Isaiah 42:25

וַיִּשְׁפֺּ֤ךְ עָלָיו֨ חֵמָה֣ אַפּ֔וֹ וֶעֱז֖וּז מִלְחָמָה֑ וַתְּלַהֲטֵ֤הוּ מִסָּבִיב֙ וְלֺ֣א יָדָ֔ע וַתִּבְעַר־בּ֖וֹ וְלֹא־יָשִׂי֥ם עַל־לֵבֽ׃

25 So he poured out the fury of his anger and the strength of battle, and it set him on fire all around, but he did not understand. It burned him but he did not take it to heart.

Two synonymously parallel thoughts end the chapter, like one of Shakespeare's scene-ending couplets. Here we are reminded that disaster would not fall on Israel because of Babylon's ingenuity or strength, and not because their gods were stronger than the true God, but because the Lord was chastising his people; hardening the hard-hearted and turning the repentant back to faith and forgiveness.

וַיִּשְׁפֹּךְ עָלָיו חֵמָה אַפּוֹ So he poured out the fury of his anger וַיִּשְׁפֹּךְ is a qal waw-consecutive imperfect, here stating the conclusion of what has already been said ("So..."). עָלָיו from עַל means "upon" or "down, out." חֵמָה אַפּוֹ is the common Old Testament phrase "the heat of his nose," a reference to the anger of God. Sometimes God's nose וֵיִּחַר "becomes hot" (Genesis 39:19; Num. 11:1) and sometimes it is a "hot nose" as it is here. My sons have learned that an audible sigh coming from dad means that he is fuming inside (my sister-in-law calls it the "Smith Sigh"). Mp: וַיִּשְׁפֹּךְ occurs twice as a waw-consecutive imperfect (cf. 2 Sam. 20:10), protecting it against similar forms (1 Kg. 13:5; Daniel 11:15).

וֶעֱזוּז מִלְחָמָה and the fierceness of battle, עֱזוּז is "strength," and in connection with "battle" (מִלְחָמָה) means "fierceness, ferocity." This also the term for "mighty" in Psalm 24:8, "The LORD strong and mighty, the LORD mighty in battle." Mp: The construct form וֶעֱזוּז occurs twice (Psalm 145:6; Isaiah 42:25).

וַתְּלַהֲטֵהוּ מִסָּבִיב וְלֹא יָדָע and it set him on fire all around, but he did not understand. The piel waw-consecutive imperfect of לָהַט is impersonal here, "it" being the fire itself. סָבַב "encircled" is an adverb. וְלֹא יָדָע "but he did not understand" is the sad testimony of a heart turning away from the Lord to unbelief. An Mp note with some homiletical value tells us that וְלֹא יָדָע "but he did not understand" occurs eleven times: Gen 19:33; 19:35; 31:32; 39:6; Lev 5:17; Deut 34:6; Isaiah 42:25; Job 35:15; Prov. 7:23; 9:18; Eccl. 6:5.

Weil marked the other Mp note sub loco, meaning he wanted to create an explanatory note but did not complete the task before his death. The note says that this is the only time יָדָע occurs with zaqef lengthening the vowel in pause to qames, but that every time this form is the name of a man it is written like this (with qames). I cannot find fault with the Mp note as it is written here; this is the only place where zaqef causes a pausal form of יָדַע. The man's name occurs in 1 Chr. 2:28; 2:32. Atnach (Eccl. 6:5) and silluq (Jer. 41:4) also lengthen the verb in pause (both forms occur in Hosea 7:9).

וַתִּבְעַר־בּוֹ וְלֹא־יָשִׂים עַל־לֵב It burned him but he did not take it to heart. וַתִּבְעַר qal waw-consecutive imperfect from בָּעַר "burn, consume," similarly to the way אכל can describe fire consuming or eating its material (Exodus 3:2). Paul Raabe pointed out that בָּעַר takes an object with -בְּ just as דלק can (cf. Anchor Bible Obadiah p. 248). "He did not take it to heart" is a bell that tolls for sinful mankind throughout history. It's still tolling today.