this prophet, as a specimen of the poetic style in which Isaiah delivers
his predictions, and has illustrated at some length the various beauties
which eminently distinguish the simple, regular, and perfect poem
contained in those chapters. But the grandest specimen of his poetry is
presented in the fourteenth chapter, which is one of the most sublime
odes occurring in the Bible, and contains the noblest personifications
to be found in the records of poetry. The prophet, after predicting the
liberation of the Jews from their severe captivity in Babylon, and their
restoration to their own country, verses 1–3, introduces a chorus of
them, expressing their surprise and astonishment at the sudden downfall
of Babylon, and the great reverse of fortune that had befallen the
tyrant, who, like his predecessors, had oppressed his own, and harassed
the neighbouring kingdoms. These oppressed kingdoms, or their rulers,
are represented under the image of the fir trees and the cedars of
Libanus, which is frequently used to express any thing in the political
or religious world that is supereminently great and majestic: the whole
earth shouts for joy; the cedars of Libanus utter a severe taunt over
the fallen tyrant, and boast their security now he is no more, verses
4–8. This is followed, verse 9, by one of the boldest and most animated
personifications of hades, or the regions of the dead, that was ever
executed in poetry. Hades excites his inhabitants, the shades of
princes, and the departed spirits of monarchs. These illustrious shades
rise at once from their couches as from their thrones; and, advancing to
the entrance of the cavern to meet the king of Babylon, they insult and
deride him on being reduced to the same low state of impotence and
dissolution with themselves, verses 10, 11. The Jews now resume the
speech, verse 12; they address the king of Babylon as the morning star
fallen from heaven, as the first in splendour and dignity, in the
political world fallen from his high state: they introduce him as
uttering the most extravagant vaunts of his power and ambitious designs
in his former glory; these are strongly contrasted, in the close, with
his present low and abject condition, verses 13–15. Immediately follows
a different scene, and a most happy image, to diversify the same
subject, and give it a new turn and additional force. Certain persons
are introduced, who light upon the corpse of the king of Babylon, cast
out and lying naked upon the bare ground, among the common slain, just
after the taking of the city, covered with wounds, and so disfigured,
that it is some time before they know him. They accost him with the
severest taunts, and bitterly reproach him with his destructive
ambition, and his cruel usage of the conquered; which have deservedly
brought upon him this ignominious treatment, so different from what
those of his high rank usually meet with, and which shall cover his
posterity with disgrace, verses 16–20. To complete the whole, God is
introduced, declaring the fate of Babylon; the utter extirpation of the
royal family, and the total desolation of the city; the deliverance of
his people, and the destruction of their enemies; confirming the
irreversible decree by the awful sanction of his oath, verses 21–27. How
forcible, says Bishop Louth, is this imagery, how diversified, how
sublime! How elevated the diction, the figures, the sentiments! The
Jewish nation, the cedars of Lebanon, the ghosts of departed kings, the
Babylonish monarch, the travellers who find his corpse, and last of all
Jehovah himself, are the characters which support this beautiful lyric
drama. One continued action is kept up, or rather, a series of
interesting actions are connected together in an incomparable whole:
this, indeed, is the principal and distinguished excellence of the
sublimer ode, and is displayed in its utmost perfection in this poem of
Isaiah, which may be considered as one of the most ancient, and
certainly one of the most finished, specimens of that species of
composition which has been transmitted to us. The personifications here
are frequent, yet not confused; bold, yet not improbable; a free,
elevated, and truly divine spirit pervades the whole; nor is there any
thing wanting in this ode to defeat its claim to the character of
perfect pathos and sublimity. There is not a single instance in the
whole compass of Greek and Roman poetry which, in every excellence of
composition, can be said to equal or even to approach it.
ISCARIOT, the name of that disciple who betrayed our Saviour. He was so
called, probably, as belonging to Karioth, or Cerioth; that is, a man of
Kerioth, Matt. x, 4.
