Isa 1:1

“Under Egypt he meant the world, and under things made with hands its idolatry, and under the shaking its subversion and dissolution. And the Lord, the Word, he represented as upon a light cloud, referring to that most pure tabernacle, in which setting up His throne, our Lord Jesus Christ came into the world to shake error.”

“When Hezekiah, king of Judah, was still sick and weeping, there came an angel, and said to him: "I have seen thy tears, and I have heard thy voice. Behold, I add unto thy time fifteen years. And this shall be a sign to thee from the Lord: Behold, I turn back the shadow of the degrees of the house of thy father, by which the sun has gone down, the ten degrees by which the shadow has gone down," so that day be a day of thirty-two hours. For when the sun had run its course to the tenth hour, it returned again. And again, when Joshua the son of Nun was fighting against the Amorites, when the sun was now inclining to its setting, and the battle was being pressed closely, Joshua, being anxious lest the heathen host should escape on the descent of night, cried out, saying, "Sun, stand thou still in Gibeon; and thou moon, in the valley of Ajalon," until I vanquish this people. And the sun stood still, and the moon, in their places, so that day was one of twenty-four hours. And in the time of Hezekiah the moon also turned back along with the sun, that there might be no collision between the two elemental bodies, by their bearing against each other in defiance of law. And Merodach the Chaldean, king of Babylon, being struck with amazement at that time-for he studied the science of astrology, and measured the courses of these bodies carefully-on learning the cause, sent a letter and gifts to Hezekiah, just as also the wise men from the east did to Christ.”

“A "vision," he says, not ordinary or perceptible with physical eyes, but a prophetic vision of things to come in far distant times; for just as one sees in a great tablet the invasion of enemies, ravagings of countryside, sieges of cities and enslavements of people, represented with the brilliance of color, the same way he seems to see a dream, but not a vision in sleep, when the divine spirit enlightens the soul.”

“[The heading] indicated the ages of the kings, since there was a different state of affairs among the Jews, and events were to transpire in the distant future which never entered the mind or suspicion of the people of that time. Furthermore, it needs to be noted that the whole book, which only seems to be a single composition, was actually spoken over long periods of time, since there was need of extensive and precise understanding to discern the future, to determine the meaning of the events of the time and to suit the prophecy for the events that occurred in each reign. For the age of these kings covered fifty years in all, during which the things contained in this whole book were spoken.”

“It is our task to pay diligent attention to the mind, so that it becomes clear-sighted, becoming perfect through appropriate exercises, while it is God's gift that the Spirit should illuminate us for the comprehension of his mysteries. The prophet puts "vision" first in his account and then introduces his report of the words, in order to show that he did not receive it through the faculty of hearing but is proclaiming the meaning of the word that has been impressed on his mind. For we need voice to indicate our thoughts, but God, affecting directly the very ruling aspect of the soul in those who are worthy, impresses on them the knowledge of his own will.”

“No one, when he will have seen the Prophets to be written in verses, would think them to be bound in meter among the Hebrews, and to have anything in common with the Psalms or the works of Solomon. But what is customary to be used in Demosthenes and Cicero, as they are written in words with divisions, who certainly wrote prose and not in verses, we also, providing ease of reading, have divided a new translation with a new kind of writing. And first, knowing of Isaiah what is presented in his speech, certainly as a man noble and of urbane elegance he does not have anything of rusticity mixed into (his) speech. For this reason it happens that in comparison with others the translation was not able to preserve the flower of his speech. And then adding this, that it is being spoken not only by a prophet, but by an evangelist. For thus all the mysteries of Christ and the Church are pursued to clarity, so that you would not think them to be prophesied of the future, but they covered the history of things past. For this reason I suppose the Seventy interpreters to have been unwilling at that that time to set forth clearly for the gentiles the sacraments of their faith, not throwing holy things to dogs or pearls to swine, which things, when you will have read this edition, you will note were hidden by them. Nor am I unaware of how much work it is to understand the Prophets, or for anyone not to be easily able to judge from the translation, unless he will have before understood those things which he will have read, and we to suffer from the bites of many, who, being goaded by jealousy, what they are not able to follow, they despise. Therefore, knowing and being wise, I place my hand in the fire, and nevertheless I pray this for the scornful readers: that just as the Greeks after the Seventy translators read Aquila and Symmachus and Theodotion, either for study of their doctrines or so that they better understand the Seventy through their collation, that these are deemed worthy to have at least one translator after the earlier ones. Reading first and afterward despising, they are seen not to condemn by judgment, but rather by the ignorant presumption of hatred. And Isaiah prophesied in Jerusalem and Judea when the ten tribes had not yet been led into captivity, and the oracle covered both kingdoms, now together, now separately. And while he sometimes looks at present history, and indicated the return of the people to Judea after the Babylonian captivity, yet is all his concern for the calling of the nations and for the coming of Christ. Who, how much the more you love, O Paula and Eustochium, the more strive for him, so that for the present disparagement, by which the envious incessantly tear me into pieces, the same One may restore a reward to me in the future, Who knows me to have exerted myself in the learning of foreign languages: the Jews might not jump all day on the errors of the Scriptures in His Church.”

