Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Isaiah 19:2
And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians: and they shall fight every one against his brother, and every one against his neighbor; city against city, [and] kingdom against kingdom.
2. Jehovah speaks. The description of anarchy and civil war recalls ch. Isa 3:5, Isa 9:18 ff.
I will set Egyptians ] Lit. I will stir up (see ch. Isa 9:11) Egypt against Egypt the general expression for civil discord which is explained in the remainder of the verse. kingdom against kingdom ] LXX. a correct translation drawn from the translator’s local knowledge of Egypt. The numerous nomes or cantons were but loosely federated, and dissensions and local jealousies were always apt to break out when the central government was paralysed.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And I will set – ( sksakety). This word (from sakak) means properly to cover, to spread over, to hide, conceal, to protect. Another signification of the verb is, to weave, to intermingle. It may mean here, I will arm the Egyptians against each other (Gesenius); or, as in our version, I will mingle, confound, or throw them into discord and strife. The Septuagint renders it, Epegerthesontai – They shall be excited, or, raised up. Symmachus, Sumbalo. Syriac and Chaldee, I will excite. The sense is, that there would be discord and civil war, and this is traced to the agency or overruling providence of God – meaning that he would permit and overrule it. Compare the notes at Isa 45:7 : I make peace, and I create evil; I, Yahweh, do all these things; Amo 3:6 : Shall there be evil in a city and Jehovah hath not done it? The civil war here referred to was probably that which arose between the twelve kings in the time of the dodekarchy (see the Analysis to the chapter), and which resulted in the single dominion of Psammetichus. Dr. Newton (On the Prophecies, xii.) supposes, however, that the prophet refers to the civil wars between Apries and Amasis at the time of the invasion by Nebuchadnezzar. But it agrees much better with the former discord than with this. The description which follows is that of anarchy or civil strife, where many parties are formed, and would naturally lead to the supposition that there were more than two engaged.
And kingdom against kingdom – Septuagint, Nomos epi nomon – Nome against nomes. Egypt was formerly divided into forty-two nomes or districts. The version by the Septuagint was made in Egypt, and the translators would naturally employ the terms which were in common use. Still the event referred to was probably not that of one nome contending against another, but a civil war in which one dynasty would be excited against another (Gesenius), or when there would be anarchy and strife among the different members of the dodekarchy. See the Analysis of the chapter.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Isa 19:2
And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians
Divine providence in civil strife
This method of administration, we say, obtains and prevails in all ages.
This is the meaning of many a controversy, of many a quarrel, of many a dissension, in cabinets, in families, in nations. Men are surprised that they should turn upon their brothers with disdain, and even with cruel hatred. It is indeed matter of surprise and great sorrow, and if looked at within narrow limits it would seem to be a reflection upon Providence: but when does God ask to be judged within the four comers of human imagination or criticism? He not only does the deed, He does it within a field which He Himself has measured, and within the range of declarations which have about them all the mystery and graciousness of evangelical prophecies. We must, therefore, look not only at the incident, but at all its surroundings and to all its issues. When we are puzzled by household difficulties, by commercial perplexities, by unions that only exist for a moment and then dissolve or are turned into sourness and alienation, we must never forget that there is One who rules over all. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians; I will raise civil wars among them.
Kingdom against kingdom; for although all Egypt was now one kingdom, and under one king, yet not many years after this time it was divided into twelve several kingdoms, between whom there were many and cruel wars, as is related by the historians of those times, and particularly by Herodotus and Diodorus.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
2. setstir up. GESENIUStranslates, “arm.”
Egyptians against theEgyptiansLower against Upper: and Saitic against both. (SeeIsa 3:10). NEWTONrefers it to the civil wars between Apries and Amasis at the time ofNebuchadnezzar’s invasion; also between Tachos, Nectanebus, and theMendesians, just before Ochus subdued Egypt.
