, so to speak, but to his life in the church, or to the perpetuity of his life and principles in the church which he redeemed. His words are: ‘Yet we are to remember that the prophet does not speak only of the person of Christ, but embraces the whole body of the church, which ought never to be separated from Christ. We have, therefore, says he, a distinguished testimony respecting the perpetuity of the church. For as Christ lives for ever, so he will not suffer his kingdom to perish’ - (Commentary in loc.)
2. Others translate it, ‘Who of his contemporaries will consider it,’ or ‘considered it?’ So Storr, Doderlin, Dathe, Rosenmuller and Gesenius render it. According to Gesenius it means, ‘Who of his contemporaries considered that he was taken out of the land of the living on account of the sin of my people?’
3. Lowth and some others adopt the interpretation first suggested, and render it, ‘His manner of life who would declare?’ In support of this, Lowth appeals to the passages from the Mishna and the Gemara of Babylon, where it is said that before anyone was punished for a capital crime, proclamation was made before him by a crier in these words, ‘Whosoever knows anything about his innocence, let him come and make it known.’ On this passage the Gemara of Babylon adds, ‘that before the death of Jesus, this proclamation was made forty days; but no defense could be found.’ This is certainly false; and there is no sufficient reason to think that the custom prevailed at all in the time of Isaiah, or in the time of the Saviour.
4. Others render it, ‘Who can express his posterity, the number of his descendants?’ So Hengstenberg renders it. So also Kimchi.
5. Some of the fathers referred it to the humanity of Christ, and to his miraculous conception. This was the belief of Chrysostom. See Calvin in loc. So also Morerius and Cajetan understood it.
But the word is never used in this sense. The word דור dôr (generation), means properly an age, a generation of human beinigs; the revolving period or circle of human life; from דור dûr, a circle Deu 23:3-4, Deu 23:9; Ecc 1:4. It then means, also, a dwelling, a habitation Psa 49:20; Isa 38:12. It occurs often in the Old Testament, and is in all other instances translated ‘generation,’ or ‘generations.’ Amidst the variety of interpretations which have been proposed, it is perhaps not possible to determine with any considerable degree of certainty what is the true sense of the passage. The only light, it seems to me, which can be thrown on it, is to be derived from the 10th verse, where it is said, ‘He shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days;’ and this would lead us to suppose that the sense is, that he would have a posterity which no one would be able to enumerate, or declare. According to this, the sense would be, ‘He shall be indeed cut off out of the land of the living. But his name, his race shall not be extinct. Notwithstanding this, his generation, race, posterity, shall be so numerous that no one shall be able to declare it.’ This interpretation is not quite satisfactory, but it has more probabilities in its favor than any other.
For - (כי kı̂y). This particle does not here denote the cause of what was just stated, but points out the connection (compare 1Sa 2:21; Ezr 10:1). In these places it denotes the same as ‘and.’ This seems to be the sense here. Or, if it be here a causal particle, it refers not to what immediately goes before, but to the general strain and drift of the discourse. All this would occur to him because he was cut off on account of the transgression of his people. He was taken from confinement, and was dragged to death by a judicial sentence, and he should have a numerous spiritual posterity, because he was cut off on account of the sins of the people.
He was cut off - This evidently denotes a violent, and not a peaceful death. See Dan 9:26 : ‘And after threescore and two weeks shall the Messiah be cut off, but not for himself.’ The Septuagint renders it, ‘For his life is taken away from the earth.’ The word used here (גזר gâzar), means properly “to cut, to cut in two, to divide.” It is applied to the act of cutting down trees with an axe (see 2Ki 6:4). Here the natural and obvious idea is, that he would be violently taken away, as if he was cut down in the midst of his days. The word is never used to denote a peaceful death, or a death in the ordinary course of events; and the idea which would be conveyed by it would be, that the person here spoken of would be cut off in a violent manner in the midst of his life.
For the transgression of my people - The meaning of this is not materially different from ‘on account of our sins.’ ‘The speaker here - Isaiah - does not place himself in opposition to the people, but includes himself among them, and speaks of them as his people, that is, those with whom he was connected’ - (Hengstenberg). Others, however, suppose that Yahweh is here introduced as speaking, and that he says that the Messiah was to be cut off for the sins of his people.
Was he stricken - Margin, ‘The stroke upon him;’ that is, the stroke came upon him. The word rendered in the margin ‘stroke’ (נגע nega‛), denotes properly a blow Deu 17:8 :Deu 21:5; then a spot, mark, or blemish in the skin, whether produced by the leprosy or any other cause. It is the same word which is used in Isa 53:4 (see the note on that verse). The Hebrew, which is rendered in the margin ‘upon him’ (למו lâmô) has given rise to much discussion. It is properly and usually in the plural form, and it has been seized upon by those who maintain that this whole passage refers not to one individual but to some collective body, as of the people, or the prophets (see Analysis prefixed to Isa 52:13), as decisive of the controversy. To this word Rosenmuller, in his Prolegomena to the chapter, appeals for a decisive termination of the contest, and supposes the prophet to have used this plural form for the express purpose of clearing up any difficulty in regard to his meaning. Gesenius refers to it for the same purpose, to demonstrate that the prophet must have referred to some collective body - as the prophets - and not to an individual. Aben Ezra and Abarbanel also maintain the same thing, and defend the position that it can never be applied to an individual. This is not the place to go into an extended examination of this word. The difficulties which have been started in regard to it, have given rise to a thorough critical examination of the use of the particle in the Old Testament, and an inquiry whether it is ever used in the singular number. Those who are disposed to see the process and the result of the investigation, may consult Ewald’s Hebrew Grammar, Leipzig, 1827, p. 365; Wiseman’s Lectures, pp. 331-333, Andover Edit., 1837; and Hengstenberg’s Christology, p. 523. In favor of regarding it as used here in the singular number and as denoting an individual, we may just refer to the following considerations:
1. It is so rendered by Jerome, and in the Syriac version.
2. In some places the suffix מו mô, attached to nouns, is certainly singular. Thus in Psa 11:7, (פניטו pânēyṭô) ‘His face,’ speaking of God; Job 27:23, ‘Men shall clap their hands at him’ (עלימו ‛âlēymô), where it is certainly singular; Isa 44:15, ‘He maketh it a graven image, and falleth down thereto’ (למו lâmô).
3. In Ethiopic the suffix is certainly singular (Wiseman).
These considerations show that it is proper to render it in the singular number, and to regard it as referring to an individual. The Septuagint renders it, Εἰς Θάνατον Eis Thanaton - ‘Unto death,’ and evidently read it as if it were an abbreviation of למות lāmûth, and they render the whole passage, ‘For the transgressions of my people he was led unto death.’ This translation is adopted and defended by Lowth, and has also been defended by Dr. Kennicott. The only argument which is urged, however, is, that it was so used by Origen in his controversy with the Jews; that they made no objection to the argument that he urged; and that as Origen and the Jews were both acquainted with the Hebrew text, it is to be presumed that this was then the reading of the original. But this authority is too slight to change the Hebrew text. The single testimony of Origen is too equivocal to determine any question in regard to the reading of the Hebrew text, and too much reliance should not be reposed even on his statements in regard to a matter of fact. This is one of the many instances in which Lowth has ventured to change the Hebrew text with no sufficient authority.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Judgment, or by an unjust and cruel judgment. (Haydock)…
Judgment, or by an unjust and cruel judgment. (Haydock) --- Hebrew, "from prison and judgment." (Calmet) --- Septuagint, "in humiliation, (Haydock) or humility, his judgment was taken away," or rescinded, by his glorious resurrection. St. Philip follows this version in explaining this passage to the eunuch, Acts viii. 33. --- Generation, from his eternal Father or from the Virgin [Mary], his incarnation, life, resurrection, or posterity in the Church. All these may be meant, and are inexplicable. (Calmet)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain Rather, "He was taken away (that is, cut off)…
Rather, "He was taken away (that is, cut off) by oppression and by a judicial sentence"; a hendiadys for, "by an oppressive judicial sentence" [LOWTH and HENGSTENBERG]. GESENIUS not so well, "He was delivered from oppression and punishment" only by death. English Version also translates, "from . . . from," not "by . . . by." But "prison" is not true of Jesus, who was not incarcerated; restraint and bonds (Joh 18:24) more accord with the Hebrew. Act 8:33; translate as the Septuagint: "In His humiliation His judgment (legal trial) was taken away"; the virtual sense of the Hebrew as rendered by LOWTH and sanctioned by the inspired writer of Acts; He was treated as one so mean that a fair trial was denied Him (Mat 26:59; Mar 14:55-59). HORSLEY translates, "After condemnation and judgment He was accepted."
who . . . declare . . . generation--who can set forth (the wickedness of) His generation? that is, of His contemporaries [ALFORD on Act 8:33], which suits best the parallelism, "the wickedness of His generation" corresponding to "oppressive judgment." But LUTHER, "His length of life," that is, there shall be no end of His future days (Isa 53:10; Rom 6:9). CALVIN includes the days of His Church, which is inseparable from Himself. HENGSTENBERG, "His posterity." He, indeed, shall be cut off, but His race shall be so numerous that none can fully declare it. CHYRSOSTOM, &c., "His eternal sonship and miraculous incarnation."
Read full note →
cut off--implying a violent death (Dan 9:26).
my people--Isaiah, including himself among them by the word "my" [HENGSTENBERG]. Rather, JEHOVAH speaks in the person of His prophet, "My people," by the election of grace (Heb 2:13).
was he stricken--Hebrew, "the stroke (was laid) upon Him." GESENIUS says the Hebrew means "them"; the collective body, whether of the prophets or people, to which the Jews refer the whole prophecy. But JEROME, the Syriac, and Ethiopiac versions translate it "Him"; so it is singular in some passages; Psa 11:7, His; Job 27:23, Him; Isa 44:15, thereto. The Septuagint, the Hebrew, lamo, "upon Him," read the similar words, lamuth, "unto death," which would at once set aside the Jewish interpretation, "upon them." ORIGEN, who laboriously compared the Hebrew with the Septuagint, so read it, and urged it against the Jews of his day, who would have denied it to be the true reading if the word had not then really so stood in the Hebrew text [LOWTH]. If his sole authority be thought insufficient, perhaps lamo may imply that Messiah was the representative of the collective body of all men; hence the equivocal plural-singular form.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 8. From prison and from judgment… who shall declare,…
8. From prison and from judgment… who shall declare, etc. — Among multifarious interpretations here, that which is least often adopted seems the best, (Lowth,) namely, Deprived of proper legal detainment and trial — the usual prior summoning of witnesses, according to Jewish law — who can have the requisite knowledge of his teaching and way of life in such a precipitate condemnation? The Hebrew preposition mem, (English, from,) before the words rendered “prison,” and “judgment,” denotes the unjust privative fact, or legal right denied to him; and Christ’s own reference when before Pilate (Joh_18:20-21) to the Jewish law of trial, adds force to this interpretation, which is further sustained by the following clause.