ISHBOSHETH, a son of King Saul, and his successor in the throne. He was
acknowledged king by a part of the tribes of Israel, A. M. 2949, while
David reigned at Hebron, over the tribe of Judah, 2 Sam. ii, 8, 9, &c;
iii. He reigned two years in peace, but the remaining eight years were
spent in perpetual wars between his troops and those of David, till in
the end he perished, and with him ended the royal dignity of the house
of Saul.
ISHMAELITES, the descendants of Ishmael, the son of Abraham by Hagar,
his Egyptian bond-maid. Ishmael was born B. C. 1910, and his name,
founded on a circumstance which afforded relief to his mother, when she
was wandering from her master’s house toward Egypt, her native country,
is derived from the Hebrew ישמעאל, formed of שמע, _to hear_, and אל,
_God_, and denoting, “the Lord hath hearkened.” The heavenly messenger
who appeared to Hagar in the wilderness, and instructed her by what name
to call her future son, predicted also that he and his posterity would
prove fierce and warlike, engaged in repeated hostilities, and yet able
to maintain their independence. Hagar, deriving encouragement from this
circumstance, returned to the house of Abraham, and was soon delivered
of her promised son. The father regarded Ishmael as the heir of his
wealth, till Sarah had the promise of her son Isaac. After the birth of
Isaac, Abraham was persuaded by his wife to dismiss Hagar and her son;
and the patriarch probably provided for their subsistence in some
distant situation, where they could not encroach on the patrimony of
Isaac. Having wandered for some time in the wilderness of Beersheba,
they proceeded farther to the wilderness of Paran, which bordered on
Arabia; and here Ishmael arrived at maturity, and became an expert
archer, or a hunter and warrior. In process of time his mother procured
for him a wife out of Egypt, by whom he had twelve sons, who eventually
established themselves as the heads of so many distinct Arabian tribes.
Accordingly, the descendants of Ishmael are mentioned in history under
the general name of Arabians and Ishmaelites. Of Ishmael’s personal
history, we merely learn from the sacred writings, that he joined with
his brother Isaac in paying the last tribute of respect to the remains
of their father; and that he died at the age of a hundred and
thirty-seven years, B. C. 1773, Gen. xxv, 9, 18. His descendants,
according to the Scripture account, spread themselves “from Havilah to
Shur, that is, before Egypt, as thou goest toward Assyria.” From this
brief statement, we may conjecture how far their territory extended; for
Havilah, according to the generality of writers, was situated near the
confluence of the Tigris and Euphrates, and Shur, on the isthmus which
separates Arabia from Egypt, now called the Isthmus of Suez. From thence
we may well imagine, that they spread themselves on both sides so far as
to have taken possession of the greatest part of Arabia; and, indeed,
Josephus does not scruple to style their progenitor the founder of the
Arabian nation. See ARABIA.
ISHTOB, a country situated at the northern extremity of the mountains of
Gilead, toward Mount Libanus, 2 Sam. x, 6. See TOB.
ISRAEL, a prince of God, or prevailing, or wrestling with God. This is
the name which the angel gave Jacob, after having wrestled with him all
night at Mahanaim, or Peniel, Genesis xxxii, 1, 2, 28, 29, 30; Hosea
xii, 4. By the name of Israel is sometimes understood the person of
Jacob, sometimes the whole people of Israel, the whole race of Jacob;
sometimes the kingdom of Israel, or ten tribes, distinct from the
kingdom of Judah; and finally, the spiritual Israel, the true church of
God.
ISRAELITES, the descendants of Israel, who were first called Hebrews by
reason of Abraham, who came from the other side of the Euphrates; and
afterward Israelites, from Israel, the father of the twelve tribes; and,
lastly, Jews, particularly after their return from the captivity of
Babylon; because the tribe of Judah was then much stronger and more
numerous than the other tribes, and foreigners had scarcely any
knowledge but of this tribe. See JEWS.
ISSACHAR, the fifth son of Jacob and Leah, Gen. xxx, 14–18. He had four
sons, Tola, Phovah, Job, and Shimron. We know nothing particular of his
life. The tribe of Issachar had its portion in one of the best parts of
the land of Canaan, along the great plain or valley of Jezreel, with the
half tribe of Manasseh to the south, that of Zebulun to the north, the
Mediterranean to the west, and Jordan, with the extremity of the sea of
Tiberias, to the east.
