9 In that day, their strong cities will be like the forsaken places in the woods and on the mountain top, which were forsaken from before the children of Israel; and it will be a desolation.
*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.
In that day shall his strong cities be as a forsaken bough. He follows out what he had begun to say about driving out the inhabitants of the country; and as the Israelites, trusting to their fortified cities and to their bulwarks, thought that they were in safety, he threatens that they will be of no more use than if enemies were marching through desert places. The view entertained by some, that chvrs (chOrEsh) and zvvt (azubath) [1] are proper names of towns, is a forced interpretation. I understand them rather to denote unpleasant and disagreeable places, or that the walls and ditches will contribute no more to their defense than if the Israelites dwelt amidst thickets and bushes. As they left. [2] Here the particle 'sr, (asher,) I have no doubt, denotes comparison; and therefore I have rendered it in like manner as, which makes the statement of the Prophet to be, in connection with what had been already said, that the people would tremble and flee and be scattered, in the same manner as God had formerly driven out the ancient inhabitants. Those who think that 'sr, (asher,) is a relative are constrained to supply something, and to break up the thread of the discourse. But it simply brings to their remembrance an ancient example, that the Israelites may perceive how vain and deceitful is every kind of defense that is opposed to the arm of God. It is a severe reproach; for the Israelites did not consider that the Lord gave to them that land, as it were, by hereditary right, in order that they might worship him, and that he drove out their enemies to put them in possession of it. And now, by their ingratitude, they rendered themselves unworthy of so great a benefit; and, consequently, when they had been deprived of it, there was good reason why they should feel distresses which were the reverse of their former blessings. This passage will be made more plain by the writings of Moses, whom the prophets follow; for in the promises he employs this mode of expression, "One of you shall chase a thousand," (Leviticus 26:8; Joshua 23:10), and in the threatenings, on the other hand, he says, "One shall chase a thousand of you." (Deuteronomy 32:30.) Accordingly, as he struck such terror into the Canaanites, that at the sight of the Israelites they immediately fled, so he punished the ingratitude of the people in such a manner that they had no power to resist. Thus the Lord gave a display of his power in two ways, both in driving out the Canaanites and in punishing his people. The Prophet, therefore, by mentioning that ancient kindness, reproaches the people with ingratitude, forgetfulness, and treachery, that they may acknowledge that they are justly punished, and may perceive that it proceeds from the Lord, that they are thus chased by the enemies to whom they were formerly a terror.
1 - "Like the leaving of the ploughed field, or on the topmost bough.' I adopt with pleasure the interpretation of this disputed passage proposed in the excellent Lexicon of Parkhurst, v.chrs as being most natural, and in strict conformity with the Jewish law, Leviticus 19:9, 10; Deuteronomy 24:19-21; which commanded a leaving of the ploughman, and of the branches of the vine and olive,' to be given up to the use of the poor in harvest. Avarice would be apt to make these leavings very scanty." -- Bishop Stock.
2 - Whom they left. -- Eng. Ver.
His strong cities - The cities of the united kingdoms of Damascus and Samaria.
Be as a forsaken bough - There has been much difficulty in the interpretation of this passage. Lowth says, 'No one has ever been able to make any tolerable sense of these words;' and proposes himself the translation,
In that day shall his strongly fenced cities become
Like the desertion of the Hivites and the Amorites;
Following in this the translation of the Septuagint, but doing violence to the Hebrew text. Rosenmuller translates it, 'As the remnant of a grove when the thicket is cut down, and when few trees are left.' The word rendered 'bough' (חרשׁ choresh) means, properly, a thicket, or thick foliage, a wood that is entangled or intricate 1-Samuel 23:15-16, 1-Samuel 23:18; 2-Chronicles 27:4; and probably this is the idea here. The phrase may be rendered, 'as the leavings or residue of a grove, copse, or entangled wood;' and the idea is, that as a "few" trees might be left when the axeman cuts down the grove, so a few inferior and smaller towns should be left in the desolation that would come upon Damascus.
And an uppermost branch - Isaiah 17:6. As a few berries are left in the topmost branch of the olive, or the vine, so shall I a few cities or people be left in the general desolation.
Which they left - Which "are" left, or which the invaders would leave.
Because of the children of Israel - literally, 'from the face,' that is, before the children of Israel. Lowth supposes that it refers to the Amorites, who left their land before the Israelites, or gave up their land for them. Vitringa renders it, 'On account of the children of Israel;' and supposes that it means that a few cities were spared by the purpose of God in the invasion by Tiglath-pileser, to be a residence of the Israelites that should remain; or that, for some reason which is not known, the Assyrians chose to spare a few towns, and not wholly to destroy the country. The "general" idea is plain, that a few towns would be left, and that it would be "before" the children of Israel, or in their presence, or in order that they might continue to dwell in them. Jerome interprets the whole as referring to the time when the land of Judea was forsaken on the invasion of the Romans.