For he was cut off out of the land of the living — And this with indecent haste; with no chance for a proper trial: all this, too, because he was willing to suffer for the sins of the people of Israel and of the world.
Read full note →
Was he stricken — Hebrew, The stroke was upon him.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 8. He was taken from prison and from judgment]…
8. He was taken from prison and from judgment] Every word here is ambiguous. The principal interpretations are as follows: (1) “Without hindrance and without right he was taken away,” i.e. he was put to death without opposition from any quarter, and in defiance of justice. The only exception that can fairly be taken to this view is the translation “hindrance,” a sense of the noun for which there are no parallels. Yet the verb from which the noun is derived occurs in the sense of “detain” (1Ki_18:44, &c.), and as the noun is very uncommon, the rendering cannot be pronounced impossible. (2) “Through oppression and through judgement he was taken away” (so virtually R.V.). “Judgement” here means “judicial procedure,” and the rendering “oppression” is guaranteed by Psa_107:39. “Oppression and judgement” may mean (as explained by Cheyne) an oppressive judgement (“through distressful doom,” see his Introduction, p. 428), the idea being that the Servant’s death, like that of our Lord, was a judicial murder. For “taken away” in the sense of “put to death” see on ch. Isa_52:5, and cf. Eze_33:4 (where, however, a different part of the verb is used). (3) “From oppression and from judgement he was taken away,” i.e. released by death, or taken by God to Himself (2Ki_2:10). Here the sense of “oppression and judgement” is indeterminate; the meaning might either be simply that by death he was finally released from his troubles, or that God took him away from the malice of his persecutors. The rendering “imprisonment” instead of “oppression” could be justified from the usage of the verb (2Ki_17:4 &c.), although not of the noun itself; only in this case we must not read, “From imprisonment … he was led away (to execution),” for that is an idea which could hardly have suggested itself apart from the fulfilment of the prophecy in the crucifixion of Christ. Of the three interpretations the last seems the most natural, although everything turns on the question whether the death of the Servant is conceived as caused directly by men or by God through sickness. (see below on the last clause of this verse.)
And who shall declare his generation?] A still more difficult clause. The Hebr. word for “generation” (dôr) may mean (a) the time in which he lived, (b) the circle of his contemporaries, (c) those like-minded with him (Psa_12:7; Psa_14:5; Pro_30:11 ff.); but is never used with any such significance as “length of life,” or “life-history,” or “posterity.” In neither of its three senses does it supply a suitable object to the verb declare or rather consider (Psa_143:5 “meditate”). We may, however, take it in the sense (b), and render with R.V. and as for his generation who (among them) considered &c. (On this construction see Davidson, Synt. § 72, Rem. 4). Yet the construction as direct obj. of the verb is so much the more natural that any suggestion would be acceptable which might enable us to retain it. Duhm (following Knobel) takes the word in its Aramaic sense of “dwelling-place” (see on ch. Isa_38:12) and translates “who enquires after his dwelling-place” (with God)? It would be better, perhaps, to understand “dwelling-place” exactly as in Isa_38:12, of the earthly dwelling-place, the place that once knew him but knows him no more: “Who enquires after it, or thinks about it?” he has vanished from the thoughts of men.
Read full note →
for he was cut off (Psa_88:5; Eze_37:11) out of the land of the living] Comp. again Jer_11:19. The R.V. makes this clause an object sentence governed by the verb “considered” (reading that instead of for). This is perhaps necessary if the R.V. rendering of the previous line be adopted.
for the rebellion of my people was he stricken (lit. “(was) a stroke upon him”)] The last word in the Hebr. (לָמוֹ) would be translated most naturally “upon them” (but see Davidson, Gram. § 19 R. c.); hence some render “because of the rebellion of my people, the stroke (due) to them.” A far more satisfactory sense is obtained by the help of the LXX. Read למות and change the preceding noun into a passive verb (nugga‘ for nega‘) and render was he stricken unto death. The expression “stricken” is from the same verb which in Isa_53:4 suggested leprosy as the cause of the Servant’s disfigurement; and its use here in connexion with his death is in favour of the view that he died of his sickness and not by the hands of his persecutors. If this conclusion be sound it confirms the view expressed above as to the sense of the first clause of this verse.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (8) He was taken from prison . . .—The…
(8) He was taken from prison . . .—The Hebrew preposition admits of this rendering, which is adopted by many commentators, as describing the oppression and iniquitous trial which had preceded the death of the servant. It admits equally of the sense, through oppression and through judgment; and, on the whole, this gives a preferable sense. The whole procedure was tainted with iniquity.