ITHAMAR, Aaron’s fourth son, Exod. vi, 23. There is no probability that
he ever exercised the high priesthood. He and his sons continued in the
rank of simple priests, till this dignity came into his family in the
person of Eli.
ITURÆA, so called from Itur, or Jetur, one of the sons of Ishmael, who
settled in it, but whose posterity were either driven out or subdued by
the Amorites; when it is supposed to have formed a part of the kingdom
of Bashan, and subsequently of the half tribe of Manasseh east of
Jordan; but as it was situated beyond the southern spur of Mount Hermon,
called the Djebel Heish, this is doubtful. It lay on the north-eastern
side of the land of Israel, between it and the territory of Damascus, or
Syria; and is supposed to have been the same country at present known by
the name of Djedour, on the east of the Djebel Heish, between Damascus
and the lake of Tiberias. The Ituræans being subdued by Aristobulus, the
high priest and governor of the Jews, B. C. 106, were forced by him to
embrace the Jewish religion; and were at the same time incorporated into
the state. Philip, one of the sons of Herod the Great, was tetrarch, or
governor, of this country when John the Baptist commenced his ministry.
IVORY. שנבים; from שז, _a tooth_, and הבים, _elephants_; ἐλεφάντινος,
Rev. xviii, 12. The first time that ivory is mentioned in Scripture is
in the reign of Solomon. If the forty-fifth Psalm was written before the
Canticles, and before Solomon had constructed his royal and magnificent
throne, then that contains the first mention of this commodity. It is
spoken of as used in decorating those boxes of perfume, whose odours
were employed to exhilarate the king’s spirits. It is probable that
Solomon, who traded to India, first brought thence elephants and ivory
to Judea. “For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish, with the navy of
Hiram: once in three years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold and
silver, and ivory,” 1 Kings x, 22; 2 Chron. ix, 21. It seems that
Solomon had a throne decorated with ivory, and inlaid with gold; the
beauty of these materials relieving the splendour, and heightening the
lustre of each other, 1 Kings x, 18. Cabinets and wardrobes were
ornamented with ivory, by what is called marquetry, Psalm xlv, 8.
_Quale per artem
Inclusum buxo aut Oricia terebintho
Lucet ebur._
VIRGIL.
“So shines a gem, illustrious to behold,
On some fair virgin’s neck, enchased in gold:
So the surrounding ebon’s darker hue
Improves the polish'd ivory to the view.”
PITT.
These were named “houses of ivory,” probably because made in the form of
a house, or palace; as the silver ναοὶ of Diana, mentioned Acts xix, 24,
were in the form of her temple at Ephesus; and as we have now ivory
models of the Chinese pagodas, or temples. In this sense we may
understand what is said of the ivory house which Ahab made, 1 Kings
xxii, 39; for the Hebrew word translated “_house_ is used,” as Dr.
Taylor well observes, for “a place, or case, wherein any thing lieth, is
contained, or laid up.” Ezekiel gives the name of house to chests of
rich apparel, Ezek. xxvii, 24. Dr. Durell, in his note on Psalm xlv, 8,
quotes places from Homer and Euripides, where the same appropriation is
made. Hesiod makes the same. As to dwelling houses, the most, I think,
we can suppose in regard to them is, that they might have ornaments of
ivory, as they sometimes have of gold, silver, or other precious
materials, in such abundance as to derive an appellation from the
article of their decoration; as the Emperor Nero’s palace, mentioned by
Suetonius, was named _aurea_, or “golden,” because _lita auro_,
“overlaid with gold.” This method of ornamental buildings, or
apartments, was very ancient among the Greeks. Homer mentions ivory as
employed in the palace of Menelaus at Lacedæmon:--
Χαλκοῦ τε στεροπὴν, καδδώματα ἠχήεντα
Χρυσοῦ τ’, ἠλέκτρȣ τε, καὶ ἀργύρȣ ἠ δ’ ἐλέφαντος.