kingdom against kingdomTheSeptuagint has “nome against nome”; Egypt wasdivided into forty-two nomes or districts.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians,…. Or mingle and confound them together; in which confusion they should fall upon and destroy one another, as the Midianites did: the phrase is expressive of rebellions and civil wars, as the following words explain it; and which show, that the calamities of Egypt should be brought upon them, not by means of a foreign invasion, but by internal quarrels, and other means, which the Lord would in judgment send among them:
and they shall fight everyone against his brother, and everyone against his neighbour; and destroy one another:
city against city; of which there were great numbers in Egypt; in the times of Amasis, it is said s, there were twenty thousand:
[and] kingdom against kingdom; for though Egypt was but originally one kingdom, yet upon the death of Sethon, one of its kings, who had been a priest of Vulcan, there being no successor, twelve of the nobility started up, and set up themselves as kings, and divided the kingdom into twelve parts t, and reigned in confederacy, for the space of fifteen years; when, falling out among themselves, they excluded Psammiticus, one of the twelve, from any share of government; who gathering an army together, fought with and conquered the other eleven, and seized the whole kingdom to himself, and who seems afterwards regarded in this prophecy; all this happened in the times of Manasseh king of Judah, and so in or quickly after Isaiah’s time: though some understand this of the civil wars between Apries and Amasis, in the times of Nebuchadnezzar. The Septuagint version renders the phrase here, “nome against nome”; for the whole land of Egypt, by Sesostris, one of its kings, was divided into thirty six u nomes, districts, or provinces, whose names are given by Herodotus w, Pliny x, and others; for so the words of that version should be rendered, and not as they are by the Latin interpreter, and in the Arabic version, which follows it, “law upon law”.
s Herodot. l. 2. c. 177. t Ib. c. 147. u There were ten of them in Thebais, the same number in Delta, and sixteen between them. w Euterpe, sive l. 2. c. 164, 165, 166. x Nat. Hist. I. 5. c. 9. Ptolem. Geograph. l. 4. c. 4. Strabo Geogr. l. 17. P. 541.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
“And I spur Egypt against Egypt: and they go to war, every one with his brother, and every one with his neighbour; city against city, kingdom against kingdom. And the spirit of Egypt is emptied out within it: and I swallow up its ready counsel; and they go to the idols to inquire, and to the mutterers, and to the oracle-spirits, and to the soothsayers. And I shut up Egypt in the hand of a hard rule; and a fierce king will reign over them, saith the Lord, Jehovah of hosts.” Civil war will rage in Egypt (on sicsec , see at Isa 9:10). The people once so shrewd are now at their wits’ end; their spirit is quite poured out , with the reduplication removed, for , according to Ges. 68, Anm. 11 – as, for example, in Gen 11:7; Eze 41:7), so that there is nothing left of either intelligence or resolution. Then (and this is also part of the judgment) they turn for help, in counsel and action, where no help is to be found, viz., to their “nothings” of gods, and the manifold demoniacal arts, of which Egypt could boast of being the primary seat. On the names of the practisers of the black art, see Isa 8:19; ‘ittim , the mutterers, is from ‘ atat , to squeak (used of a camel-saddle, especially when new), or to rumble (used of an empty stomach): see Lane’s Lexicon. But all this is of no avail: Jehovah gives them up ( , syn. , to be ruled over by a hard-hearted and cruel king. The prophecy does not relate to a foreign conqueror, so as to lead us to think of Sargon (Knobel) or Cambyses (Luzzatto), but to a native despot. In comparing the prophecy with the fulfilment, we must bear in mind that Isa 19:2 relates to the national revolution which broke out in Sais, and resulted in the overthrow of the Ethiopian rule, and to the federal dodekarchy to which the rising of the nation led. “Kingdom against kingdom:” this exactly suits those twelve small kingdoms into which Egypt was split up after the overthrow of the Ethiopian dynasty in the year 695, until Psammetichus, the dodekarch of Sais, succeeded in the year 670 in comprehending these twelve states once more under a single monarchy. This very Psammetichus (and the royal house of Psammetichus generally) is the hard ruler, the reckless despot. He succeeded in gaining the battle at Momemphis, by which he established himself in the monarchy, through having first of all strengthened himself with mercenary troops from Ionia, Caria, and Greece. From his time downwards, the true Egyptian character was destroyed by the admixture of foreign elements;
(Note: See Leo, Universalgesch. i. 152, and what Brugsch says in his Histoire d’Egypte, i. 250, with regard to the brusques changements that Egypt endured under Psammetichus.)