Who shall declare his generation?—The words are, perhaps, the most difficult of the whole section, and have been very differently explained: (1) “Who shall declare his life, the mystery of his birth, his eternal being?” (2) “Who shall count his spiritual offspring?” as in Psa_22:30. (3) “As to his generation (i.e., his contemporaries, as in Jer_2:31), who will consider rightly?” (4) “Who shall set forth his generation in all the intensity of their guilt?”—to say nothing of other renderings, which render the noun as “his dwelling,” i.e., the grave, or his “course of life,” or his “fate.” Of these (3) seems most in harmony with the context, the words that follow pointing to the fact which ought to have been considered, and was not, that though the Servant of Jehovah was smitten, it was not for his own sins, but theirs.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain He was taken from prison and from judgment; rather,…
He was taken from prison and from judgment; rather, by oppression and a judgment was he taken away; i.e. (us Dr. Kay says) "by a violence which cloaked itself under the formalities of a legal process." The Septuagint Version, which is quoted by Philip the deacon in the Acts, (Isa_8:3) must have been derived from quite a different text. It preserves, however, the right rendering of the verb, "was he taken away," i.e. removed from the earth. Who shall declare his generation? literally, his generation who considereth? The meaning is obscure. Dr. Kay understands by "his generation," his lifetime or his life, comparing Isa_38:12, "Mine age is departed," where the same word is used and accompanied by a pronominal suffix. Mr. Urwick suggests that it includes
(1) his origin;
Read full note →
(2) his earthly life; and
(3) his everlasting reign in heaven.
Others (Delitzsch, Gesenius, Cheyne) take "his generation" to mean "the men of his generation," and join the clause with what follows: "As for those of his generation, which of them considered that he was cut off," etc.? He was cut off; i.e. taken away before his time, cut down like a flower. (comp. Job_14:2 Lam_3:54 Eze_37:11) The land of the living. The present world, the earth. (see Isa_38:11; and comp. Job_28:13 Psa_27:13 Psa_52:5 Psa_116:9 Psa_142:2 Jer_11:19) For the transgression of my people was he stricken. The sentiment is the same as in ver. 5, but with the difference that there it was suffering only, here it is death itself, which the Servant endures for man. "My people" may be either "God"s people" or "the prophet"s people," according as the speaker is regarded as Isaiah or Jehovah. Jehovah certainly becomes the Speaker in vers. 11, 12.
Vers. 8-10. The shortness but sufficiency of human life.
"Who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living." "He shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days." Here is a paradox in connection with our Master which finds a close correspondence in another connected with ourselves.
I THE BREVITY AND PERPETUITY OF OUR LORD"S CAREER. It was indeed true, as the prophet foresaw, that "he was cut off," etc.; his days were few; his ministry was brief counted by months rather than by years. There did not seem to be time enough in that short span, in a course so quickly run and so suddenly concluded, to accomplish anything great and far-reaching. But how wide has his influence proved! how long has his Name been known and his power been felt! How has he "prolonged his days" in the institutions he has founded which are existing now, in the truth he announced which is triumphing to-day over all other theories, in the spirit he communicated which is breathing still in the laws, the literature, the habits, the language of mankind! Who shall declare his generation? Does he not "see his seed" in the countless children of his grace who flock to his standard, who bless his Name, who call him Lord and Saviour and Friend! He who was so soon cut off from the land of the living is proving himself to be the One who hath immortality as no other son of man has had or ever will have.
II THE SHORTNESS BUT THE SUFFICIENCY OF OUR MORTAL LIFE.
1. Our life below is very brief. Scripture abundantly asserts it; observation is continually confirming it; experience is painfully proving it. It is not only brief, so far as the actual number of our years is concerned when compared with some animal life or with angelic existence, or when contrasted with God"s eternity; but it is brief so far as our own consciousness is concerned. Its conclusion seems to come with great rapidity and unexpectedness. In the curiosity of childhood, the eagerness of youth, the ambition and activity of early manhood, the cares and anxieties of prime and of declining days, our life hurries on and passes away, and, before we are looking for it, there comes the last summons and the day of departure.
2. But, short as it is, it is sufficient. It is long enough for us to store our minds with heavenly wisdom; to become reconciled to God and to take our stand with the wise and holy; to grow into the likeness of our Divine Exemplar; to bear witness to the truth of Christ; to exert an influence which will never die. Our truest and best "seed" are not found in the children and grandchildren who are born to us, but in the spiritual results we have accomplished. We die and disappear, and the stone on which our name is carved is overthrown, and no man will speak of us again; but we, too, "shall prolong our days" in the holy and beautiful characters men will be forming and the useful lives they will be living, because of the witness we are bearing here and the work we are doing now. C.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain He was taken from prison and from judgment
Isa_53:8-9
He was taken from prison and from judgment
Read full note →
He was taken from prison and from judgment:
Every word here is ambiguous.
The principal interpretations are as follows--
1. Without hindrance and without right He was taken away, i.e. He was put to death without opposition from any quarter, and in defiance of justice.
2. Through oppression and through judgment He was taken away (so virtually R.V.). Judgment here means judicial procedure, and the rendering oppression is guaranteed by Psa_107:39.
3. From oppression and from judgment He was taken away, i.e released by death, or taken by God to Himself (2Ki_2:10). Of the three interpretations, the last seems the most natural. (Prof. J. Skinner, D.D.)