_Odyss._ iv, 72.
“Above, beneath, around the palace, shines
The sumless treasure of exhausted mines;
The spoils of elephants the roof inlay,
And studded amber darts a golden ray.”
Bacchylides, cited by Athenæus, says, that, in the island of Ceos, one
of the Cyclades, the houses of the great men “glister with gold and
ivory.”
JABBOK, a small river which falls into the Jordan below the sea of
Tiberias. Near this brook the angel wrestled with Jacob, Gen. xxxii, 22.
Mr. Buckingham thus describes it: “The banks of this stream are so
thickly wooded with oleander and plane trees, wild olives, and wild
almonds in blossom, with many flowers, the names of which were unknown
to us; with tall and waving reeds, at least fifteen feet in height; that
we could not perceive the water through them from above, though the
presence of these luxuriant borders marked the winding of its course,
and the murmur of its flow, echoing through its long deep channel, was
to be heard distinctly from afar. On this side of the stream, at the
spot where we forded it, was a piece of wall, solidly built upon the
inclined slope, constructed in a uniform manner, though of small stones,
and apparently finished at the end toward the river, so that it never
could have been carried across, as we at first supposed, either for a
bridge, or to close the pass. This was called by the Arabs ‘Shugl beni
Israel,’ or the work of the sons of Israel; but they knew of no other
traditions regarding it. The river, where we crossed it at this point,
was not more than ten yards wide, but it was deeper than the Jordan, and
nearly as rapid; so that we had some difficulty in fording it. As it ran
in a rocky bed, its waters were clear, and we found their taste
agreeable.”
JABESH, or JABESH-GILEAD, the name of a city in the half tribe of
Manasseh, east of Jordan. Naash, king of the Ammonites, besieged it, 1
Sam. xi, 1, &c. The inhabitants were friendly to Saul and his family, 1
Sam. xxxi, 11, 12.
JACHIN, the name of a pillar in Solomon’s temple, 1 Kings vii, 21. See
BOAZ.
JACOB, the son of Isaac and Rebekah. He was the younger brother of Esau,
and a twin. It was observed, that at his birth he held his brother
Esau’s heel, and for this reason was called Jacob, Gen. xxv, 26, which
signifies “he supplanted.” Jacob was of a meek and peaceable temper, and
loved a quiet pastoral life; whereas Esau was of a fierce and turbulent
nature, and was fond of hunting. Isaac had a particular fondness for
Esau; but Rebekah was more attached to Jacob. The manner in which Jacob
purchased his brother’s birthright for a mess of pottage, and supplanted
him by obtaining Isaac’s blessing, is already referred to in the article
ESAU.
The events of the interesting and chequered life of Jacob are so plainly
and consecutively narrated by Moses, that they are familiar to all; but
upon some of them a few remarks may be useful. As to the purchase of the
birthright, Jacob appears to have been innocent so far as any guile on
his part or real necessity from hunger on the part of Esau is involved
in the question; but his obtaining the ratification of this by the
blessing of Isaac, though agreeable, indeed, to the purpose of God, that
the elder should serve the younger, was blamable as to the means
employed. The remarks of Dr. Hales on this transaction implicate Isaac
also:--Thirty-seven years after, when Jacob was seventy-seven years old,
according to Abulfaragi, and Isaac a hundred and thirty-seven, when he
was old, and his sight had failed, and he expected soon to die, his
partiality for Esau led him to attempt to set aside the oracle, and the
cession of Esau’s birthright to Jacob, by conferring on him the blessing
of Abraham, in reward for bringing him savoury venison to eat, before
his death. In this design, however, he was disappointed by the artifice
of Rebekah, who dressed her favourite Jacob in his brother’s clothes,
and made him personate Esau, and thereby surreptitiously obtained for
him the blessing: “Let people serve thee, and nations bow down to thee:
be lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother’s sons bow down to thee:
cursed be every one that curseth thee, and blessed be he that blesseth
thee,” Gen. xxvii, 1–29. It is remarkable that, notwithstanding the
agitation of Isaac, when “he trembled very exceedingly,” at the
detection of the fraud, he did not attempt to rescind the blessing, nor
transfer it to Esau; but, on the contrary, confirmed it on Jacob: “Yea,
and he shall be blessed.” His wishes were overruled and controlled by
that higher power which he vainly endeavoured to counteract; and that he
spoke as the Spirit gave him utterance, appears from his prediction
respecting Esau’s family: “And it shall come to pass, when thou shalt
have the dominion, that thou shalt break thy brother’s yoke from off thy
neck,” Gen. xxvii, 40; which was fulfilled in the days of Jehoram, king
of Judah, when “the Edomites revolted from under the dominion of Judah,
and made themselves a king unto this day,” 2 Chron. xxi, 8–10.