and this occasioned the emigration of a large portion of the military caste to Meroe. The Egyptian nation very soon came to feel how oppressive this new dynasty was, when Necho (616-597), the son and successor of Psammetichus, renewed the project of Ramses-Miamun, to construct a Suez canal, and tore away 120,000 of the natives of the land from their homes, sending them to wear out their lives in forced labour of the most wearisome kind. A revolt on the part of the native troops, who had been sent against the rising Cyrene, and driven back into the desert, led to the overthrow of Hophra, the grandson of Necho (570), and put an end to the hateful government of the family of Psammetichus.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
2. And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians. Here he describes more particularly the calamity which the Lord had determined to bring on Egypt. By the expression, I will set, he means the internal struggles, in which those who ought to be mutual defenders cut down one another; and no evil can be more destructive than this to a state or a people. It was of importance also to convince the Jews that God, in whose hands are the hearts of men, (Pro 21:1,) could by his unseen influence inflame the Jews to mutual animosities, that they might slay each other, though they were victorious over foreign enemies. Hence we learn that nations never rise in a seditious manner, unless the Lord set them against each other, as when one brings forward gladiators to the place of combat. He inflames their minds for battle, and prompts them to slay each other by mutual wounds; and therefore, as we ought to reckon it an evidence of God’s favor, when friendship is cherished among citizens, so we ought to ascribe it to his vengeance, when they rage against and slay and injure one another.
And they shall fight every one against his brother. For the sake of heightening the picture, he adds what was still more monstrous, that those who were related to them by blood would take up arms to destroy each other; for if men are worse than beasts when, forgetting their common nature, they engage in battle, how much more shocking is it to nature that brethren or allies should fight with each other! But the more monstrous it is, the more ought we to acknowledge the judgment of God and his terrible vengeance.
City against city, and kingdom against kingdom. Isaiah appears to advance by degrees; for he mentions, first, a brother; secondly, a neighbor; thirdly, cities; and, fourthly, kingdoms By kingdoms he means provinces, into which Egypt was divided, which the Greeks called νομοἰ, the term by which the Greek translators have rendered it in this passage. (26)
(26) Καὶ νομὸς ἐπὶ νομόν. The reader will observe the distinction between the paroxytone νόμος, a law, and the oxytone νομός, a field or a dwelling; for it is the latter that is employed by Herodotus to denote a district or province. Herod. 2:164. — Ed.
FT284 “And the spirit of Egypt shall fail. Heb. shall be emptied. ” — Eng. Ver.
FT285 “And the Egyptians will I give over, or, shut up. ” — Eng. Ver. “And I will shut up Egypt in the hand of cruel lords.” — Stock.
FT286 “A fierce king.” — Eng. Ver.
FT287 See vol. 1 p. 266
FT288 “ Embanked canals. Rivi aggerum, as the Vulgate has it. The canals by which the waters of the Nile were distributed were fortified by mounds or banks. מצור, ( mātzōr,) which word Rosenmüller vainly endeavors to shew to be another name for Egypt or Mizraim.” — Stock.
FT289 See vol. 1 p. 492
FT290 “And ashamed (disappointed or confounded) are the workers of combed (or hatchelled) flax, and the weavers of white (stuffs.) The older writers supposed the class of persons here described to be the manufacturers of nets for fishing, and took הורי, ( hōrai,) in the sense of perforated open work or net-work. The moderns understand the verse as having reference to the working of flax and manufacture of linen. Knobel supposes הורי, ( hōrai,) to mean cotton, as being white by nature, and before it is wrought. Some of the older writers identified שריקות, ( sĕrīkōth,) with sericum , the Latin word for silk. Calvin supposes an allusion in the last clause to the diaphanous garments of luxurious women.” — Professor Alexander.
FT291 Our author is puzzled about this word. In his version he follows the old rendering, “all that make a net,” but his marginal reading is “all that make gain,” and to the latter he adheres in his commentary. Bishops Lowth and Stock render it, “all that make a gain,” and Professor Alexander, “all laborers for hire.” — Ed.
FT292 קרם, ( kĕdĕm,) has two meanings, “antiquity” and “the east;” and accordingly Bishop Stock renders this clause, “the son of the kings of the east,” adding the following note: — “ Kings of the east. A synonyme for wise men, μάγοι ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν, the quarter of the world where the arts of divination originated, and to whose sovereigns Egyptian sages pretended kindred. Hence the magi, that came to worship Christ, are often denominated the three kings. ” — Ed.
FT293 “Zoan, the Tanis of the Greeks, was one of the most ancient cities of Lower Egypt, (Num 13:22,) and a royal residence. The name is of Egyptian origin, and signifies low situation. Noph is the Memphis of the Greek geographers, called Moph, (Hos 9:6.) It was one of the chief cities of ancient Egypt, the royal seat of Psammetichus.” — Alexander.
FT294 “The stay (Heb., corners) of the tribes thereof.” — Eng. Ver.
