He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
He was taken from prison and from judgment - rather, 'He was taken, away (i:e., cut off, answering to the following, 'He was cut off out of the land of the living') BY (through) oppression and BY (through) a judicial sentence:' a hendiad for 'by an oppressive judicial sentence' (Lowth and Hengstenberg). The Hebrew particle min (H4480) expresses sometimes the starting point from which a thing takes its rise: from, owing to, through. Gesenius, not so well, 'He was delivered from oppression and punishment' only by death. The English version also translates, "from ... from," not 'by ... by.' So the Vulgate, 'de augustia et de judicio sublatus. est.' The Syriac also supports the English version. But "prison" is not true of Jesus who was not incarcerated; restraint and bonds (John 18:24) more accord with the Hebrew х `otser (H6115) - literally, shutting up, or restraint, from `aatsar (H6113), to restrain]. Acts 8:33 translates as the Septuagint: "In His humiliation His is judgment ( krisis (G2920), legal trial) was taken away" - the virtual sense of the Hebrew, as rendered by Lowth, and sanctioned by the inspired writer of Acts. The same Hebrew in Psalms 107:39, mee`otser (H6115), is translated "through oppression." He was treated as one so mean that a fair trial was denied Him (Matthew 26:59; Mark 14:55-59). Both His betrayer and His judge declared His innocence. The Hebrew, laquach, is used of taking away by a violent death (Jeremiah 15:15; Ezekiel 24:16). Jerome explained it of Christ's being taken up to glory.
Who shall declare his generation? (Hebrew, dowrow (H1755)) - who can set forth (the wickedness of) His generation? i:e., of His contemporaries (Alford on Acts 8:33), which suits best the parallelism, 'the wickedness of his generation' corresponding to 'oppressive judgment.' But Luther, 'His length of life' - i:e., there shall be no end of His future days (Isaiah 53:10; Romans 6:9). Calvin includes the days of His Church, which is inseparable from Himself. Hengstenberg, 'His posterity.' He, indeed, shall be cut off, but His race - i:e., His spiritual seed, shall be so numerous that none can fully declare it. Chrysostom, etc., 'His eternal Sonship and miraculous incarnation.' But the clauses both before and after refer to His humiliation, not to His subsequent eternity of days, which is not stated until Isaiah 53:10.
For he was cut off - implying a violent death (Daniel 9:26).
For the transgression of my people - Isaiah, including himself among them by the word "my" (Hengstenberg). Rather, Yahweh (H3068) speaks in the person of His prophet, "my people," by the election of grace (Hebrews 2:13).
Was he stricken - Hebrew, 'the stroke (was laid) upon Him.' Gesenius says that the Hebrew, laamow (H3807a), means them; the collective body, whether of the prophets or people, to which the Jews refer the whole prophecy. But Jerome, the Syriac and Ethiopic versions translate it Him. So virtually the Septuagint (eechthee eis thanatou). So the suffix (-mow) is singular in some passages: Psalms 11:7, His; Job 27:23, Him; Isaiah 44:15, thereto. Perhaps the Septuagint for the Hebrew, laamow (H3807a), 'upon Him,' read the similar words, lamawet (H4194), 'unto death;' which would at once set aside the Jewish interpretation, 'upon them.' Origen, who laboriously compared the Hebrew with the Septuagint, so read it, and urged it against the Jews of his day, who would have denied it to be the true reading if the word had not then really so stood in the Hebrew text (Lowth). Messiah was the representative of the collective body of all men; hence, the equivocal plural-singular form, laamow (H3807a).