“(Chapter 1, Verse 1) The vision of Isaiah, the son of Amos, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. For Judah, in which two tribes are signified, the Seventy and Theodotion have translated 'Judah,' which signifies the entire land of the twelve tribes. And because we translate from Hebrew, 'concerning Judah and Jerusalem,' they have interpreted it as 'against Judah and Jerusalem.' Symmachus, in his own way, more clearly, 'concerning Judah and Jerusalem,' so that he does not want to indicate either prosperity or adversity by the title, but what the prophetic discourse has foretold about Judah and Jerusalem in both respects. Therefore, Isaiah primarily speaks about two tribes, Judah and Benjamin, excluding the ten tribes that were in Samaria and were called Ephraim and Israel; and those that under the reign of King Uzziah of Judah, and Jerusalem, the king of Assyria, Tiglath-Pileser, had already begun to devastate. Finally, in the fifty-second year of his reign, when Pekah, the son of Remaliah, was reigning in Samaria, Tiglath-Pileser, the king of Assyria, came and captured Aijon and Abel, the house of Maacah, and Janoah and Kedesh and Hazor and Gilead and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and he resettled them in Assyria (2 Kings 15:18-19). From this it is shown that all these things are narrated as a warning by the neighboring destruction of Samaria to the two tribes. But Ozias himself is the same person who is also called Azarias with a double name. And indeed, at the same time we know that Isaiah, Hosea, Joel, and Amos prophesied, from the kings who are mentioned in the title. But the beginning of the word of the Lord was with Hosea, son of Beeri. However, Amos is the father of Isaiah, not as most people think, he is the third of the twelve Prophets, but another; they are written in different letters among the Hebrews. This one has the first and last letters Aleph and Sade (); that one has Ainet Samech (): and this one is interpreted by some as strength or robust; that one as a hard or heavy people: about which we have spoken more fully in Amos. Not only this prophet, but also others with the title 'Vision seen by Isaiah or Obadiah' do not reveal what they saw. For example: 'I saw the Lord of hosts sitting on a high and lofty throne, and the two seraphim were around Him.' But what was said, they tell, that is, 'Hear, heaven, and listen, earth' (Isa. 6:1-2). And: 'This is what the Lord God says to Edom. I have heard an announcement from the Lord, and a messenger has been sent to the nations' (Obad. 1:1). For the prophets were previously called seers, who were able to say: Our eyes are always towards the Lord (Psalm 14:15). And: To you, I lift up my eyes, you who are enthroned in heaven (Psalm 123:1). Therefore, the Savior commanded the Apostles: Lift up your eyes and see the fields, for they are already white for harvest (John 4:35). The bride in the Song of Songs also had these eyes of the heart, to whom the bridegroom says: You have ravished my heart, my sister, my bride, with one glance of your eyes (Song of Songs 4:9). And in the Gospel we read: The light of your body is your eye (Matt. VI, 22). It is also said in the old Scriptures that the people saw the voice of God (Exod. XX, 18). From this, the delusions of the Montanists are silenced, who in their ecstasy thought that the prophets spoke of future events from a deranged mind, for they could not see what they were ignorant of. I know that some interpret Judah and Jerusalem to mean heavenly things, and Isaiah to represent the Lord Savior: that it foreshadows the captivity of that province in our land, and later the return and ascent to the holy mountain in the last days. We despise everything that is contrary to the Christian faith, judging it, and following the truth of history, we interpret it spiritually so that whatever they dream about the heavenly Jerusalem, we refer it to the Church of Christ, and to those who either leave it because of sin or return to the original seat because of repentance, and also because we consider that this is said in the same Prophet: 'Arise, shine; for your light has come, and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you. For darkness shall cover the earth, and thick darkness the peoples; but the Lord will arise upon you, and his glory will appear over you. Nations shall come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your dawn. Lift up your eyes and look around; they all gather together, they come to you; your sons shall come from far away, and your daughters shall be carried on their nurses' arms. Then you shall see and be radiant; your heart shall thrill and rejoice, because the abundance of the sea shall be brought to you, the wealth of the nations shall come to you. A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian and Ephah; all those from Sheba shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall proclaim the praise of the Lord. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered to you, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister to you; they shall be acceptable on my altar, and I will glorify my glorious house.' And it is stated in the title that he prophesied during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. This is not to be understood in a confused manner like in other prophets, so that we do not know what was said under which specific king. Rather, it is referred to the end of the book to indicate what was separately revealed to him by the Lord under Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. Let us also know that Hezekiah began to reign in Jerusalem in the 12th year of Romulus, who founded a city in Italy bearing his name, so that it is clear how much older our histories are than those of other nations. Isaiah is interpreted as the Savior of the Lord; Judah, the confession; Jerusalem, the vision of peace; Uzziah, the strength of the Lord; Jotham, the perfection of the Lord; Ahaz, the one who holds or is strong; Hezekiah, the rule of the Lord. Therefore, whoever is saved with the Lord presiding is the son of Amos, that is, strong and mighty; he spiritually perceives the vision of confession while lamenting the ancient sins, and the peace while moving from repentance to light, and he rests in eternal peace. And all his times pass under the strength, perfection, and power of the Lord. And when he has done all things, he will say that evangelical saying: We are useless servants: for what we ought to have done, we have done (Luke 17:10).”

