Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Isaiah 48:14
All ye, assemble yourselves, and hear; which among them hath declared these [things]? The LORD hath loved him: he will do his pleasure on Babylon, and his arm [shall be on] the Chaldeans.
14. All ye ] The summons is addressed, not as in ch. Isa 41:1-4 &c. to the nations, but to the people of Israel; the gods of the heathen are referred to in the words which among them &c.
The Lord hath loved him ] is to be construed as a relative sentence: he whom Jehovah loveth shall perform etc. A new title, similar to those in Isa 44:28, Isa 45:1, Isa 46:11, is here bestowed upon Cyrus (comp. “my friend” of Abraham in Isa 41:8). his pleasure ] see on Isa 42:21.
and his arm shall be on the Chaldeans ] A preposition has dropped out or must be supplied from the preceding clause; and then we may either render as E.V. (in which case “his arm” would most naturally mean the arm, i.e. the might, of Cyrus); or thus: “and (he will perform) His arm (Jehovah’s mighty judgement) on the Chaldans” (Dillmann). But although “arm” is a symbol of might, it could hardly be used alone of judgement. The LXX. (“to destroy the seed of the Chaldeans”) obviously read zera‘ instead of zr‘; and this is probably the better text. Render simply and (on) the seed of the Chaldans.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
All ye, assemble yourselves and hear – Ye Jews who are in Babylon, gather together, and listen to the assurance that God is able to protect you, and that he will certainly restore you to your own country.
Which among them – Who among the pagan?
Hath declared these things? – The things relating to the destruction of Babylon, and the rescue of his people. This is an appeal similar to that which God has often made, that he alone can predict future events. None of the astrologers, soothsayers, or diviners of Babylon had been able to foretell the expedition and the conquests of Cyrus, and the capture of the city. If they had been able to foresee the danger, they might have guarded against it, and the city might have been saved. But God had predieted it a hundred and fifty years before it occurred, and this demonstrated, therefore, that he alone was God.
The Lord hath loved him – Lowth renders this, He whom Jehovah hath loved will execute his will on Babylon. The Septuagint renders it, Loving thee, I will execute thy will against Babylon. There can be no doubt that it refers to Cyrus, and that the meaning is, that he whom Yahweh had loved would accomplish his will on Babylon. It does not necessarily mean that Yahweh was pleased with his moral character, or that he was a pious man (compare the notes at Isa 41:2); but that he was so well pleased with him as an instrument to accomplish his purposes, that he chose to employ him for that end.
He will do his pleasure on Babylon – He will accomplish all his desire on that city; that is, he will take, and subdue it. The word his here, may refer either to Cyrus or to Yahweh. Probably it means that Cyrus would do to Babylon what would be pleasing to Yahweh.
And his arm – The arm is a symbol of strength, and is the instrument by which we execute our purposes.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 14. Which among them hath declared these things – “Who among you hath predicted these things”] For bahem, “among them,” twenty-one MSS., nine ancient, and two editions, one of them that of the year 1488, fourteen of De Rossi’s, and one ancient of my own, have bachem, “among you;” and so the Syriac.
The Lord hath loved him: he will do his pleasure on Babylon – “He, whom JEHOVAH hath loved, will execute his will on Babylon”] That is, Cyrus; so Symmachus has well rendered it: , “He whom the Lord hath loved will perform his will.”
On the Chaldeans.] The preposition is lost; it is supplied in the edition of 1486, which has bechasdim, and so the Chaldee and Vulgate.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
All ye; ye Jews, to whom he addressed his speech, Isa 48:12, and continueth his speech, Isa 48:16,17, &c. Assemble; I challenge you all to answer what I have said before, and am now going to say again.
Which among them hath declared these things? which of the gods whom any of you have served or do still hanker after? The Lord hath loved him, to wit, Cyrus, who might easily be understood out of the foregoing context, in which he is frequently mentioned. The pronoun is put for the noun, as is usual both in Scripture and in other authors. Now God loved Cyrus, not with a special, and everlasting, and complacential love, for he was a heathen, and had some great vices as well as virtues; but with that general love and kindness which God hath for all his creatures, as is observed, Psa 145:9; and moreover with that particular kind of love which God hath for such men as excel others in any virtues, as Cyrus did; in which sense Christ loved the young man, Mar 10:21; and with a love of good-will and beneficence. God had such a kindness for him, as to make him a most glorious and victorious general and king, and the great instrument for the deliverance of his own people; which was a singular honour and advantage to him, and might have been far greater, and extended to the eternal salvation of his soul, if he had not wanted a heart to use the price which God hereby put into his hand. And as anger being ascribed to God is not meant of the affection, for such passions are inconsistent with the perfection of Gods nature, but of the effect; so the love of God, when it is applied in Scripture to such persons as Cyrus, is not so much to be understood of an inward affection, as of the outward effects of it; and so this love is explained in the following words, by that prosperous success which God gave him against the Chaldeans.
