ews also,"--remarks _Koecher_--"who have to make up for the defect
of compound verbs by the varied use of simple verbs?" But the Prophet
had a special reason, in the liberty specially afforded by the higher
style, for deviating from the ordinary connection. The [Hebrew: el] had
to be avoided, because, had it been put, the perception of the
correspondence of the subsequent [Hebrew: eliv] with the [Hebrew:
eliK], in ver. 14, would have become more difficult.--2. It is asserted
that it is against the connection; that the contrast to [Hebrew: mwM]
induces us to expect something corresponding. _Beck_ says: "A change in
those who formerly abhorred the Servant is to be expressed here, not _a
deed by the Servant himself_." If there were here, indeed, a contrast
intended to the many who formerly were shocked, we might answer that,
indirectly, the words: "He shall sprinkle," suggest, indeed, an
opposite conduct of the "many Gentiles." No one is cleansed by the
Servant of God, who does not allow himself to be cleansed by [Pg 271]
Him. But no one will desire to be cleansed by Him, who does not put his
whole trust in Him, who does not recognize Him as his King and Lord. To
the contempt and horror with which the Jews shrink back from the
Messiah in His humiliation, would thus be opposed the faithful, humble
confidence, with which the heathens draw near to the glorified Messiah.
But the fact that the real contrast to the [Hebrew: wmmv] is not
[Hebrew: izh], but rather [Hebrew: iqpcv], is clearly shown by [Hebrew:
eliv], which corresponds with [Hebrew: eliK]. The [Hebrew: izh]
corresponds rather to: "He was disfigured." Just as this states the
cause of their being shocked, so in: "He shall sprinkle," the cause of
the shutting of the mouth is stated. This is also seen from a
comparison of chap. liii. 3, 4. His sufferings appeared formerly as the
proof that He was hated by God. Now that the vicarious value of His
suffering manifests itself, it becomes the reason of humble, respectful
submission. Just as, formerly, many were shocked at Him, because he was
so disfigured, so, now, even kings shall shut their mouth at Him on
account of His atonement. Moreover, one does not exactly see how this
reason could be brought forward, as, in a formal point of view, there
is, at all events, "a deed by the Servant himself" before us, in
whatever way we may view the [Hebrew: izh].--3. "If _sprinkling_ were
meant to be equivalent to cleansing by blood, the