According to this view, all the parties were more or less culpable;
Isaac, for endeavouring to set aside the oracle which had been
pronounced in favour of his younger son; but of which he might have an
obscure conception; Esau, for wishing to deprive his brother of the
blessing which he had himself relinquished; and Rebekah and Jacob, for
securing it by fraudulent means, not trusting wholly in the Lord. That
their principal object, however, was the spiritual part of the blessing,
and not the temporal, was shown by the event. For Jacob afterward
reverenced Esau as his elder brother, and insisted on Esau’s accepting a
present from his band in token of submission, Gen. xxxiii, 3–15. Esau
also appears to have possessed himself of his father’s property during
Jacob’s long exile. But though the intention of Rebekah and Jacob might
have been free from worldly or mercenary motives, they ought not to have
done evil that good might come. And they were both severely punished in
this life for their fraud, which destroyed the peace of the family, and
planted a mortal enmity in the breast of Esau against his brother: “Is
he not rightly named Jacob?” _a supplanter_; “for he hath supplanted me
these two times: he took away my birthright, and lo, now he hath taken
away my blessing. The days of mourning for my father are at hand; then
will I slay my brother Jacob,” Gen. xxvii, 36–41. And there can be
little doubt of his intention of executing his threat, when he came to
meet him on his return, with such an armed force as strongly alarmed
Jacob’s fears, had not God changed the spirit of Esau into mildness, so
that “he ran to meet Jacob, and fell on his neck, and they wept,” Gen.
xxxiii, 4. Rebekah, also, was deprived of the society of her darling
son, whom “she sent away for one year,” as she fondly imagined, “until
his brother’s fury should turn away,” Genesis xxvii, 42–44; but whom she
saw no more; for she died during his long exile of twenty years, though
Isaac survived, Gen. xxxv, 27. Thus was “she pierced through with many
sorrows.” Jacob, also, had abundant reason to say, “Few and evil have
been the days of the years of my pilgrimage,” Gen. xlvii, 9. Though he
had the consolation of having the blessing of Abraham voluntarily
renewed to him by his father, before he was forced to fly from his
brother’s fury, Gen. xxviii, 1–4, and had the satisfaction of obeying
his parents in going to Padan-aram, or Charran, in quest of a wife of
his own kindred, Gen. xxviii, 7; yet he set out on a long and perilous
journey of six hundred miles and upward, through barren and inhospitable
regions, unattended and unprovided, like a pilgrim, indeed, with only
his staff in his hand, Gen. xxxii, 10. And though he was supported with
the assurance of the divine protection, and the renewal of the blessing
of Abraham by God himself, in his remarkable vision at Bethel, and
solemnly devoted himself to his service, wishing only for food and
raiment, and vowing to profess the worship of God, and pay tithe unto
him should he return back in peace, Gen. xxviii, 10–22; yet he was
forced to engage in a tedious and thankless servitude of seven years, at
first for Rachel, with Laban, who retaliated upon him the imposition he
had practised on his own father; and substituted Leah, whom he hated,
for Rachel, whom he loved; and thereby compelled him to serve seven
years more; and changed his wages several times during the remainder of
his whole servitude of twenty years; in the course of which, as he
pathetically complained, “the drought consumed him by day, and the frost
by night, and the sleep departed from his eyes,” in watching Laban’s
flocks, Gen. xxxi, 40; and at last he was forced to steal away, and was
only protected from Laban’s vengeance, as afterward from Esau’s, by
divine interposition. Add to these his domestic troubles and
misfortunes; the impatience of his favourite wife, “Give me children, or
I die;” her death in bearing her second son, Benjamin; the rape of his
daughter Dinah; the perfidy and cruelty of her brothers, Simeon and
Levi, to the Shechemites; the misbehaviour of Reuben; the supposed death
of Joseph, his favourite and most deserving son:--these were, all
together, sufficient to have brought down his gray hairs with sorrow to
the grave, had he not been divinely supported and encouraged throughout
the whole of his pilgrimage. For the circumstances which led Jacob into
Egypt, see JOSEPH.