He will do his pleasure on Babylon; Cyrus shall execute that I have appointed him to do for the destruction of Babylon, and for the redemption of my people; which was in itself a good work; and therefore this is added as the reason why God loved him.
His arm shall be on the Chaldeans; he shall smite and subdue them.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
14. among themamong the godsand astrologers of the Chaldees (Isa 41:22;Isa 43:9; Isa 44:7).
Lord . . . loved him; hewill, c.that is, “He whom the Lord hath loved will do,”&c. [LOWTH] namely,Cyrus (Isa 44:28; Isa 45:1;Isa 45:13; Isa 46:11).However, Jehovah’s language of love is too strong to apply to Cyrus,except as type of Messiah, to whom alone it fully applies (Re5:2-5).
his pleasurenot Cyrus’own, but Jehovah’s.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
All ye assemble yourselves, and hear,…. That is, the people of the Jews, Jacob and Israel his called, before addressed; who are bid to gather together, and draw nigh, that they might hear what the Lord had to say to them:
which among them hath declared these things? that are future, that concern the redemption and salvation of Israel? which of all the idols among the nations, or of the priests and soothsayers among them, whom the Jews were prone to listen to, that could foretell things to come, such as these the Lord had said should be?
the Lord hath loved him; not Israel, as the Targum; but Cyrus, whom the Lord loved as a man, as he does all his creatures; and whom he distinguished from others, by bestowing excellent qualifications on him; and whom he raised to great dignity, and gave him great honour, by using him as an instrument in his hand for the deliverance of his people; and who was a type of Christ, the dear Son of God’s love, in whom he is always well pleased.
He will do his pleasure on Babylon, and his arm shall be on the Chaldeans; either he shall do as he pleases with Babylon, and with his army destroy the Chaldeans; or he shall do the pleasure of God on Babylon, and destroy the inhabitants of it, and deliver his people from it. This is also true of Christ, who will do his pleasure on mystical Babylon, destroy antichrist, and all the antichristian states, with his mighty arm and power, with the breath of his mouth, and with the brightness of his coming.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
14. Assemble, all of you, and hear. There can be no doubt that the Prophet addresses the Jews, though here he utters nothing that ought not to be acknowledged by all. But because unbelieving and irreligious men have no ears, on this account he does not invite them to “hear.” We know that the Jews enjoyed this privilege above other nations, that God revealed himself to them. (Psa 147:19; Rom 3:2.) “God is known in Judea,” says the Psalmist,: his name is great in Israel.” (Psa 126:1.) So much the less excusable was either their slothfulness or their obstinacy, in paying scarcely any regard to their own prosperity. Whence arose their great levity or proneness to revolt, but from their undervaluing or despising the inestimable treasure of heavenly doctrine? They therefore deserved to be sharply and severely rebuked by the Prophet, who now exclaims against them, indirectly remarking that they wickedly and perversely agree among themselves to cast into the shade the grace of God.
Who among them foretelleth those things? Here God appears to permit the Jews to bring forward publicly any objection which they can make, as those who trust to the goodness of their cause venture to taunt their adversaries: “Produce thy arguments; if thou possessest any acuteness, shew it.” Of his own accord, therefore, he makes an attack upon them, and gives them permission to shew, if they can find any argument to that effect, that such things were foretold by the gods of the Gentiles. We may also extend it to the diviners and augurs, who claimed for themselves the knowledge of future events, and who could not at all foresee such things. With the same view he will repeat what follows in the next verse, “It is I, it is I who have spoken.” The object of the whole is to shew that the Jews waver, and even fall away, in consequence of not estimating sufficiently how extraordinary a blessing it is to learn from the sacred mouth of God all that is necessary for their salvation.