FT295 Instead of פנת, ( pinnăth,) the construct singular, Grotius, Lowth, and others, prefer the conjectural reading, פנות ( pinnōth,) corners. But Rosenmüller removes the difficulty of the Syntax by remarking, that פנה, ( pinnāh,) a collective noun, and agreeably to the frequent usage of the Hebrew tongue, fitly agrees with a plural verb; and he quotes 2Sa 19:41, as a parallel instance. — Ed.
FT296 Professor Alexander prefers the literal rendering, “from before the shaking of the hand,” and thus explains the passage: “ מפני, ( mippĕnē,) may be rendered, on account of, which idea is certainly included, but the true force of the original expression is best retained by a literal translation. תנופת יד, ( tĕnūphăth yăd,) is not the act of beckoning for the enemy, but that of threatening or preparing to strike. The reference is not to the slaughter of Sennacherib’s army, but more generally to the indications of Divine displeasure.”
FT297 The only passage which occurs to my remembrance as likely to be in the author’s eye is, “And thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb and a bye-word, among all the nations whither the Lord shall lead thee.” (Deu 28:37.) — Ed.
FT298 Heliopolis is a Greek word, and signifies “the city of the sun.” It is the name of a famous city of Lower Egypt, in which there was a temple dedicated to the sun. — Ed.
FT299 “ Pillar. ” — Eng. Ver.
FT300 The name “Philomētor,” which means “loving his mother,” was ironically given to him on account of his known hatred of his mother Cleopatra. — Ed
FT301 “ Sous ceste pedagogie de la Loy.”
FT302 “ Les signes et sacramens.”
FT303 Of one clause in this verse, rendered by our translators “and a great one,” Calvin takes no notice. Rosenmüller considers רב ( rāb) to be the participle Kal of רוב, ( rūb,) and assigns to Cocceius the honor of having discovered that the punctuation, which the Masoretic annotators have set aside, in the parallel passage of Deuteronomy, as a peculiarity for which they could not account, was the key to the true interpretation. Almost all the commentators, Cocceius excepted, render רב ( rāb) “a great one,” some of them supposing that Ptolemy the Great, the son of Lagus, and others that Alexander the Great, was meant. But Cocceius was the first to perceive that the signification “Great” does not agree with the context, and has justly remarked that the word רב ( rāb) with a Kametz, ought not to be confounded with רב ( rāb,) with a Pathach, but that its meaning should be sought from the verb רוב ( rūb) or ריב ( rīb,) “to contend, to argue, to defend one’s cause in a court of justice;” and he quotes a parallel passage, in which Moses, while he blesses Judah, speaking of God, says, ידיו רב לו ( yādaiv rāb lō) “his hands shall be his protector.” (Deu 33:7.) See Robertson’s Clavis Pentateuchi, p. 561. The ancients appear to have taken a similar view. The Septuagint renders it thus. Καὶ ἀποστελεῖ αὐτοῖς ἄνθρωπον ὃς σώσει αὐτοὺς, κρίνων σώσει αὐτούς. The Chaldee and Syriac render it, “a deliverer and a judge,” and Jerome’s rendering is, propuqnatorem , “a defender or champion”. Rosenmüller Scholia. “A Savior and a vindicator”. Lowth. “An advocate”. Stock. “The explanation of רב, ( rab) as a participle,” says Professor Alexander, “is found in all the ancient versions, and is adopted by most modern writers.” — Ed.
FT304 The words of the Apostle are, “How shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? ” But Calvin’s remark, which immediately follows, vindicates the appropriateness, though not the verbal accuracy, of the quotation. — Ed.
FT305 “ La doctrine de salut;” “The doctrine of salvation.”
FT306 “ Ce sera un preparatif pour les amener à repentance;” — “It will be a preparation to lead them to repentance.”
FT307 “ Pourvenu que notre repentance ne soit hypocritique;” — “Provided that our repentance be not hypocritical.”
FT308 “ D’où viennent les chastimens, si non de nos pechez? S’ils sont pardonnez, aussi le sont les chastimens meritez a cause d’iceux. “ — “Whence come chastisements but from our sins? If they are remitted, so are also the chastisements deserved on account of them.”
FT309 See vol. 1 p. 101
FT310 This is the Author’s version. See p. 48
FT311 The particle את (ĕ th) does not decide the question, for it may either be the sign of the accusative case, or a preposition signifying with. Professor Alexander adopts the latter view, and argues powerfully in favor of the rendering, “they shall serve God,” in which he concurs with Lowth, “And the Egyptian shall worship with the Assyrian,” and with Stock, “And Egypt shall serve [God] with Assyria.” — Ed.
