mark the commencement and the close of the prophecies in Isaiah, and an indication of such a natural division throws material light cu the prophecy itself. The proper divisions have been indicated above. That division has been made also in the translation in this work, and is shown by the figures which occur at the commencement of each prophetic portion. These divisions are also indicated by the word VISION Occurring at the commencement of each such section; though neither that word, nor the word prophecy or oracle, expresses precisely the idea respecting the contents of all these portions. As the word vision, however, occurs in the general title to the whole book (ch. i. 1), it was thought best to use that to mark the beginning of each section.

§ 5. THE HISTORICAL WRITINGS OF ISAIAH.

It is evident that Isaiah wrote more than we have in the book which bears his name. In 2 Chron. xxvi. 22, it is said, "Now the rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last, did Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, write." But the only portion of the book of Isaiah which can with any certainty be referred to the time of Uzziah is chapter vi. And even if, as we may suppose, the five previous chapters are to be referred to his time. yet they contain no historical statement; no record of public events sufficient to constitute a history of "the acts of Uzziah, first and last." It is therefore morally certain that there were other writings of Isaiah which we have not in this collection of his prophecies.

Again, in 2 Chron. xxxii. 32, it is said, "Now the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and his goodness, behold, they are written in the vision of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz." In the book of Isaiah we have a record of some very important events connected with the life of Hezekiah. See chs. xxxvi.-xxxix. But there is no formal record of the events of the early part of his reign, or of his death. What is said relates to the invasion of Sennacherib (chs. xxxvi. xxxvii.); to the sickness and recovery of Hezekiah (ch. xxxviii.); and to the visit of the embassadors from Babylon, ch. xxxix. But this would scarcely deserve to be called a record, or history of his "acts," and his "goodaess" (marg. kindnesses); that is, his doings or plans of beneficence to promote the happiness and piety of his people. It is not, however, on this passage so much that reliance is to be placed to prove that he wrote other documents, as on the passage quoted from 2 Kings.

In regard to these historical records which are not now found in the book of Isaiah, there can be but two opinions.

(1.) One is, that they are lost; that they formed a part of the record of his times which was then of value, and which was lost when more full and complete records were made in the books of Kings and Chronicles. Many such writings are mentioned which are now lost, or which are not found under the names of their authors. Thus we have accounts of the writings of Gad, and Iddo the Seer, and Nathan, and the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilomite, and the book of Jehu (1 Chron xxix. 29. 2 Chron. ix. 29. xx. 34. 1 Kings xvi. 1); all of which are now

jost, unless they have come down to us under some other name. Nor is there any improbability that some portions of the once inspired writings are lost. They may have been inspired to accomplish a certain object; and when that object was gained, they may have been lost or destroyed as not 'arther necessary, or as superseded by superior clearness of revelation. No man can tell why it should be regarded as more improbable that divine communications which are written should be lost when they have accomplished their purpose, than it is that divine communications spoken should be lost. In the mere act of writing there is no peculiar sacredness that should make it necessary to preserve it. And yet no one can doubt (comp. John xxi. 25) that a very large portion of what our blessed Lord spoke, who always spoke inspired truth, is now irrecoverably lost. It never was recorded; and there can be no impropriety in supposing that portions of truth that have been recorded have likewise perished. The whole Bible will be consumed in the conflagration of the last day-but truth will live. God has preserved, with remarkable care, as much truth as he saw was necessary to illuminate and edify his church to the end of time. There is, however, no indispensable necessity of supposing that in fact any part of the sacred record has been destroyed. For,

(2.) The records which were made by Isaiah, Iddo, Nathan, Ahijah, &c., may have been public documents that were laid up in the archives of the state, and that were subsequently incorporated into the historical books which we now have. It is probable that the history of each reign was recorded by a prophet, a scribe, or a historiographer. See Note, Isa. xxxvi. 3. From the following extract from the travels of Mr. Bruce, it is evident that such an officer is known in modern times as attached to a court. The extract will also be descriptive of the duties of such an officer, and perhaps may be regarded as descriptive of some of the functions discharged by the prophets. "The king has near his person an officer who is meant to be his HISTORIOGRAPHER. He is also keeper of his seal; and is obliged to make a journal of the king's actions, good or bad, without comment of his own upon them. This, when the king dies, or at least soon after, is delivered to the council, who read it over, and erase every thing false in it, whilst they supply every material fact that may have been omitted, whether purposely or not." Travels, vol. ii. p. 596. Such a record is also kept of all the sayings and purposes of the Emperor of China by an officer appointed for this purpose. It is carefully made, and sealed up during his life, and is not opened until he dies. This is regarded in that empire as an important public security that the Emperor will say or do nothing that he will be unwilling should be known by posterity. See Edin. Ency., Art. China. It would seem probable, therefore, that this is an oriental custom extensively prevalent. There is every reason to believe that a part of these royal biographies, or records of important events in each reign, were written by prophets. See the Analysis of Isa. xxxvi. These records would be deposited in the archives of state, and would be regarded as authentic documents, and placed under the custody of proper officers. When the connected history of the nation came to be written; when the books of the

"Kings" and the "Chronicles" were composed, nothing would b more natural than to take these documents or historical records, and arrange and embody them as a part of the sacred history. They may have been incorporated entire into the narratives which we now have; and the name of the writer simply referred to as the authority for the document, or to preserve the recollection of the original author of each fragment or part of the history. This I regard as by far the most probable supposition; and if this be correct, then we have still substantially the portions of history which were composed by Isaiah, Gad, &c., and they have been, with perhaps some slight changes necessary to constitute a continuous narrative, or to supply some omissions, incorporated into the historical records which we now possess. These requisite changes may have been made by Ezra when the canon of the Old Testament was completed. The reasons for this opinion, may be seen more at length in the Analysis of chapter xxxvi.