Jehovah hath loved him, and he shall execute his pleasure on Babylon. He points out a single instance, that God had now deigned to foretell to them the end of their captivity in Babylon. Cyrus is not named by him as the dispenser of this favor, but, as if he were speaking of a man who was known and ascertained, he says, without mentioning the name, that God has chosen him to take Babylon by force. The word loved is not employed in an absolute sense, but πρὸς τὶ; with reference to a particular object; and therefore it is limited to the successful result of the expedition. In like manner Saul, with reference to a particular object, was dear to God, so that he reigned for a time, and was even endued with the gift of prophecy. (1Sa 10:10.) The case is different with believers, whom God has embraced with an unchangeable love, and whom he never permits to fall away from him. He intimates that Cyrus will take Babylon by force, in consequence of having undertaken this work by God’s appointment and direction, not indeed intentionally on his part, but in such a manner as God makes even the ignorant and blind to go where he pleases, or compels them against their will to yield obedience; for the Prophet does not applaud Cyrus for voluntary obedience, but rather magnifies the providence of God, by which he leads all men to execute his counsel.
And his arm. (237) Some read the word “arm” in the nominative, and others in the accusative case; but it makes little difference as to the meaning. Arm may here be taken for “work,” and in a metaphorical sense; and thus the passage will read more smoothly. “He will execute his counsel on Babylon, his work on the Babylonians;” for we know that it is a distinguishing peculiarity in the style of the prophets to join together “the work of the Lord” and his “counsel.” Indirectly he reproaches the Jews with their ingratitude in refusing to believe the promises of God, though he points out the event, as it were, with the finger, and speaks in a very different manner from that in which either diviners or false gods are accustomed to speak. In a word, he wishes to convince the Jews that, the taking of Babylon by storm shall be “the work of the Lord,” under whose direction Cyrus shall execute it, in order that the Church may at length be delivered.
(237) “‘And his arm shall be seen (or shall be visible) in the land of the Babylonians.’ Here he speaks of Cyrus.” — Jarchi. “Others, without supplying ב, (beth,) suppose that this phrase contains an aposiopesis, and read the words thus: ‘And his arm the Babylonians,’ that is, ‘And his arm (shall strike or shall make war upon) the Babylonians.’ Koeher, thinking that in the words וזרועו כשדים (uzerogno kassedim) there is no ellipsis, explains them to mean, ‘And the Babylonians his arm,’ that is, they shall be his supporters. ‘For,’ adds he, ‘their aid was of no small consequence, if what Xenophon (Cyroped. 4:24; 5:11) has recorded about Gobryas and Gadates, who were Babylonians, be true. Thus, allies, friends, and any one that assists another, are accounted to be his arm.’” — Rosenmuller.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(14) All ye, assemble yourselves.The challenge is addressed as before (Isa. 43:9) to the worshippers of idols.
The Lord hath loved him.Better, He whom the Lord loveth will do his pleasure. The context leaves it uncertain whether the pleasure and the arm are those of Cyrus or Jehovah. The latter seems to give a preferable meaning. There is, perhaps, an allusive reference to the idea implied in the name of the great king of Israel (David, beloved, or darling). Cyrus was to be even as a second David, beloved of the Lord.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
14. Assemble yourselves, and hear A call to the people most probably the heathen to convene, and to consider the subject to be brought before them.
Which among them Among the idol deities, with whom is the controversy.
Hath declared these things The “things” heretofore predicted of Jehovah the coming deliverance of Israel through Cyrus, and the destruction he should bring on Israel’s oppressors, the Babylonians.
He will do his pleasure The “he” we take to refer to Cyrus, God’s agent in this work; the “his” to God himself.
His arm That of Cyrus.
Shall be on the Chaldeans To punish and subdue them.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Isa 48:14-15. All ye, assemble yourselves Instead of The Lord hath loved him, &c. we should read, He whom Jehovah loveth, shall do his pleasure, &c. To confirm the faith and hope of the believers in the Jewish church, the prophet here goes on to prove, that the subversion of the Babylonish monarchy by Cyrus, and the deliverance of the Jewish people from captivity in consequence, are the work of God their Saviour, the Angel of the covenant, the Son of God: and it will throw great light on this whole period to consider these as the words and address of that divine Person. The similarity of this passage with the preceding prophesies respecting Cyrus, need not be marked out to the attentive reader.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Isa 48:14 All ye, assemble yourselves, and hear; which among them hath declared these [things]? The LORD hath loved him: he will do his pleasure on Babylon, and his arm [shall be on] the Chaldeans.
Ver. 14. The Lord hath loved him, ] i.e., Cyrus. He so loveth his people that for their sakes he loveth all their benefactors and well wishers. See Gen 12:3 .
