As in the case of the prophets generally, the author's attitude and teaching, viewed in their broader features, are determined by his historical situation. Like Isaiah in 701, like Jeremiah on the eve of the Exile, he stands at a critical moment in the history of his nation. Was Judah to lose its individuality in the land of its exile to be gradually assimilated, like its brethren of the Ten Tribes, to the nations among whom it dwelt? There were many among the exiles upon whom the promise of Jeremiah had produced no impression, who were content to remain where they were, who had no high aspirations for the future; others, who were ready to quit Babylon if the opportunity should offer, were despondent, over-awed by the power and magnificence of the great imperial city. The prophet saw the future with a truer eye. Though Cyrus, pursuing his triumphal progress, may throw the nations of Asia into consternation, and drive them in terror to their idol-gods, Israel has no ground for alarm; the promise has been given, and cannot be recalled; Israel must yet return to its ancient home, and complete the destined cycle of its history. The approaching restoration from exile holds in his view a similar position to that occupied in Isaiah by the triumph over the Assyrians. It marks the beginning of a now epoch, in which the powers of the world and of evil, now holding sway over Israel, will be rendered harmless; it inaugurates the advent of the perfect Kingdom of God. Hence the importance assumed by it in the prophet's eyes, and the brilliant colours in which he depicts it. It is a manifestation of the Divine glory; it is an event of world-wide significance, to be told, and acknowledged gratefully, in the remotest regions of the earth. But he stands upon a loftier pedestal than Isaiah, and pierces further into the future. He has a more distinct consciousness of the greatness of Israel's mission; he is aware that, in some mysterious way, a “light of the Gentiles” is in the future to proceed from it; he has received, in even larger and fuller measure than Isaiah, a revelation of God's purposes of grace. Hence the extraordinary comprehensiveness of his view, and the wealth and richness of his prophetic teaching. In the words of A. B. Davidson, “No thought is too lofty or too wide for the Prophet, in the passion of enthusiasm which the vision of a restored nature and regenerated world raises within him.”
1. The first requisite was to revive the exiles' consciousness of God, to impress them with a sense of His infinite power and resources, and the immutability of His word; and also to impart to them a new and inspiring view of their own mission and destiny as a nation. And to this task the writer addresses himself with all the impassioned and persuasive eloquence of which he is an unrivalled master. The prophet's doctrine of God is, accordingly, the fundamental element of his teaching. The book, it has been well said, “is a structure based upon and built out of the monotheistic conception, the idea that Jehovah. God of Israel, is the true and only God.” The author does not differ from earlier prophets in being a monotheist, but he differs remarkably in this, that he inculcates the principle almost as an abstract truth of religion, and strives to bring it home to the reason and the imagination of his readers.
2. The contrast between the transitory impotence of man and the eternal omnipotence of Jehovah is the next point that he emphasizes. In face of the apparently invincible might of Babylon, deliverance must have seemed hopeless to the exiles. But at the very outset of his prophecy he proclaims this contrast for Israel's comfort. When the mysterious voice has announced the impending restoration of Israel, another voice bids him “Cry,” and when he asks “What shall I cry?” he receives the answer: “All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field: the grass withereth, the flower fadeth; because the breath of Jehovah bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass. The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.” It is the thought upon which the Israelites are to reflect in view of all the overwhelming magnificence and power of their conquerors, which seems for the moment so irresistible and so permanent.
Have frequent thoughts of God's omnipotency, or His almighty power. This most men, it may be, suppose they need not much exhortation unto; for none ever doubted of it. Who doth not grant it on all occasions? Men grant it, indeed, in general; for eternal power is inseparable from the first notion of the Divine Being. So are they conjoined by the apostle: “His eternal power and Godhead.” Yet few believe it for themselves and as they ought. Indeed, to believe the almighty power of God with reference unto ourselves and all our concernments, temporal and eternal, is one of the highest and most noble acts of faith, which includes all others in it; for this is that which God at first proposed alone as the proper object of our faith in our entrance into covenant with Him, “I am the Almighty God”; that which Job arrived unto after his long exercise and trial. “I know,” saith he, “that thou canst do every thing, and no thought of thine can be hindered.” “God hath spoken once,” saith the psalmist; “twice have I heard this; that power belongeth unto God.” It was that which God saw it necessary frequently to instruct him in; for we are ready to be affected with the appearances of present power in creatures, and to suppose that all things will go according unto their wills because of their power. But it is quite otherwise; all creatures are poor feeble ciphers that can do nothing. Power belongs unto God; it is a flower of His crown imperial, which He will suffer none to usurp.1 [Note: John Owen, Of Spiritual Mindedness, chap. ix.]
3. In dealing with God's relation to man, the prophet lays unusual stress upon the motives by which He acts, and the principles exemplified in His actions-the latter being not merely described but referred to the motive or principle from which they spring. Thus, as one such principle, justice is emphasized: the path of Cyrus, the commission of Israel, or of the ideal Servant, are, by the use of this term, exhibited in the light of a manifestation or furtherance of God's righteous purpose. Similarly, righteousness is often specified as the principle determining the approaching deliverance. Another motive of Jehovah's action is the Divine name: being jealous of His honour, He cannot any longer permit His name to be reproached, or the glory which is His due to be transferred to idol gods, by the nation which He has chosen to be His own people remaining permanently in exile.
He lays emphasis especially on God's righteousness. It is the quality displayed in the raising up of Cyrus, in the sustaining of Israel, which is ascribed to Jehovah's “right hand of righteousness,” and in the calling of the ideal Servant of the Lord. But, further, it is exhibited in Jehovah's manner of revealing Himself; He is One who “speaks righteousness”; One who, in contrast with the false gods, is approved as righteous by the verification of His prophecies; a word goes forth from His mouth in righteousness and shall not return. The general idea suggested by these various usages is perhaps trustworthiness in word and deed, and particularly in the perfect correspondence between word and deed. This implies that Jehovah's actions are all regulated by a consistent and firmly maintained principle, so that when He speaks He but reveals the inner principle which is the true motive of His action; and when He is said to uphold Israel or to raise up Cyrus “in righteousness” the meaning is that He does so in pursuance of a steadfast purpose which He may be relied on to carry through. And since His purpose is ultimately a purpose of salvation, we can understand why so frequently in the prophecy the idea of righteousness tends to become merged in that of salvation.
The Hebrew term for righteousness denotes that which is perfectly straight. The Greek is that which divides equally to all, apportions to every one his due, whilst the Latin means that which is commanded. The thought expressed by the Hebrew root is deeper than that which is conveyed by either the Latin or the Greek. The Romans were a military people, a nation of soldiers, and the idea of righteousness in their minds was naturally associated with that of obedience to orders. The Greeks were a people foremost in all that ministers to social enjoyment and civilization, and their idea of righteousness was that which accorded to each the possession of his due. The thought of an antecedent and eternal distinction between right and wrong, as a straight line drawn from earth to Heaven, apart from the present results of good and evil, runs through the whole system of Old Testament morality, and that thought is graphically represented under the image of that which is perfectly straight. According to Euclid, a straight line is the shortest which can be drawn from one point to another, and in the Jewish tongue Righteousness is the most direct path towards the Great White Throne. So we find that the usual word for sinning-Kha-tâ-means not only that of missing the mark, as generally taken, but also of swerving from this straight line, and thereby making so much the longer the sinner's journey towards the goal and aim of his existence.1 [Note: W. H. Saulez, The Romance of the Hebrew Language, 29.]