“The word of the holy prophets is always difficult to surmise. It is filled with hidden meanings and is pregnant with announcements of divine mysteries. The end of the law and prophets is Christ, as Scripture says. Those who want to expound these subtle matters must be diligent, I believe, to work in a logical way to thoroughly examine all of the symbols in the text to gain spiritual insight. First, the interpreter must determine the historical meaning and then interpret the spiritual meaning, in order for readers to derive benefit from every part of the text. The exposition must be clearly seen to be complete in every way.”

“the vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz Said Rabbi Levi: We have a tradition from our ancestors that Amoz and Amaziah, king of Judah, were brothers. which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem Now, did he not prophesy concerning many nations, viz. the prophecy of Babylonia (ch. 13), the prophecy of Moab (ch. 15)? Thus you learn that this is not the beginning of the Book, and that the Book is not given its name for this prophecy. So we learned in the Baraitha of the Mechilta (Exod. 15: 9,10): “In the year of King Uzziah’s death” (6:1) is the beginning of the Book, but there is no early and late in the order [i.e., the order of the chapters is no indication of the chronological order. (Others read: There is no early and late in the Book—Parshandatha.] The context proves this point, for, on the day of the earthquake (see Zech. 14:5), the day Uzziah became a metzora (see 2 Chron. 26:19), it was said: “Whom shall I send and who will go for us?” And I said, “Here I am; send me” (6:8). We learn that this was the beginning of his mission, and this prophecy was said afterwards. And concerning this alone, it is stated: which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, just as Scripture says concerning each nation, “the prophecy of such and such a nation.” Here too, Scripture writes: “which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.” Since they are harsh reproofs, he calls them “chazon,” which is the harshest of the ten expressions by which prophecy is called, as is stated in Gen. Rabbah (44:7), and proof of this is the verse (infra 21:2), “A harsh prophecy (חָזוּת) was told to me.” in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, [and] Hezekiah, kings of Judah. These four kings he buried, [i.e. he outlived,] in his lifetime. On the day Uzziah became a metzora, the Shechinah rested upon him, and he prophesied all the days of these kings, until Manasseh arose and killed him. (And this prophecy was said in the days of Hezekiah after the ten tribes were exiled.)”