FT312 “ De la crainte de Dieu,” — “from the fear of God.”
FT313 “Jacob is the lot (Heb. cord) of his inheritance.” — Eng. Ver.
FT314 “The meaning obviously is,” says Professor Alexander, “that Israel should be one of three, or a party to a triple union.” By an analagous idiom of the Greek language, Peter calls Noah ὄγδοον, “the eighth,” that is, “one of eight persons.” (2Pe 2:5.) From classical writers other instances might be given, such as εἰς οἰκίαν δωδέκατος “he went to his house the twelfth,” or, “one of twelve,” that is, “along with eleven other persons.” — Ed.
FT315 “Whom the Lord of hosts shall bless.” — Eng. Ver.
FT316 Our Author perhaps refers to his expository remarks on Eph 2:10, Isa 17:7, Isa 64:7, See p. 26
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(2) I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians . . .The discord predicted was probably the natural consequence of the overthrow of the Ethiopian power by Sargon, the Assyrian king, in B.C. 720. Under Piankhi each nome, or district, had been governed by a chief, owning the suzerainty of the Ethiopian king, and these, when the restraint was removed, would naturally assert their independence. So Herodotus (ii. 147) relates that on the overthrow of Sabaco, the last of the Ethiopian dynasty, the unity of Egypt was broken up into a dodecarchy.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
2-4. Opinions greatly vary as to when the events here described took place. Of the most plausible, one refers them to times shortly following the destruction of Sennacherib’s army, during which times the affairs of Egypt were in great confusion. Another opinion (and which is to be preferred) places the events in successu; the reference to Nebuchadnezzar’s conquest being general, and to the conquest of Cambyses particular; and the whole referring to successive disciplinary punishments, but ending with deliverances, such as the final adoption of the worship of the true God will bring. The lesson taught is, that Jehovah is the God of all nations, especially of Egypt and Assyria, the greatest kingdoms then known; and that his worship effects the only true salvation for all.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2. Egyptians against Egyptians One district or nome against another. So the Septuagint: or, Upper, Middle, and Lower Egypt against each other. The former is the more probable meaning. In all Egypt there were at various times from thirty-six to forty-two of such divisions. Or, the immediate thought of divisions may be that of the Dodakarchy, or the twelve provinces, from B.C. 695 till Psammetichus. (See SMITH’S History, vol. 1.)
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Isa 19:2-3. And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians Two principal misfortunes of Egypt, on which the rest depend, are related in this prophesy; the first, a civil war to arise in Egypt, with its consequence; Isa 19:2-3. The other, the oppression of Egypt by some potent prince or princes. Instead of kingdom against kingdom, the LXX read, province against province, , Egypt being divided into nomoi, praefectures or provinces. Vitringa and others apply this to the time of the reign of the twelve kings, the anarchy which preceded, and the civil wars which ensued; wherein Psammiticus prevailed over the rest: but it may perhaps be more properly applied to what agrees better in point of time with other parts of the prophesy; the civil wars between Apries and Amasis, at the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion; and the civil wars between Tachos, Nectanebus, and the Mendesian, a little before the country was finally subdued by Ochus. It is no wonder that, in consequence of such distractions and distresses as these, the Egyptians, being naturally a cowardly people, should be destitute of counsel; and that the spirit of Egypt should fail in the midst thereof; and that, being also a very superstitious people; they should seek to their idols, &c.; a remarkable instance whereof, with respect to Psammiticus, we are told by Herodotus, lib, 2: p. 169. See Bishop Newton and Vitringa as before.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
“Handfuls of Purpose”
For All Gleaners
“I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians.” Isa 19:2
It should be understood that in many of these detached texts we avail ourselves of the practice of accommodation. Here is an instance which admits of accommodation of a practical kind. God has various ways of troubling men and bringing about the purposes of his providence. A man may be his own enemy. He may be as a kingdom divided against itself. Passing from the individual man to the social relation, it is possible for a man’s foes to be they of his own household. Understand, therefore, that we are not always exposed to attacks from a foreign source, but that mischief of the deadliest kind may arise within our boundaries. The most deadly of all hatred is that between brothers. The most deplorable of all wars is civil war. Unanimity is shattered; natural alliances are rendered impossible; the councils that ought to be united are turned to confusion; and men know not when they hit out in the dark whether they are striking at friends or foes. It is instructive to notice that God claims all these ministries and engines of operation as distinctly under his own providence. God may be the author of civil war. God may employ evil in order to bring about good; not that he tolerates moral evil or looks with any degree of approval upon it, but he permits social evil, civil wars, misunderstandings, unnatural alliances, to concur in bringing about an evolution otherwise humanly impossible. Even the wicked are servants of God unconsciously. The wrath of man is under his control, and he makes it serve him. The great lesson which we have to lay to heart is not to be looking far away upon the horizon for possible foes, but to be looking into our own hearts, and into our own families and churches. When equals meet in contest what can the result be but destruction? Man was not made to be set against man. Families were meant to be united. Churches should be compact and unanimous, having the full use of their total strength for the propagation of good and the abolition of evil. Remember that God can bring up enemies from unexpected places.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
Isa 19:2 And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians: and they shall fight every one against his brother, and every one against his neighbour; city against city, [and] kingdom against kingdom.