He will do his pleasure.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
them. Some codices, with two early printed editions, and Syriac, read “you”.
him: i.e. Cyrus: Isa 45:1; Isa 46:10, Isa 46:11.
arm. Put by Figure of speech Metonymy (of Cause), for the judgment inflicted by it. Note also the Figure of speech Anthropopatheia.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
assemble: Isa 41:22, Isa 43:9, Isa 44:7, Isa 45:20, Isa 45:21
among them: Instead of bahem “among them,” thirty-five manuscripts and two editions have bachem “among you.”
The Lord: Rather, “He whom the Lord hath loved, will execute his will on Babylon:” that is, Cyrus. Isa 45:1-3, Mar 10:21
he will do: Isa 13:4, Isa 13:5, Isa 13:17, Isa 13:18, Isa 44:28, Isa 46:11, Jer 50:21-29, Jer 51:20-24
Reciprocal: Isa 45:13 – raised him Jer 50:25 – this Hab 2:7 – they Zec 6:8 – quieted
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Isa 48:14-15. All ye assemble yourselves and hear Ye Jews, to whom he addressed his speech, (Isa 48:12,) and to whom he continues to speak; which among them hath declared these things Which of the gods, whom any of you have served, or do now serve? The prophet gives a general challenge to the idols and their worshippers, to bring proof that ever such a remarkable turn of providence as that of the Jews restoration was foretold by any of the heathen oracles. The Lord hath loved him Namely, Cyrus; that is, he hath done him this favour, this honour, to make him an instrument of the redemption of his people, and therein a type of the great Redeemer, Gods beloved Son. He will do his pleasure on Babylon Cyrus shall execute what the Lord hath appointed for the destruction of Babylon, and the deliverance of Gods people. And his arm shall be on the Chaldeans He shall smite and subdue them. I, even I, have spoken, &c. Both the prediction and the execution of this great work are to be ascribed to me only. The idols had no hand therein. He shall make his way prosperous I will give him good success in his undertaking.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
48:14 All ye, assemble yourselves, and hear; who among them hath declared these [things]? The LORD hath loved {r} him: he will do his pleasure on Babylon, and his arm [shall be on] the Chaldeans.
(r) Meaning, Cyrus, whom he had chosen to destroy Babylon.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The Israelites needed to listen because only the Lord could reveal what He would do. Specifically, Yahweh revealed His love (choice, cf. Deu 4:37; Mal 1:2-3) of Cyrus, who would fulfill God’s will on Babylon by defeating the Chaldeans (cf. Isa 44:28). The Israelites, in view of who their God is, should not resist His choice of Cyrus or reject the revelation about him. The idols, "them," could not reveal this.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
CHAPTER X
CYRUS
Isa 41:2; Isa 44:28-28; Isa 46:11; Isa 48:14
CYRUS, the Persian, is the only man outside the covenant and people of Israel, who is yet entitled the Lords Shepherd, and the Lords Messiah or Christ. He is, besides, the only great personality of whom both the Bible and Greek literature treat at length and with sympathy. Did we know nothing more of him than this, the heathen who received the most sacred titles of Revelation, the one man in history who was the cynosure of both Greece and Judah, could not fail to be of the greatest interest to us. But apart from the way in which he impressed the Greek imagination and was interpreted by the Hebrew conscience, we have an amount of historical evidence about Cyrus, which, if it dissipates the beautiful legends told of his origin and his end, confirms most of what is written of his character by Herodotus and Xenophon, and all of what is described as his career by the prophet whom we are studying. Whether of his own virtue, or as being the leader of a new race of men at the fortunate moment of their call, Cyrus lifted himself, from the lowest of royal stations, to a conquest and an empire achieved by only two or three others in the history of the world. Originally but the prince of Anshan, or Anzan, -a territory of uncertain size at the head of the Persian Gulf, -he brought under his sway, by policy or war, the large and vigorous nations of the Medes and Persians; he overthrew the Lydian kingdom, and subjugated Asia Minor; he so impressed the beginnings of Greek life, that, with all their own great men, the Greeks never ceased to regard this Persian as the ideal king; he captured Babylon, the throne of the ancient East, and thus effected the transfer of empire from the Semitic to the Aryan stock. He also satisfied the peoples, whom he had beaten, with his rule, and organised his realms with a thoroughness unequalled over so vast an extent till the rise of the Roman Empire.