“חזון The vision of. The נ is not radical. The son of Amoz. There exists an opinion, though a solitary one, that when the father of a prophet is mentioned by name, he also was a prophet; another opinion is, that Isaiah was a member of the royal family, that his father Amoz and Amaziah were brothers, and that the evil-disposed of Israel were unable on that account to do harm to Isaiah, as they did to Jeremiah (vid. Jer. 38); but in fact Isaiah did not escape persecution, for he says, I gave my back to smiters, etc. (1. 6). Irrespectively of all traditional explanations, we may say that the father of a prophet, if mentioned by name, was a man of some distinction, whose character rendered him conspicuous among his fellow-men; sometimes he was himself a prophet, at others not, e.g., David, the son of Jesse (2 Sam. 23:1). David was the man of God (2 Chron. 8:14), Jesse was not. It is with prophecy as with royalty; comp. Jehu, king of Israel, the son of Nimshi (1 Kings 19:16); Nimshi was not a king. We read, it is true, In the vision of Isaiah, the son of Amoz, the prophet (2 Chron. 32:32), where the qualifying term, the prophet, may as well be referred to Amoz as to Isaiah; but from the words, To Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz (2 Kings 19:2), we learn that Isaiah was the prophet. Thus the forefathers of Zephania are named (Zeph. 1:1), because the king Hezekiah was one of them. Concerning Judah and Jerusalem. The greater part of Isaiah’s prophecies refer to the cities of Judah, which were to be taken by the king of Assyria, and to Jerusalem, which was to be delivered out of his hand; the whole of the second part of the Book of Isaiah has as its subject the exile of Judah, the other tribes not being mentioned here at all. In the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. Isaiah very probably commenced his prophetical career in the last year of King Uzziah, as shall be explained below (6:1). In strict regard to the words of the text, we think that he died in the days of Hezekiah; for had he lived in the days of Manasse, the son of Hezekiah, it would certainly have been stated in this verse. Some say that Isaiah was slain by Manasse, because he exclaimed, Mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts (6:5). If this statement is based on tradition, it may be accepted.”