And there shall be desolation - The land shall be desolated, except the few cities and towns that shall be left, like the gleaning of the olive tree.
As a forsaken bough, and an uppermost branch "the Hivites and the Amorites" - החרש והאמיר hachoresh vehaamir. No one has ever yet been able to make any tolerable sense of these words. The translation of the Septuagint has happily preserved what seems to be the true reading of the text, as it stood in the copies of their time; though the words are now transposed, either in the text or in their Version; οἱ Αμαρῥαιοι και οἱ Ευαιοι, "the Amorites and the Hivites." It is remarkable that many commentators, who never thought of admitting the reading of the Septuagint, understand the passage as referring to that very event which their Version expresses; so that it is plain that nothing can be more suitable to the context. "My father," says Bishop Lowth, "saw the necessity of admitting this variation at a time when it was not usual to make so free with the Hebrew text." Mr. Parkhurst is not satisfied with the prelate's adoption of the reading of the Septuagint, "the Hivites and the Amorites." He thinks the difficult words should be thus rendered; he takes the whole verse: "And his fortified cities shall be like the leaving, or what is left כעזובת caazubath, of or in a ploughed field, החרש hachoresh, or on a branch which they leave coram, before, the children of Israel." Which he considers a plain reference to the Mosaic laws relative to the not gleaning of their ploughed fields, vineyards, and oliveyards, but leaving עזב ozeb, somewhat of the fruits, for the poor of the land; Leviticus 9:9, Leviticus 9:10; Deuteronomy 24:19-21, in the Hebrew. I fear that the text is taken by storm on both interpretations. One MS. has כל ערי col arey, "all the cities;" and instead of החלש hachalash, "of the branch," six MSS. have החדש hachodesh, "of the month." But this is probably a mistake.
In that day shall his strong cities be as a forsaken bough, and an uppermost branch, which (l) they left because of the children of Israel: and there shall be desolation.
(l) As the Canaanites left their cities when God placed the Israelites there, so the cities of Israel will not be able to defend their inhabitants any more than bushes, when God will send the enemy to plague them.
In that day shall his strong cities be as a forsaken bough, and an uppermost branch,.... Meaning the strong cities of Ephraim or Jacob, the ten tribes, which should be forsaken of their inhabitants; having fled from before the enemy, or being slain or carried captive; like a bough of a tree, that is forsaken stripped of its leaves, and an uppermost branch of a tree that is dead and dry, and has nothing on it:
which they left; or "as they left", or "were left":
because of the children of Israel; "from the face of" them; or for fear of them; that is, the same cities which the Canaanites left; and as they left them, or were left by them, for fear of the Israelites; the same, and in the same manner, shall they be left by the Israelites, for fear of the Assyrians; and so the Septuagint version reads the words,
"in that day thy cities shall be forsaken, in like manner as the Amorites and Hivites left them, from the face of the children of Israel;''
and this sense is given by Aben Ezra and Kimchi: though some interpret it of some places being spared and left for the remnant to dwell in; but what follows in this verse, and in the next Isaiah 17:10, shows the contrary sense:
and there shall be desolation; over all those cities, and in all the land; though Aben Ezra particularly applies it to Samaria, the royal city. Jerom interprets the whole of the cities of Judea being forsaken of their inhabitants, when the Romans besieged Jerusalem, and made the land desolate; which calamity came upon them, for their neglect and forgetfulness of Jesus the Saviour.
forsaken bough--rather "the leavings of woods," what the axeman leaves when he cuts down the grove (compare Isaiah 17:6).
which they left because of--rather, "which (the enemies) shall leave for the children of Israel"; literally, "shall leave (in departing) from before the face of the children of Israel" [MAURER]. But a few cities out of many shall be left to Israel, by the purpose of God, executed by the Assyrian.