We have scarcely any contemporary or nearly contemporary evidence about his personality. But his achievements testify to extraordinary genius, and his character was the admiration of all antiquity. To Greek literature Cyrus was the Prince pre-eminent, -set forth as the model for education in childhood, self-restraint in youth, just and powerful government in manhood. Most of what we read of him in Xenophons “Cyropaedia” is, of course, romance; but the very fact, that, like our own King Arthur, Cyrus was used as a mirror to flash great ideals down the ages, proves that there was with him native brilliance and width of surface as well as fortunate eminence of position. He owed much to the virtue of his race. Rotten as the later Persians have become, the nation in those days impressed its enemies with its truthfulness, purity, and vigour. But the man who not only led such a nation, and was their darling, but combined under his sceptre, in equal discipline and contentment, so many other and diverse peoples, so many powerful and ambitious rulers, cannot have been merely the best specimen of his own nations virtue, but must have added to this, at least much of the original qualities-humanity, breadth of mind, sweetness, patience, and genius for managing men-which his sympathetic biographer imputes to him in so heroic a degree. It is evident that the “Cyropaedia” is ignorant of many facts about Cyrus, and must have taken conscious liberties with many more, but nobody-who, on the one hand, is aware of what Cyrus effected upon the world, and who, on the other, can appreciate that it was possible for a foreigner (who, nevertheless, had travelled through most of the scenes of Cyrus career) to form this rich conception of him more than a century after his death-can doubt that the Persians character (due allowance being made for hero-worship) must have been in the main as Xenophon describes it.
Yet it is very remarkable that our Scripture states not one moral or religious virtue as the qualification of this Gentile to the title of “Jehovahs Messiah.” We search here in vain for any gleam of appreciation of that character, which drew the admiring eyes of Greece. In the whole range of our prophecy there is not a single adjective, expressing a moral virtue, applied to Cyrus. The “righteousness,” which so many passages associate with his name, is attributed, not to him, but to Gods calling of him, and does not imply justice or any similar quality, but is, as we shall afterwards see when we examine the remarkable use of this word in Second Isaiah, a mixture of good faith and thoroughness, -all-rightness. The one passage of our prophet, in which it has been supposed by some that Jehovah makes a religious claim to Cyrus, as if the Persian were a monotheist-“he calleth on My name”-is, as we have seen, too uncertain, both in text and rendering, to have anything built upon it. Indeed, no Hebrew could have justly praised this Persians faith, who called himself the “servant of Merodach,” and in his public proclamations to Babylonia ascribed to the Babylonian gods his power to enter their city. Cyrus was very probably the pious ruler described by Xenophon, but he was no monotheist. And our prophet denies all religious sympathy between him and Jehovah, in words too strong to be misunderstood: “I woo thee, though thou hast not known Me I gird thee, though thou hast not known Me”. {Isa 45:4-5} On what, then, is the Divine election of Cyrus grounded by our prophet, if not upon his character and his faith? Simply and barely upon Gods sovereignty and will. That is the impressive lesson of the passage: “I am Jehovah, Maker of everything; that stretch forth the heavens alone, and spread the earth by Myself that say of Koresh, My shepherd, and all My pleasure he shall accomplish.” {Isa 44:24; Isa 44:28} Cyrus is Jehovahs because all things are Jehovahs; of whatsoever character or faith they be, they are His and for His uses. “I am Jehovah, and there is none else: Former of light and Creator of darkness, Maker of peace and Creator of evil; I, Jehovah, Maker of all these.” Gods sovereignty could not be more broadly stated. All things, irrespective of their character, are from Him and for His ends. But what end is dearer to the Almighty, what has He more plainly declared, than that His people shall be settled again in their own land? For this He will use the fittest force. The return of Israel to Palestine is a political event, requiring political power; and the greatest political power of the day is Cyrus. Therefore, by His prophet, the Almighty declares Cyrus to be His peoples deliverer, His own anointed. “Thus saith Jehovah to His Messiah, to Koresh:That thou mayest know that I am Jehovah, Caller of thee by thy name, God of Israel, for the sake of My servant Jacob and Israel My chosen. And I have called thee by thy name. I have wooed thee, though thou hast not known Me”. {Isa 45:1; Isa 45:3-4}
Now to this designation of Cyrus, as the Messiah, great objections rose from Israel. We can understand them. People who have fallen from a glorious past, cling passionately to its precedents. All the ancient promises of a deliverer for Israel represented him as springing from the house of David. The deliverance, too, was to have come by miracle, or by the impression of the peoples own holiness upon their oppressors. The Lord was to have made bare His arm and Israel to go forth in the pride of His favour, as in the days of Egypt and the Red Sea. But this deliverer, who was announced, was alien to the commonwealth of Israel; and not by some miracle was the peoples exodus promised, but as the effect of his imperial word-a minor incident in his policy! The precedents and the pride of Israel called out against such a scheme of salvation, and the murmurs of the people rose against the word of God.