Ver. 2. And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians. ] Commiscebo Egyptios inter se, I will embroil them in a civil war. This happened, saith Junius, under King Psammeticus, after the death of Sethon, about the end of Hezekiah’s reign, or the beginning of Manasseh’s, while Isaiah was yet alive. a
And kingdom against kingdom.
a Herod., lib. ii. Diod. Sic., lib. i.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
set the Egyptians, &c. Referring to the anarchy consequent on the defeat of Egypt by Sargon (688 B.C.)
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
I will: Isa 19:13, Isa 19:14, Isa 9:21, Jdg 7:22, Jdg 9:23, 1Sa 14:16, 1Sa 14:20, 2Ch 20:22, 2Ch 20:23, Eze 38:21, Mat 12:25, Rev 17:12-17
set: Heb. mingle
Reciprocal: 1Ki 16:21 – divided Isa 19:4 – a cruel lord Jer 46:12 – stumbled Jer 51:46 – ruler against Eze 30:4 – the sword Hag 2:22 – every Zec 8:10 – for Mat 24:7 – nation shall Mar 3:24 – General Mar 13:8 – nation shall Luk 11:17 – Every
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Isa 19:2-3. I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians Two principal calamities to befall Egypt are foretold in this prophecy; the first of which is here described: civil wars should arise among them. They shall fight every one against his brother and neighbour Whom he ought to love as himself. City against city, and kingdom against kingdom The LXX. read, , province against province, Egypt being divided into prefectures, or provinces. Vitringa and others apply this to the time of the twelve kings, the anarchy that preceded, and the civil wars that ensued, in which Psammitichus prevailed over the rest; but it may, perhaps, be more properly applied to what agrees better, in point of time, with other parts of the prophecy, the civil wars between Apries and Amasis, at the time of Nebuchadnezzars invasion; and the civil wars a little before the country was finally subdued by Ochus. It is no wonder, that in such distractions and distresses as these, the Egyptians, being naturally a cowardly people, should be destitute of counsel, and that the spirit of Egypt should fail in the midst thereof, as the prophet foretels, (Isa 19:3,) and that, being also a very superstitious people, they should seek to the idols, and to the charmers, and to them that had familiar spirits, and to the wizards. But their divination was all in vain, God having determined that they should be subdued and oppressed by cruel lords and tyrants, as it follows.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
19:2 And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians: and they shall {c} fight every one against his brother, and every one against his neighbour; city against city, [and] kingdom against kingdom.
(c) As he caused the Ammonites, Moabites and Idumeans to kill one another, when they came to destroy the Church of God, 2Ch 20:22, Isa 49:26 .
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Egyptian society was notable for its lack of unity throughout its history. There was frequent conflict between the Upper and Lower Egypt geographical factions. Kingdom periods, during which the Pharaoh was worshipped as god, were interspersed with long periods when the 42 city-states ruled themselves and the people worshipped innumerable gods. Sometimes her god-king was strong and the people united behind him, but when he was weak there was little social solidarity. Isaiah foresaw another period of social chaos coming when the Egyptians would look to idols and the spirit world for guidance. The sovereign God of armies would then deliver them over to the rule of a strong, cruel leader who would dominate them. The fulfillment may have been the Ethiopian Pharaoh Piankhi (715 B.C.), Pharaoh Psammetichus (670 B.C.), one of the Assyrian kings (Sargon II, Sennacherib, Esarhaddon in 671, or Ashurbanipal in 668 B.C.), or the Persian Artaxerxes III Ochus (343 B.C.). Several conservative scholars prefer Esarhaddon. [Note: See also Chisholm, Handbook on . . ., p. 60.] Depressed people are easy targets for despotic rulers.