Third turn: "In that day will his fortified cities be like the ruins of the forest and of the mountain top, which they cleared before the sons of Israel: and there arises a waste place. For thou hast forgotten the God of thy salvation, and hast not thought of the Rock of thy stronghold, therefore thou plantedst charming plantations, and didst set them with strange vines. In the day that thou plantedst, thou didst make a fence; and with the morning dawn thou madest thy sowing to blossom: a harvest heap in the day of deep wounds and deadly sorrow of heart." The statement in Isaiah 17:3, "The fortress of Ephraim is abolished," is repeated in Isaiah 17:9 in a more descriptive manner. The fate of the strongly fortified cities of Ephraim would be the same as that of the old Canaanitish castles, which were still to be discerned in their antiquated remains, either in the depths of forests or high up on the mountains. The word ‛azubâh, which the early translators quite misunderstood, signifies, both here and in Isaiah 6:12, desolate places that have gone to ruin. They also misunderstood והאמיר הסהרשׁ. The Septuagint renders it, by a bold conjecture, οἱ Αμοῤῥηαῖοι καὶ οὶ Εὐαῖοι; but this is at once proved to be false by the inversion of the names of the two peoples, which was very properly thought to be necessary. האמיר undoubtedly signifies the top of a tree, which is quite unsuitable here. But as even this meaning points back to אמר, extollere, efferre (see at Psalm 94:4), it may also mean the mountain-top. The name hâ'emori (the Amorites: those who dwell high up in the mountains) proves the possibility of this; and the prophet had this name in his mind, and was guided by it in his choice of a word. The subject of עזבוּ is self-evident. And the reason why only the ruins in forests and on mountains are mentioned is, that other places, which were situated on the different lines of traffic, merely changed their inhabitants when the land was taken by Israel. The reason why the fate of Ephraim's fortified castles was the same as that of the Amoritish castles, which were then lying in ruins, was that Ephraim, as stated in Isaiah 17:10, had turned away from its true rocky stronghold, namely from Jehovah. It was a consequence of this estrangement from God, that Ephraim planted נעמנים נטעי, plantations of the nature of pleasant things, or pleasant plantations (compare on Psalm 78:49, and Ewald, 287, ab), i.e., cultivated all kinds of sensual accompaniments to its worship, in accordance with its heathen propensities; and sowed, or rather (as zemōrâh is the layer of a vine) "set," this garden-ground, to which the suffix ennu refers, with strange grapes, by forming an alliance with a zâr (a stranger), namely the king of Damascus. On the very day of the planting, Ephraim fenced it carefully (this is the meaning of the pilpel, sigsēg from שׂוּג = סוּג, not "to raise," as no such verb as שׂוּג = שׂגה, סגא, can be shown to exist), that is to say, he ensured the perpetuity of these sensuous modes of worship as a state religion, with all the shrewdness of a Jeroboam (see Amos 7:13). And the very next morning he had brought into blossom what he had sown: the foreign layer had shot up like a hot-house plant, i.e., the alliance had speedily grown into a hearty agreement, and had already produced one blossom at any rate, viz., the plan of a joint attack upon Judah. But this plantation, which was so flattering and promising for Israel, and which had succeeded so rapidly, and to all appearance so happily, was a harvest heap for the day of the judgment. Nearly all modern expositors have taken nēd as the third person (after the form mēth, Ges. 72, Anm. 1), and render it "the harvest flees;" but the third person of נוּד would be נד, like the participle in Genesis 4:12; whereas the meaning cumulus (a heap), which it has elsewhere as a substantive, is quite appropriate, and the statement of the prophet resembles that of the apostle in Romans 2:5. The day of the judgment is called "the day of נחלה" (or, according to another reading, נחלה), not, however, as equivalent to nachal, a stream (Luzzatto, in giorno di fiumana), as in Psalm 124:4 (the tone upon the last syllable proves this), nor in the sense of "in the day of possession," as Rosenmller and others suppose, since this necessarily gives to נד the former objectionable and (by the side of קציר) improbable verbal sense; but as the feminine of nachleh, written briefly for maccâh nachlâh (Jeremiah 14:17), i.e., inasmuch as it inflicts grievous and mortal wounds. Ephraim's plantation is a harvest heap for that day (compare kâtzir, the harvest of punishment, in Hosea 6:11 and Jeremiah 51:33); and the hope set upon this plantation is changed into אנוּשׁ כּאב, a desperate and incurable heartfelt sorrow (Jeremiah 30:15). The organic connection between Isaiah 17:12-14, which follow, and the oracle concerning Damascus and Israel, has also been either entirely misunderstood, or not thoroughly appreciated. The connection is the following: As the prophet sets before himself the manner in which the sin of Ephraim is punished by Asshur, as the latter sweeps over the Holy Land, the promise which already began to dawn in the second turn bursts completely through: the world-power is the instrument of punishment in the hands of Jehovah, but not for ever.
In - The day of Jacob's trouble, of which he spake Isaiah 17:4. Uppermost branch - Which he that prunes the tree neglects, because he esteems it useless and inconsiderable. Left - Which they (the Canaanites) left or forsook because of (or for fear of) the children of Israel. And this was a fit example, to awaken the Israelites to a serious belief of this threatening, because God had inflicted the same judgment upon the Canaanites, for the same sins of which they were guilty.
*More commentary available at chapter level.