Sternly replies the Almighty: “Woe to him that striveth with his Moulder, a potsherd among the potsherds of the ground! Saith clay to its moulder, What doest thou? or thy work” of thee, “No hands hath he? Woe to him that saith to a father, What begettest thou? or to a woman, With what travailest thou? Thus saith Jehovah, Holy of Israel and his Moulder: The things that are coming ask of Me; concerning My sons, and concerning the work of My hands, command ye Me! I have made Earth, and created man upon her: I, My hands, have stretched Heaven, and all its hosts have I ordered.” In that universal providence, this Cyrus is but an incident. “I have stirred him up in righteousness, and all his ways shall I make level. He”-emphatic-“shall build My City, and My Captivity he shall send off-not for price and not for reward, saith Jehovah of Hosts.” {Isa 45:9-13}
To this bare fiat, the passages referring to Cyrus in chapter 46 and chapter 48, add scarcely anything. “I am God, and there is none like Me Who say, My counsel shall stand, and all My pleasure will I perform. Who call from the sunrise a Bird-of-prey, from a land far-off the Man of My counsel. Yea, I have spoken, yea, I will bring it to pass. I have formed, yea, will do it.” {Isa 46:9-11} “Bird-of-prey” here has been thought to have reference to the eagle, which was the standard of Cyrus. But it refers to Cyrus himself. What God sees in this man to fulfil His purpose is swift, resistless force. Not his character, but his swoop is useful for the Almightys end. Again: “Be gathered, all of you, and hearken; who among them hath published these things? Jehovah hath loved him: he will do His pleasure on Babel, and his arm” shall be on “the Chaldeans. I, I have spoken; yea, I have called him: I have brought him, and will cause his way to prosper,” or, “I will pioneer his way”. {Isa 48:14-15} This verb “to cause to prosper” is one often used by our prophet, but nowhere more appropriately to its original meaning than here, where it is used of “a way.” The word signifies “to cut through”; then “to ford a river”-there is no word for bridge in Hebrew; then “to go on well, prosper.”
In all these passages, then, there is no word about character. Cyrus is neither chosen for his character nor said to be endowed with one. But that he is there, and that he does so much, is due simply to this, that God has chosen him. And what he is endowed with is force, push, swiftness, irresistibleness. He is, in short, not a character, but a tool; and God makes no apology for using him but this, that he has the qualities of a tool.
Now we cannot help being struck with the contrast of all this, the Hebrew view of Cyrus, with the well-known Greek views of him. To the Greeks he is first and foremost a character. Xenophon, and Herodotus almost as much as Xenophon, are less concerned with what Cyrus did than with what he was. He is the King, the ideal ruler. It is his simplicity, his purity, his health, his wisdom, his generosity, his moral influence upon men, that attract the Greeks, and they conceive that he cannot be too brightly painted in his virtues, if so he may serve for an example to following generations. But bring Cyrus out of the light of the eyes of this hero-worshipping people, that light that has so gilded his native virtues, into the shadow of the austere Hebrew faith, and the brilliance is quenched. He still moves forcibly, but his character is neutral. Scripture emphasises only his strength, his serviceableness, his success. “Whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him, and I will loosen the loins of kings; to open doors before him, and gates shall not be shut. I will go before thee, and make the rugged places plain. I will shiver doors of brass, and bars of iron will I sunder”. That Cyrus is doing a work in Gods hand and for Gods end, and therefore forcibly, and sure of success-that is all the interest Scripture takes in Cyrus.
Observe the difference. It is characteristic of the two nations. The Greek views Cyrus as an example; therefore cannot too abundantly multiply his morality. The Hebrew views him as a tool; but with a tool you are not anxious about its moral character, you only desire to be convinced of its force and its fitness. The Greek mind is careful to unfold the noble humanity of the man, -a humanity universally and eternally noble. By the side of that imperishable picture of him, how meagre to Greek eyes would have seemed the temporary occasion, for which the Hebrew claimed Cyrus had been raised up-to lead the petty Jewish tribe back to their own obscure corner of the earth. Herodotus and Xenophon, had you told them that this was the chief commission of Cyrus from God, to restore the Jews to Palestine, would have laughed. “Identify him, forsooth, with those provincial interests!” they would have said. “He was meant, we lift him up, for mankind!”
