ly, strongly, [Pg 334] and distinctly, if his
intention was to state the doctrine of substitution; and those who
undertake to explain it away, would not, by so doing, leave any thing
firm and certain in Scripture. _Rosenmueller_ (_Gabler's_ Journal, ii.
S. 365), _Gesenius_, _Hitzig_ have indeed candidly confessed that the
passage contained the doctrine of vicarious satisfaction, after
_Alshech_ had, among the Jews, given the honour to truth.

IV. EXAMINATION OF THE NON-MESSIANIC INTERPRETATIONS.

Passing over mere whims, three explanations present themselves which
require a closer examination, viz.--(1), that which makes the whole
Jewish people the subject; (2), that which refers it to the godly
portion of the Jewish people; and (3), that which refers it to the
collective body of the Prophets. The following reasons militate against
all the three interpretations simultaneously.

1. According to them, the contents of the section in question present
themselves as a mere _fancy_; and its principal thought, the vicarious
suffering of the Servant of God is an absurdity. According to them, the
prophets can no longer be considered as godly men who spake as they
were moved by the Holy Spirit; and their name [Hebrew: nbia], by which
they claimed divine inspiration, is a mere pretence. And this
reflection is, at the same time, cast upon the Lord, who, throughout,
treats these visionaries as organs of immediate divine communications.

2. According to all the three explanations, the subject is not a real
person, but an ideal one, a personified collective. But not one sure
analogous instance can be quoted in favour of a personification carried
on through a whole section, without the slightest intimation, that it
is not a single individual who is spoken of. In ver. 3, the subject is
called [Hebrew: aiw]; in vers. 10 and 12 a soul is ascribed to Him;
grave and death are used so as to imply a subject in the Singular.
Scripture never leaves any thing to be guessed. If we had an allegory
before us, distinct hints as to the interpretation would certainly [Pg
335] not be wanting. It is, _e.g._, quite different in those passages
where the Prophet designates Israel by the name of the Servant of the
Lord. In them, all uncertainty is prevented by the addition of the
names of Jacob and Israel, xli. 8, 9; xliv. 1, 2, 21; xlv. 4; xlviii.
20; and in them, moreover, the Prophet uses the Plural by the side of
the Singular, to int