§ 6. QUOTATIONS OF ISAIAH IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Isaiah refers more fully to the times of the Messiah than any other of the prophets. It is natural, therefore, to expect to find his writings often quoted or appealed to in the New Testament. The frequency of the reference, and the manner in which it is done, will show the estimate in which he was held by the Saviour, and by the apostles. It may also contribute in some degree to the explanation of some of the passages quoted to have them convenient for reference, or for examination. The meaning of Isaiah may be often determined by the inspired statement of the event referred to in the New Testament; and the meaning of a New Testament writer likewise by a reference to the passage which he quotes. In regard to those quotations, also, it may be of use to bear in remembrance that a portion is made directly and literally from the Hebrew, and agrees also with the Septuagint version, or is in the words of the Septuagint; a portion agrees with the Hebrew in sense but not in words; a portion is made from the Septuagint translation even when the Septuagint differs from the Hebrew; and in some cases there is a bare allusion to a passage. It may be useful to furnish a classification of the entire passages which are quoted in the New Testament, under several heads, that they may be seen at one view, and may be compared at leisure. For this selec tion and arrangement, I am mainly indebted to Horne.

ii. p. 343, seq.

Intro. vol.

Mark xv. 28, Luke xxii, 37.
John xii. 38, co np. Rom. x. 18

Rom. xv. 21.

1 Cor. xv. 32.
1 Cor. xv. 54.
2 Cor. vi. 2.
Gal. iv. 27.
Heb. ii. 13.

'II. Quotations nearly agreeing with the Hebrew.

III. Quotations agreeing with the Hebrew in sense,

Isa. xl. 3, 4, 5. Matt. iii. 3. Comp. Mark i. 3.

Isa. xlii. 1-4.

Isa. lix. 7, 8.

Isa. x. 22, 23.

Isa. xlv. 23.

Rom. x. 20, 21.
1 Cor. i. 19.

1 Cor. ii. 16.
1 Cor. xiv. 21.

1 Pet. i. 24, 25.
1 Pet. ii. 22.

1 Pet. ii. 24.

1 Pet. iii. 14, 15.

but not in words.

Luke iii. 4-6.
Matt. xii. 18-21.
Rom. iii. 15-17.

Rom. ix. 27, 28.

Rom. xiv. 11.

Isa. xi. 10.

Isa. lii. 11, 12.

Rom. xv. 12.

2 Cor. vi. 17.

IV. Quotations which give the general sense, but which abridge, or

V. Quotations which are taken from several different places.

VI. Quotations differing from the Hebrew, but agreeing with the Sep

Isa. xxix. 13.

Isa. lv. 3.

tuagint.

Matt. xv. 8, 9.

Acts xiii. 34.

VII. Quotations in which there is reason to suspect a different reading in the Hebrew, or that the words were understood in a sense different from that expressed in our Lexicons.

IX. Quotations made from the Septuagint.

Many of the passages above referred to are made also from the Septuagint, when that version agrees with the Hebrew. I refer here to a few passages which have not been noted before. The Apostles wrote in the Greek language, and for the use of those among whom the Septuagint was extensively used. Occasionally, however, they quoted directly from the Hebrew, that is, made a translation themselves, or quoted according to the general sense. All the quotations that are in accordance with the Septuagint, or that vary from it, may be seen in Horne's Introd. vol. ii. p. 387, 428.

Isa. xlix. 6.
Isa. lxv. 1, 2.

Isa. lii. 15.

Isa. xlix. 8

Isa. xxix. 13.

Isa. lv. 3.

Isa. liii. 12.

Acts xiii. 47.
Rom. x. 20, 21.
Rom. v. 21.

2 Cor. vi. 2.

Matt. xv. 8. 9.

Acts xiii. 34.

Mark xv. 28. Luke xxii. 37.

X. Quotations which differ from the Hebrew, and the Septuagint, and which were perhaps taken from some version or paraphrase, or which were so rendered by the sacred writers themselves.

Isa. ix. 1, 2.
Isa. xlii. 1, 4.

Matt. iv. 15, 16.
Matt. xii. 18, 21.

So numerous are these quotations, and so entirely do the writings of Isaiah harmonize with those of the New Testament, that it may be regarded almost as an indispensable part of the work of explaining the New Testament to explain Isaiah. They seem to be parts of the same work; and an exposition of the apostles and evangelists can hardly be deemed complete without the accompaniment of the evangelical prophet.