What judgment are we to pass on these two characteristic pictures of Cyrus? What lessons are we to draw from their contrast?
They do not contradict, but in many particulars they corroborate one another. Cyrus would not have been the efficient weapon in the Almightys hand, which our prophet panegyrises, but for that thoughtfulness in preparation and swift readiness to seize the occasion, which Xenophon extols. And nothing is more striking to one familiar with our Scriptures, when reading the “Cyropaedia,” than the frequency with which the writer insists on the success that followed the Persian. If to the Hebrew Cyrus was the called of God, upheld in righteousness, to the Greek he was equally conspicuous as the favourite of fortune. “I have always,” Xenophon makes the dying king say, “seemed to feel my strength increase with the advance of time, so that I have not found myself weaker in my old age than in my youth, nor do I know that I have attempted or desired anything in which I have not been successful.” And this was said piously, for Xenophons Cyrus was a devout servant of the gods.
The two views, then, are not hostile, nor are we compelled to choose between them. Still, they make a very suggestive contrast, if we put these two questions about them: Which is the more true to historical fact? Which is the more inspiring example?
Which is the more true to historical fact? There is no difficulty in answering this: undoubtedly, the Hebrew. It has been of far more importance to the world that Cyrus freed the Jews than that he inspired the “Cyropaedia.” That single enactment of his, perhaps only one of a hundred consequences of his capture of Babylon, has had infinitely greater results than his character, or than its magnificent exaggeration by Greek hero-worship. No one who has read the “Cyropaedia”-out of his school-days-would desire to place it in any contrast, in which its peculiar charm would be shadowed, or its own modest and strictly-limited claims would not receive justice. The charm, the truth of the “Cyropaedia,” are eternal; but the significance they borrow from Cyrus-though they are as much due, perhaps, to Xenophons own pure soul as to Cyrus-is not to be compared for one instant to the significance of that single deed of his, into which the Bible absorbs the meaning of his whole career, -the liberation of the Jews. The “Cyropaedia” has been the instruction and delight of many, -of as many in modern times, perhaps, as in ancient. But the liberation of the Jews meant the assurance of the worlds religious education. Cyrus sent this people back to their land solely as a spiritual people. He did not allow them to set up again the house of David, but by his decree the Temple was rebuilt. Israel entered upon their purely religious career, set in order their vast stores of spiritual experience, wrote their histories of grace and providence, developed their worship, handed down their law, and kept themselves holy unto the Lord. Till, in the fulness of the times, from this petty and exclusive tribe, and by the fire, which they kept burning on the altar that Cyrus had empowered them to raise, there was kindled the glory of a universal religion. To change the figure, Christianity sprang from Judaism as the flower from the seed; but it was the hand of Cyrus, which planted the seed in the only soil in which it could have fructified. Of such a universal destiny for the Faith, Cyrus was not conscious, but the Jews themselves were. Our prophet represents him, indeed, as acting for “Jacob My servants sake, and Israels My chosen,” but the chapter does not close without proclamation to “the ends of the earth to look unto Jehovah and be saved,” and the promise of a time “when every knee shall bow and every tongue swear unto the God of Israel.”
Now put all these results, which the Jews, regardless of the character of Cyrus, saw flowing from his policy, as the servant of God on their behalf, side by side with the influence which the Greeks borrowed from Cyrus, and say whether Greek or Jew had the more true and historical conscience of this great power, -whether Greek or Jew had his hand on the pulse of the worlds mare artery. Surely we see that the main artery of human life runs down the Bible, that here we have a sense of the control of history, which is higher than even the highest hero-worship. Some may say, “True, but what a very unequal contest, into which to thrust the poor Cyropaedia!” Precisely; it is from the inequality of the contrast, that we learn the uniqueness of Israels inspiration. Let us do all justice to the Greek and his appreciation of Cyrus. In that, he seems the perfection of humanity; but with the Jew we rise to the Divine, touching the right hand of the providence of God.
There is a moral lesson for ourselves in these two views about Cyrus. The Greeks regard him as a hero, the Jews as an instrument. The Greeks are interested in him that he is so attractive a figure, so effective an example to rouse men and restrain them. But the Jews stand in wonder of his subjection to the will of God; their Scriptures extol, not his virtues, but his predestination to certain Divine ends.