Christs impisonment
(with Joh_18:12-13):--The word prison should not, perhaps, be taken to designate a particular place of incarceration; for there is no evidence to show that Christ was ever confined in any such penal cell. He was, however, a prisoner. His limbs were bound, and He was held in the custody of the iron-hearted officers of the Roman government. We shall look upon Christs imprisonment in three aspects.
I. AS THE MOST THRILLING CHAPTER IN THE HISTORY OF CHRIST.
1. He was first taken a prisoner from Gethsemane.
2. He was then taken as a prisoner from Annas to Caiaphas (Joh_18:19-24; Mat_26:59-68).
3. He was next taken a prisoner from the palace of Caiaphas to the hall of the Sanhedrim.
4. He was next taken as a prisoner from the hall of the Sanhedrim to Pilate Joh_18:28-38; Luk_23:1-7; Mar_15:1-5; Mat_27:11-14).
5. He was then taken as a prisoner from Pilate to Herod (Luk_23:8-12).
6. He was then taken as a prisoner back from Herod to Pilate (Luk_23:13-25; Mat_27:15-26; Mar_15:6-15).
7. He was finally taken as a prisoner from Pilate to Calvary (Mat_27:27-50). The cross is the culmination of the whole.
II. As THE GREATEST ENORMITY IN THE ANNALS OF CRIME.
1. His imprisonment combined all the chief elements of crime.
(1) Here was the foulest injustice. Imprisonment is for criminals; but had Christ ever been guilty of a crime?
(2) Here too is the basest ingratitude. Was there one in Judea, or Galilee, or Samaria, who could refer to one single act of unkindness which He had ever committed towards any? Not one. He went about doing good
(3) Here is astounding impiety. This Prisoner was the Son of God, the Prince of Life.
2. His Imprisonment was effected in the name of law and religion.
(1) The law they referred to (Deu_18:20) had no just application to the case of Christ, and they must have been conscious of its irrelevancy. Christ was not a prophet who had presumed to speak a word in the name of Jehovah which He had not commanded; nor had He spoken in the name of any other god; and therefore by this old law of Moses He was not guilty of death. But what if a law authorize a morally criminal act, is the act less criminal? In no measure.
(2) But it was in the name of religion as well as law. This makes the crime greater still. The men that instigated the crucifixion of the Son of God were professedly religious men; they were the religious authorities of the country. Under profession of respect for truth and God, they wrought all the enormities which blackened the page of evangelic history.
III. AS THE MOST WONDERFUL ENIGMA IN THE GOVERNMENT OF GOD. I know of nothing more wonderful in the universe than the sight of Jesus in bonds.
1. Why does Eternal Justice allow unsullied holiness thus to suffer?
2. Why does Almighty God give men the power to perpetrate such enormities?
3. Why does All-powerful Emanuel Himself submit to these enormities? Does not the vicarious principle stand out in sunny prominence? (D. Thomas, D.D.)
Christs ignominious death and glorious resurrection
I. THE SCANDAL ITSELF, laid down in the most aggravating terms--prison, judgment, cutting off from the land of the living, and a stroke upon Him for transgression as if the prophet had said, Grant all that you will charge upon Him, prison, judgment, strokes, cutting off--express it the worst way you can, all this will not impeach the glory of His excellency.
II. THE DEFENCE in other terms. He was taken from those things, and who shall declare His generation? If you think it is not enough to say that He died for others, and that He was stricken for the transgression of My people, yet He did not as every man that dieth for others; He perished not in this expression of His love, as others do: He was taken from prison, and from judgment, and now liveth gloriously. There are two things in the defence--
1. His resurrection. He was taken from prison and from judgment; He got out from under it.
2. His life and duration in that state. Who shall declare His generation? The sense is, who shall declare His age or duration? who can tell those endless ages that Christ shall live? (T. Manton, D.D.)
Who shall declare His generation?--
Who shall declare His generation?
The Hebrew word for generation is translated age in Isa_38:12, but it more properly means lifetime. The Septuagint translators have, however, hit the true idea of this passage in making the Greek word word γενεάν, instead of βίον or αἰῶνα, for the thought regards the apparent brevity of Messiah career. He comes, and He goes, and there is an end of Him. Who will take the trouble to think about a life that is cut off so soon, and leaves, apparently, no trace? He has no successor, no family, no descendants to preserve His name. The Septuagint reading, therefore, while not a literal translation of the Hebrew, follows its thought. The Hebrew literally is, Who shall think upon His career? The Septuagint is, Who shall describe or recount His race or generation? The one refers directly to His lifetime, but indirectly to His posterity; the other confines itself to the posterity. Now, both questions are answered in Isa_38:10 He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days. The Messiah will have a spiritual seed on the earth, and in them He will continue His own earthly life. (Howard Crosby, LL.D.)
Who shall declare His generation?
Meyer, Alford, and others understand this as equivalent to, Who can describe the wickedness of the men of this time? Hengstenberg interprets it, Who shall declare His posterity? i.e. His spiritual children, born of the travail of His soul. Delitzsch translates, Of His contemporaries, who considered this: He was snatched out of the land of the living, seeing that, on account of the transgression of My people, vengeance fell on Him? Who shall declare His generation? A difficult clause. The Hebrew word for generation (dor) may mean--
(1) The time in which He lived.
(2) The circle of His contemporaries.