“17. The vision of Isaiah the son of Amos. This book is divided into two parts: into a preface, and a treatise, which begins where it says, hear, O you heavens (Isa 1:2). The preface is introduced like a title to make the work that follows manifest. It is made manifest, however, from four things: first, from the genus of the work; second, from the author, where it says, Isaiah; third, from the matter, where it says, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem; fourth, from the time, where it says, in the days of Ozias, Joathan, Achaz, and Ezechias, kings of Judah. The genus of the work is shown where it says the vision, in which it differs from historical books, because it is prophecy: I have multiplied visions, and it continues: I have used similitudes by the hands of the prophets (Hos 12:10). 18. Here it is necessary to see three things: first, in what way vision relates to prophecy; second, concerning the modes of prophetic vision; third, concerning the difference of prophetic vision from other visions. Concerning the first, it should be known that "prophecy" can have a double interpretation, in as far as it can come from phanos, which means "apparition," or from for, faris ("to speak"). According to the first derivation, a prophet is said to have an apparition of things which are far off; and hence, prophecy differs from vision in mode, because apparition signifies the relation of the visible thing to the one who sees, but vision signifies the converse. Again, prophecy and vision relate to each other by addition: because a vision may be of anything, but prophecy is of things which are far off. Things are said to be far off from our knowledge in two ways; simply, and relatively. Future things that are contingent on something are far off simply; determinate knowledge of them cannot be grasped either in themselves or in their causes, and prophecy is properly of these things. Things are far off relatively when knowledge of them is separated from the knower, as certain past and present things, and prophecy is of these things not simply, but with respect to those who are ignorant of them. But according to the second derivation, a prophet is so called because he is speaking far off [procul fans], as it were. And thus prophecy adds upon vision an act of exterior declaration, and vision will be material in respect to prophecy. 19. Concerning the second, it should be known that the modes of prophetic vision are distinguished according to those things in which foreknowledge of future contingencies are received. This, however, is either an image made in the senses and is called corporeal vision, because the senses accept images from the present bodies whose images they are; or it is an image received in the imagination and is called spiritual vision, because, in it, act and property are first manifested spiritually, which is to know a thing abstracted from matter; or it is an image existing only in the intellect and is called intellectual vision. And it should be known that prophecy is kept in these three as a potential whole in its parts, whose nature is that it is in one according its perfect power, and in the others there is a certain participation and mode of it; just as in the soul, because its whole power is preserved in the rational soul, the sensitive soul does not have the perfect power of the soul, and still less the vegetative soul. Because of this, Gregory says that plants do not live by soul but by vigor. Similarly, corporeal and spiritual (or imaginary) vision also are certain kinds of prophecy, but they cannot be called true prophecies unless intellectual vision is added, in which is the complete notion of prophecy: for there is need of understanding in a vision (Dan 10:1), which is preceded by: and he (that is, Daniel) understood the word. "Vision," however, is first and properly applied to corporeal vision. And because all our knowledge comes from the senses, among which vision is the most powerful both in subtlety and universality, because it shows us more differences of things; therefore the name of seeing is transferred to other interior kinds of knowledge. 20. Concerning the third, it should be known that not every intellectual vision is prophetic vision. For there is a certain vision for which the natural light of the intellect suffices, as the contemplation of invisible things by the principles of reason; and philosophers have placed the supreme happiness of man in this contemplation. Again, there is a certain contemplation to which man is elevated sufficiently by the light of faith, as that of the saints while on earth. There is also a certain contemplation of the blessed in heaven to which the intellect is elevated by the light of glory, seeing the essence of God, inasmuch as he is the object of beatitude; and this is only found fully or perfectly in heaven, although sometimes one is suddenly elevated to it while existing in this mortal life, as happened in the rapture of Paul, I know a man in Christ: above fourteen years ago (whether in the body, I know not, or out of the body, I know not: God knows), such a one caught up to the third heaven (2 Cor 12:2). There the Gloss says that he saw as those who are from the third hierarchy. However, none of these visions is prophetic vision, because neither natural light nor the light of faith suffices for this vision; but the intellect of the prophet is elevated to it by the light of a gratuitous grace, which is the gift of prophecy, for it does not attain to seeing God as he is the object of beatitude, but as he is the cause [ratio] of things which pertain to the disposition of men in the world. Similarly, not every corporeal or imaginary vision is called prophecy, but only that vision which is made by an image specially ordained by divine power to be a sign of some future thing, whether he who sees or another receives understanding. 21. The author is touched upon where it says, Isaiah the son of Amos. And although this Amos was a prophet, because he is placed in the title of a prophecy according to the rule of the Hebrews, nevertheless, he is not the Amos who is one of the twelve prophets, because they are written with different letters in Hebrew. 22. The matter is touched upon where he says, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, because of these things that pertain to Judah and Jerusalem, so that concerning [super] is given as of [de] in the translation of Symmachus or as against [contra] in the Septuagint. And Judah is taken for the land of the two tribes, and Jerusalem for the chief city of this region. Or Judah is taken for the lot of Judah and Jerusalem for the lot of Benjamin, because Jerusalem was in Benjamin's lot as to the body of the city, which was on the slope; although as to the top of the mountain, where the tower of David and the temple were, it belonged to the house of God, as can be gathered from Joshua 15. 23. In the days. Here, the work is made known from the time, and four kings are named, in whose time Isaiah proclaimed this prophecy. Hence some divide this book according the times of the kings under whom he received revelation, so that in the first part are placed the things that were seen in the time of Ozias; in the second, those that were seen in the time of Joathan, in chapter 6, in the year that king Ozias died; in the third, the things which were seen in the time of Achaz, from chapter 7 to the end of chapter 14, where is said, in the year that king Achaz died (Isa 14:28); and from there to the end, the things which were seen in the time of Ezechias. 24. But it is asked: why does he not make mention of the kings of Israel, as Hosea in his title (Hos 1:1) makes mention of Jeroboam, the son of Joas, when they were contemporary? To this is to be said that Isaiah prophesied principally against the two tribes, and therefore he only has their kings in the title, whereas Hosea prophesied against both Judah and Israel. 25. Likewise, it is asked why no mention is made of Manasseh king of Judah, under whom Isaiah also lived, when it is certain that he did not lose the spirit of prophecy. To this is to be said that everything which was written in this book, he saw in the times of the prophets, but it was not fitting that a prophecy which is principally of consolation should be ended in a threat, or that the consolation of God should be preached in the time of a bad king who provoked the wrath of God: I will give them up to the rage of all the kingdoms of the earth (Jer 15:4).”