Now let us say no word against hero-worship. We have need of all the heroes, which the Greek, and every other, literature can raise up for us. We need the communion of the saints. To make us humble in our pride, to make us hopeful in our despair, we need our big brothers, the heroes of humanity. We need them in history, we need them in fiction; we cannot do without them for shame, for courage, for fellowship, for truth. But let us remember that still more indispensable-for strength, as well as for peace, of mind-is the other temper. Neither self nor the world is conquered by admiration of men, but by the fear and obligation of God. I speak now of applying this temper to ourselves. We shall live fruitful and consistent lives only in so far as we hear God saying to us, “I gird thee,” and give ourselves into His guidance. Admire heroes if thou wilt, but only admire them and thou remainest a slave. Learn their secret, to commit themselves to God and to obey Him, and thou shalt become a hero too.
Gods anointing of Cyrus, the heathen, has yet another lesson to teach us, which religious people especially need to learn.
This passage about Cyrus lifts us to a very absolute and awful faith. “I am Jehovah, and none else: Former of light and Creator of darkness, Maker of peace and Creator of mischief; I Jehovah, Maker of all these things.” The objection at once rises, “Is it possible to believe this? Are we to lay upon providence everything that happens? Surely we Westerns, with our native scepticism and strong conscience, cannot be expected to hold a faith so Oriental and fatalistic as that.”
But notice to whom the passage is addressed. To religious people, who professedly accept Gods sovereignty, but wish to make an exception in the one case against which they have a prejudice-that a Gentile should be the deliverer of the holy people. Such narrow and imperfect believers are reminded that they must not substitute for faith in God their own ideas of how God ought to work; that they must not limit His operations to their own conception of His past revelations; that God does not always work even by His own precedents; and that many other forces than “conventional and religious ones-yea,” even forces as destitute of moral or religious character as Cyrus himself seemed to be-are also in Gods hands, and may be used by Him as means of grace. There is frequent charge made in our day against what are called the more advanced schools of theology, of scepticism and irreverence. But this passage reminds us that the most sceptical and irreverent are those old-fashioned believers, who, clinging to precedent and their own stereotyped notions of things, deny that Gods hands are in a movement, because it is novel and not orthodox. “Woe unto him that striveth with his Moulder; shall the clay say to its moulder, What makest thou?” God did not cease “moulding” when He gave us the canon and our creeds, when He founded the Church and the Sacraments. His hand is still among the clay, and upon time, that great “potters wheel,” which still moves obedient to His impulse. All the large forward movements, the big things of to-day-commerce, science, criticism however neutral, like Cyrus, their character may be, are, like Cyrus, grasped and anointed by God. Therefore let us show reverence and courage before the great things of to-day. Do not let us scoff at their novelty or grow fearful because they show no orthodox, or even no religious character. God reigns, and He will use them, for what has been the dearest purpose of His heart, the emancipation of true religion, the confirmation of the faithful, the victory of righteousness. When Cyrus rose and the prophet named him as Israels deliverer, and the severely orthodox in Israel objected, did God attempt to soothe them by pointing out how admirable a character he was, and how near in religion to the Jews themselves? God did no such thing, but spoke only of the military and political fitness of this great engine, by which He was to batter Babylon. That Cyrus was a quick marcher, a far shooter, an inspirer of fear, a follower up of victory, one who swooped like a “bird-of-prey,” one whose weight of war burst through every obstruction, -this is what the astonished pedants are told about the Gentile, to whose Gentileness they had objected. No soft words to calm their bristling orthodoxy, but heavy facts, -an appeal to their common-sense, if they had any, that this was the most practical means for the practical end God had in view. For again we learn the old lesson the prophets are ever so anxious to teach us, “God is wise.” He is concerned, not to be orthodox or true to His own precedent, but to be practical, and effective for salvation.
And so, too, in our own day, though we may not see any religious character whatsoever about certain successful movements-say in science, for instance-which are sure to affect the future of the Church and of Faith, do not let us despair, neither deny that they, too, are in the counsels of God. Let us only be sure that they are permitted for some end-some practical end; and watch, with meekness but with vigilance, to see what that end shall be. Perhaps the endowment of the Church with new weapons of truth; perhaps her emancipation from associations which, however ancient, are unhealthy; perhaps her opportunity to go forth upon new heights of vision, new fields of conquest.