(3) Those like-minded with Him (Psa_41:7; Psa_14:5; Pro_30:11, etc.); but is never used with any such significance as length of life, or life-history, or posterity. We may take it in the sense (2), and render with R.V. and as for His generation who (among them) considered, etc. (Prof. J. Skinner, D.D.)
For the transgression of My people was He stricken
Christ smitten unto death:
There is reason to believe that the original text has, in this instance, undergone some alteration, and that it anciently stood thus, He was smitten unto death. It was thus written by Origen, who assures us that a certain Jew, with whom he disputed, seemed to feel himself more pressed by this expression than by any other part of the chapter. It is thus rendered by the Septuagint in our present copies; and if, in this instance, it had not concurred with the original, neither could Origen have urged it with good faith, nor the Jew have felt himself embarrassed by the argument which is suggested. (R. Hall, M.A.)
The Person stricken
The Jews pretend that no single person is designed in this portion of prophecy; but that the people of Israel collectively are denoted under the figure of one man, and that the purport of the chapter is a delineation of the calamities and sufferings which that nation should undergo, with a view to its correction and amendment. The absurdity of this evasion will be obvious to him who considers that the person who is represented as stricken is carefully distinguished by the prophet from the people for whoso benefit He suffered. For the transgression of My people was He stricken: in addition to which, He is affirmed to be stricken even to death, which, as Origen very properly urged, agrees well with the fate of an individual, but not with that of a people. (R. Hall, M. A.)
The substitution of the innocent for the guilty
Let us consider what circumstance met in this case, and must be supposed to concur on any occasion of this kind, to render fit and proper the substitution of an innocent person in the place of the guilty; and what is peculiar in the character of our Saviour, which renders it worthy of God to set Him apart as a propitiation the sins of the world, and annex the blessings of eternal life to such as believe in the doctrine of the Cross, and repent, and turn to God.
I. It is obvious that such a procedure as we are now contemplating, in order to give it validity and effect, MUST BE SANCTIONED BY THE SUPREME AUTHORITY. For a private person, whatever might be his station in society, to pretend to introduce such a commutation of punishment as is implied in such a transaction, would be a presumptuous invasion of legislative rights, which no well-regulated society would tolerate. This condition was most unequivocally satisfied in the mystery of Christs substitution.
II. Another indispensable circumstance in such a proceeding, is, that IT SHOULD BE PERFECTLY VOLUNTARY ON THE PART OF THE SUFFERER. Otherwise, it would be an act of the highest injustice; it would be the addition of one offence to another, and give a greater shock to all rightly-disposed minds than the acquittal of the guilty without any atonement. Here there appears, at first sight, an insuperable difficulty in the way of human salvation. How could that be rendered which was, at once, due to sin and mankind at large? Where could one be found that would endure the penalty freely, which was incurred by a sinful world? This our Saviour did. No sacrifice should go unwillingly to the altar. It was, indeed, reckoned a bad omen when any one did so. None ever went so willingly as He.
III. It is farther necessary that the substitute not only undertake voluntarily, but that HE BE PERFECTLY FREE FROM THE OFFENCE WHICH RENDERS PUNISHMENT NECESSARY. Accordingly, in the case of man Divine justice cannot be willing to acquiesce in a substitute who is a sharer in guilt; for the law has a previous hold upon him; there is a debt due on his own account. But Jesus Christ, though a man, was, by reason of His miraculous conception, free from the taint of original sin.
IV. There would be a great propriety in this also, that THE INNOCENT PERSON SUBSTITUTED FOR THE GUILTY, SHOULD STAND IN SOME RELATION TO HIM. Now, our Lord Jesus Christ was related to mankind; one like them whom He came to redeem. This was shadowed forth in the law of a Redeemer of a lost estate. The person who was to redeem must be related: hence a redeemer and a relation were expressed by one term, and the nearest relation was to redeem. Hence, then, the incarnation of our Lord was necessary.
V. If the substitution of the innocent in the room of the guilty is at all permitted, it seems requisite that NO ADVANTAGE SHOULD BE TAKEN OF A MOMENTARY ENTHUSIASM, a sudden impulse of heroic feeling, which might prompt a generous mind to make a sacrifice, of which, on cool deliberation, be repented. In the ease we are now contemplating, nothing could reconcile the mind to such a procedure but such a settled purpose on the part of the substitute as precludes the possibility of a vacillation or change. But this condition is found in the highest perfection on the part of the blessed Redeemer. His oblation of Himself was not the execution of a sudden purpose, the fruit of a momentary movement of pity; it was the result of deliberate counsel, the accomplishment of an ancient purpose, formed in the remotest recesses of a past eternity.
VI. In the case of the substitution of the innocent for the guilty, it seems highly requisite that HE WHO OFFERS HIMSELF AS THE SUBSTITUTE SHOULD JUSTIFY THE LAW BY WHICH HE SUFFERS. In the substitution of the Redeemer of mankind were conjoined the most prompt and voluntary endurance of the penalty, with the most avowed and cordial approbation of the justice of its sanctions. It was a great part of the business of His life to assert and vindicate by His doctrine that law which He magnified and made illustrious by His passion. Never had the law such an expounder as in the person of Him who came into the world to exhaust its penalties, and endure its curse.
