Isaiah 66:2

all these things] i.e. the heavens and the earth, the whole visible creation. That the phrase refers to the Jewish community with its religious institutions (Duhm) is a thoroughly unnatural supposition. For have beenread have come into being.

but to thisman will I look( have regard) &c. Cf. ch. Isaiah 57:15.

contriteis lit. "smitten"; it is the same word which is rendered "broken" or "wounded" (of the spirit) in Proverbs 15:13; Proverbs 17:22; Proverbs 18:14. In all the other passages where "contrite" is found in the E.V. (ch. Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 34:18; Psalms 51:17) it represents a formation from another root, meaning "to be crushed."

trembleth at my word Cf. Isaiah 66:5; Ezra 9:4; Ezra 10:3.

These two verses contain one of the most explicit declarations of the spirituality of religion to be found in the O.T., anticipating the principle enunciated by our Lord in John 4:24. It is not surprising that commentators have differed widely as to their precise significance in their present connexion. (1) The opinion of a few writers, that the prophet enters a protest against the rebuilding of the Temple at Jerusalem and desiderates a pure spiritual worship without sanctuary or sacrifice, is quite untenable. It is certain that no conception that would lead to a disparaging estimate of the Temple and its services can be attributed either to the second Isaiah or to any of his successors. (see to the contrary, ch. Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 56:5; Isaiah 56:7; Isaiah 60:7; Isaiah 66:6; Isaiah 66:20 f. &c.) The idea suggested lies entirely beyond the most spiritual writers in the O.T.; and in the passages most nearly akin to this (e.g. Psalms 40:6; Psalms 50:8-15; Psalms 51:16 f.) there is no suggestion that a material sanctuary and ritual could be dispensed with. (2) Hitzig and some others have supposed a reference to a project entertained by some of the exiles to erect a Temple of Jehovah in Babylonia. Not only, however, is the assumption absolutely destitute of historical evidence, but it is almost incredible that such an intention should have entered the thoughts of any Jews in exile. (3) If the passage was written in the near prospect of a return to Palestine, there is but one explanation which is at all plausible. The prophet is thinking of the characterof the mass of the people who are eagerly looking forward to the restoration of the national worship; and he warns them that Jehovah needsno temple, and that their whole service of Him will be vitiated by the want of a right religious disposition. In other words, the polemic is directed not against the existence of the Temple in itself, but against the building of it being undertaken by such men as those addressed. (4) If, on the other hand, the prophecy was written some time after the restoration, it seems impossible to evade the conclusion reached by Duhm and Cheyne, that the reference is to a design of the Samaritans to erect a rival temple to that of Jerusalem. This theory is perhaps less improbable than it may at first sight appear. In the first place we know that such a temple was actually erected on Mt. Gerizim some time after Nehemiah's second reformation in Judæa (see Ryle's note on Nehemiah 13:28); and it is to be supposed that the project had been talked of for some time previously. Nor is it any formidable objection to say that the argument here employed would tell equally against the pretensions of the sanctuary at Jerusalem. The prophet's assertion must in any case be qualified by the fundamental principle of the Jewish religion that the validity of every act of worship rests on the positive enactment of Jehovah. While Jehovah needs no human service, He is graciously pleased to accept it if rendered in accordance with His expressed will. Now this sanction had been bestowed on the one sanctuary at Jerusalem, but could not possibly belong to any temple built elsewhere. The erection of such a temple could only be justified on the assumption that man could arbitrarily assign a dwelling-place to the Most High, and to show the futility of this assumption is the purpose of the prophet's lofty declaration. The question turns largely on the interpretation of Isaiah 66:3. If that verse is rightly understood to mean that the worship of the parties spoken of was really infected by degrading superstitions, it may well be that the persons described are the Samaritans, and in that case it will follow almost of necessity that these are also addressed in Isaiah 66:1. At the same time, it must be admitted that if the erection of a schismatic Temple were referred to, we should have expected a much more explicit and vigorous condemnation of the project.