When Jacob, at the invitation of Joseph, went down to Egypt, Joseph
introduced his father to his royal master; and the patriarch, in his
priestly character, blessed Pharaoh, and supplicated the divine favour
for the king. The venerable appearance and the pious demeanour of Jacob
led the monarch to inquire his years; to which he replied, “The days of
the years of my pilgrimage are a hundred and thirty years: few and evil
have the days of the years of my life been; and I have not attained unto
the days of the years of the life of my fathers in the days of their
pilgrimage.” This answer of the patriarch was not the language of
discontent, but the solemn reflection of a man who had experienced a
large share of trouble, and who knew that the whole of human life is
indeed but “a vain show,” Genesis xlvii, 1–10. Jacob spent the remainder
of his days in tranquillity and prosperity, enjoying the society of his
beloved child seventeen years. The close of his life was a happy calm,
after a stormy voyage. The patriarch, perceiving that his dissolution
was near, sent for Joseph, and bound him by a solemn promise to bury him
with his fathers in Canaan. Shortly after this, Jacob was taken ill, and
it being reported to Joseph, he hastened to the bedside of his father,
taking with him his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim. On hearing that his
son was come, Jacob exerted all his strength, and sat up in his bed to
receive him, and to impart that blessing which, in the spirit of
prophecy, he was commissioned to bequeath. He next blessed the infant
children of Joseph; but, as he placed his hands upon their heads, he
crossed them, putting his right upon Ephraim the younger, and his left
upon Manasseh the elder. Joseph wished to correct the mistake of his
father, but Jacob persisted, being guided by a divine impulse; and he
gave to each of the lads a portion in Israel, at the same time declaring
that the younger should be greater than the elder, Gen. xlviii, 22. When
this interview was ended, Jacob caused all his sons to assemble round
his dying bed, that he might inform them what would befall them in the
last days, Gen. xlix, 1, 2. Of all the predictions which he pronounced
with his expiring breath, the most remarkable and the most interesting
is that relating to Judah: “The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor
a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall
the gathering of the people be,” Gen. xlix, 10. One grand personage was
in the mind of the patriarch, as it had been in the contemplation of his
predecessors, even the illustrious Deliverer who should arise in after
ages to redeem his people, and bring salvation to the human race. The
promised Seed was the constant object of faithful expectation; and all
the patriarchal ordinances, institutions, and predictions, had an
allusion, positive or incidental, to the Messiah. Hitherto the promise
was confined generally to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, that from them the
glorious blessing should arise; but now, under the divine direction, the
dying patriarch foretels in what tribe, and at what period, the great
Restorer shall come. The sovereign authority was to continue in the
possession of Judah, till from that tribe Shiloh should appear, and then
the royalty must cease. This was fulfilled; for the tribe of Judah
possessed legislative power till the time of Christ, and from that
period the Jewish people have neither had dominion nor priesthood. Jesus
Christ, therefore, must either be the true Shiloh, or the prophecy has
failed; for the Jews cannot prove that they have had any thing like
temporal power since his crucifixion. When they were so clamorous for
the execution of Jesus, and Pilate told them to take the law into their
own hands, they shrunk fearfully from the proposal, and acknowledged
their slavish state by saying, “It is not lawful for us to put any man
to death,” John xviii, 31. Here, then, we have a glorious proof of the
veracity of Scripture, and an incontestible evidence of the truth of our
religion.