VII. That the voluntary substitution of an innocent person, in the stead of the guilty, may be capable of answering the ends of justice, nothing seems more necessary than that THE SUBSTITUTE SHOULD BE OF EQUAL CONSIDERATION, AT LEAST, TO THE PARTY IN WHOSE BEHALF HE INTERPOSES. The interests sacrificed by the suffering party should not be of less cost and value than those which are secured by such a procedure. But the aggregate value of those interests must be supposed to be in some proportion to the rank and dignity of the party to which they belong. As a sacrifice to justice, the life of a peasant must, on this principle, be deemed a most inadequate substitute for that of a personage of the highest order. We should consider the requisitions of justice eluded, rather than satisfied, by such a commutation. It is on this ground that St. Paul declares it to be impossible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take away sins. In this view the redemption of the human race seemed to be hopeless; for where could an adequate substitute be found? The mystery hid from ages and generations, the mystery of Christ crucified, dispels the obscurity, and presents, in the person of the Redeemer, all the qualifications which human conception can embody as contributing to the perfect character of a substitute.
VIII. However much we might be convinced of the competence of vicarious suffering to accomplish the ends of justice, and whatever the benefits we may derive from it, A BENEVOLENT MIND COULD NEVER BE RECONCILED TO THE SIGHT OF VIRTUE OF THE HIGHEST ORDER FINALLY OPPRESSED AND CONSUMED BY ITS OWN ENERGIES; and the more intense the admiration excited, the more eager would be the desire of same compensatory arrangement, some expedient by which an ample retribution might be assigned to such heroic sacrifices. If the suffering of the substitute involved his destruction, what satisfaction could a generous and feeling mind derive from impunity procured at such a cost! While we rejoice in the cross of Christ as the source of pardon, our satisfaction is heightened by beholding it succeeded by the crown.
IX. If the principle of substitution be at all admitted in the operations of criminal law, it is tog obvious to require proof that IT SHOULD BE INTRODUCED VERY SPARINGLY, only on very rare occasions, and never be allowed to subside into a settled course. It requires some great crisis to justify its introduction, some extraordinary combination of difficulties, obstructing the natural course of justice; it requires, that while the letter of the law is dispensed with, its spirit be fully adhered to; so that, instead of tending to weaken the motives to obedience, it shall present a salutary monition, a moral and edifying spectacle. The substitution of Christ in the room of a guilty race receives all the advantage as an impressive spectacle which it is possible to derive from this circumstance. It stands amidst the lapse of ages, and the waste of worlds, a single and solitary monument.
X. Whenever the expedient of vicarious suffering is adopted, A PUBLICATION OF THE DESIGN OF THAT TRANSACTION BECOMES AS INDISPENSABLY NECESSARY AS OF THE TRANSACTION ITSELF; since none of the effects which it is intended to produce can be realized but in proportion as that is understood. Hence we see the infinite importance, in the doctrine of the Cross, that not merely the fact of our Lords death and sufferings should be announced, but that their object and purpose, as a great moral expedient, should be published to all nations. The doctrine of remission of sins, through the blood of that Victim which was once offered for the sins of the world, forms the grand peculiarity of the Gospel, and was the principal theme of the apostolic ministry, and is still pre-eminently the power of God to salvation. (R. Hall, M. A.)
The crucifixion
I. THE SUFFERING ITSELF. He was stricken. The greatness of this suffering will be made out to us upon these three accounts.
1. Of the latitude and extent of it.
2. Of the intenseness and sharpness of it.
3. Of the person inflicting it.
II. THE NATURE OF THE SUFFERING, which was penal, and expiatory, He was stricken for transgression.
III. THE GROUND AND CAUSE OF THIS SUFFERING, which was Gods propriety in, and relation to, the persons for whom Christ was stricken, implied in this word, My people. Conclusion: Christianity is a suffering religion, and there are two sorts of suffering to which it will certainly expose every genuine professor of it.
1. A suffering from himself; even that grand suffering of self-denial and mortification, the sharpest and most indispensable of all others, in which every Christian is not only to be the sufferer, but himself also the executioner. He who is Christs, says the apostle, has crucified the flesh with its affections and lusts.
2. From the world. (R. South, D.D.)
The stricken Christ
I. WHO WAS STRICKEN?
II. REFER TO HIS SUFFERINGS. How was He stricken?
1. With reproach. As for this fellow, we know not whence He is.
2. With ingratitude. His very disciples forsook Him, and fled.
3. With poverty.
4. Chiefly by the rod of His heavenly Father.
III. THE OBJECT OF THESE SUFFERINGS. For the transgression of My people was He stricken.
1. Justice is satisfied.
2. Conscience is at peace.
IV. THE FRUITS OF HIS SUFFERINGS, in connection with our own feelings and experience.
1. The devil is now destroyed. However formidable an enemy, the power of his arm is foiled.
2. The soul is saved.
3. All possible consolation is secured. (J. Parsons.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain (Sacramental Service.)
CHRIST STRICKEN
(Sacramental Service.)
Read full note →
Isa_53:8. For the transgression of my people was He stricken.
