felled tree,--a fact which has for its ground the
sinking of the [Pg 104] Davidic race which is here announced. We
farther direct attention to the circumstance that in our prophecy
itself, Israel's being carried away into all the countries of the earth
is foreseen as future,--a circumstance which is so much the more
analogous, that there also, as here, the foreknowledge clothes itself
in the form of the _supposition_ and not of express announcement. With
regard to the latter point, it may still be remarked that Amos also, in
chap. ix. 11, by speaking of the raising up of the tabernacle of David
which is fallen, anticipates its future lowliness.--The question still
arises:--Why is it that the Messiah is here designated as a rod of
Jesse, while elsewhere, His origin is commonly traced back to David?
_Umbreit_ is of opinion that the mention of Jesse may be explained from
the Prophet's desire to trace the pedigree as far back as possible; in
its apparent extinction, the family of the Messiah was to be pointed
out as a _very old_ one. But if this had been his intention, he would
have gone back beyond Jesse to the older ancestors whom the Book of
Ruth mentions; and if he had been so anxious to honour the family of
the Messiah, it would, at all events, have been far more suitable to
mention David than Jesse, who was only one degree removed from him. The
sound view has been long ago given by Calvin, who says: "The Prophet
does not mention David; but rather Jesse. For so much was the dignity
of that family diminished, that it seemed to be a rustic, ignoble
family rather than a royal one." It was appropriate that that family,
upon whom was a second time to be fulfilled the declaration in Ps.
cxiii. 7, 8: "He raiseth up the poor out of the dust; He lifteth up
the needy out of the dunghill, that He may set him with princes,
with the princes of His people,"--in which, the second time, the
transition should take place from the low condition to the royal
dignity, should not be mentioned according to its royal, but according
to its rustic character. This explanation of the fact is confirmed by
the circumstance that it agrees exceedingly well with the right
interpretation of [Hebrew: gze]: Jesse is mentioned and not David,
because the Davidic dignity had become a [Hebrew: gze]. The mention of
Jesse's name thus explained, agrees, then, with the birth of Christ at
Bethlehem, announced by Isaiah's cotemporary, Micah. Christ was to be
born a