The general doctrine of the text is that of an expiation for sinners, made by an innocent victim substituted in their place. In the substitution of an innocent being to suffer in the room of the guilty (and especially such a being as Jesus Christ), and in pardoning and accepting the guilty into favour on that account, there appears a departure from all our common ideas of justice and propriety, &c. We have no disposition to diminish this singularity. It stands alone. But we certainly shall fail of the just and real essence of the Christian religion in our hearts, if we do not have faith in this expiation; and if our minds cannot compass the whole amazing matter, we may hope at least to have some gleams of illumination, like the lightning’s flash on the dark bosom of the storm. Let us see:
I. The wonder of this punishment for sin laid upon an innocent and Divine Being accords with our best conceptions of God. The most just conception of God that we have ever had is that of an incomprehensible Being. The high wonder of this expiation agrees with the infinitude of God. A suffering Christ is an infinite wonder; and, therefore, the wonder of the doctrine of an expiation for sinners by the sufferings of the innocent, instead of being a reason for our incredulity, is really a reason for our faith. The innocence, the person, and the expiation of the Victim, all accord with the incomprehensible God, &c. Be yond us, and peculiar in everything else, He is beyond us and peculiar in the great atonement.
II. Our God has different modes of giving intimations of Himself. We cannot learn all that we are able to know of Him in any one spot, or by any one transaction. To lead us on He has employed grades, and built one scaffolding above another. There is matter which came from nothing at His bidding; and in this world we may learn something of His control over matter. We may lift our eyes beyond this world, and as we look out upon the stars, we may add to our knowledge of God’s government over material things. Beyond matter is mind. Beyond mere intelligence there is a kingdom of sensibilities. Still beyond there is a moral kingdom. The world of grace is still higher. Redemption—the salvation of sinners—is not a matter of mere creation, or mere government or recovery from ruin merely; it is a matter of mercy to the sinning and the punishment of sin. This matter evidently lies beyond all others. “Stricken for my people” is just the amazing thing which the rising gradations of the revelations of God demand.
III. The mystery, the wonder of this redemption of sinners, by “stripes” laid on Christ, accords with us, as well as it accords with God. We are sinners. See what sin hath done. Some symbols of its mischief are visible. It blasted paradise, &c.! Sin has broken up our relations with God. Our Creator, our final Judge, is against us! The law which sin has broken is God’s law—the law for the immortal spirit—the law for eternity to come! Eternity! The mind staggers under the weight of that idea. To last on for ever, a sinner cut off from God, and no more at peace with myself than with Him; to feel eternally the gnawings of “the worm that dieth not” and the wrath of God! Sooner come annihilation! Now, in the presence of these wants, this sin which has no analogy, which has broken up our peace relations with God, this conscience, these agonies of a fearing spirit, and this dreadful eternity—what shall God do for us? What do we want Him to do? Just what He has done. We want Him to meet our infinite fears with His infinite offers, our worst foes with His ineffable grace; to show us while we stand trembling before His justice, that something has been done which that justice cannot find fault with—something which shall wave the peace-branch over the door into eternity! He has done it. It is His own work, on His own authority, like Him, and just because it has such wonders about it as the innocence and mysterious person of a suffering Christ, our faith can trust it. Where we most fear, God is most wonderful. The excellence and the innocence of the sacrifice as the ground of our peace, shows us that the august redemption perfectly assorts with the ineffable woes and wants of our sinful condition.
4. The uses we ought to make of this subject are not trivial. There are those who have no living faith in this atonement, and who will not come to the memorial of it. Why? Simply because of two things.
(1.) They have low and grovelling ideas of God—ideas very much confined to His earthly things and His natural attributes.
(2.) They do not justly realise their condition and necessities as sinners. If men have inadequate notions of God, they will have inadequate notions of sin. If they have inadequate notions of sin, they will have inadequate notions of Christ; and then there will be nothing seen in their condition to drive them, and nothing in His character to draw them, to His infinite sacrifice. If they had anything like a just idea of what it is to be a sinner, they would look to the sacrifice of Christ with amazing gladness and gratitude.—Ichabod S. Spencer, D.D.: Sermons, vol. ii. pp. 412–431.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 General Information:
General Information:
Isaiah continues describing Yahweh's servant. (See: Isaiah 53:1-2)
Read full note →
By coercion and judgment he was condemned
This can be stated in active form. AT: "They treated him harshly, judged him, and condemned him" (See: Active or Passive)
coercion
The Hebrew word translated here as "coercion" is interpreted by some versions as "arrest." For these versions, the thought is that the Servant will be arrested and then judged and condemned.
who from that generation thought anymore about him?
This question emphasizes that no one thinks about him. AT: "no one from his generation cared what happened to him." or "no one among his contemporaries cared what happened to him." (See: Rhetorical Question)
who from that generation thought anymore about him?
Many versions interpret this passage in Hebrew differently: "Who can say anything about his descendants?" or "Who can say anything about his fate?"
But he was cut off from the land of the living
"Cut off" here refers to death. This can be stated in active form. AT: "But he died" or "But death took him away" (See: Active or Passive and Idiom)
of my people
"of the people of Israel"
nor had there been any deceit in his mouth
"Mouth" represents what a person says. AT: "nor did he deceive anyone when he spoke" (See: Metonymy)
translationWords
judge
condemn
generation
cut off
life
people of God
grave
deceive
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 53:8 Unjustly condemned: The servant will be given no…
53:8 Unjustly condemned: The servant will be given no legal protection or proper defense. • cut short in midstream: To die in midlife was understood to be God’s judgment.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.