Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Isaiah 7:1
And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, [that] Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it.
1. The genealogy of Ahaz seems unnecessary for the contemporaries of Isaiah, although it might be given to connect the passage with ch. Isa 6:1. The latter part of the verse closely resembles 2Ki 16:5; and it is not improbable that the data were supplied by an editor from the historical book, in order to make the circumstances intelligible to later generations of readers. Originally the introduction may have run: “And in the days of Ahaz it was reported to the house of David,” &c.
to war against it, but could not prevail against it ] lit. to fight against it but were unable to fight against it. From 2Ki 16:5 we learn that the city was blockaded. It was the object of the allies to take it by assault, but in this they were baffled, either by reason of the strength of the place, or because they were compelled to raise the siege. “Fight” means “fight at close quarters” as 2Sa 11:20 compared with Isa 7:1.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
In the days of Ahaz – Ahaz began to reign about 738 years before Christ. By a comparison of 2Ki 16:5, …, with 2Ch 28:5, etc., it will be seen that Judea was twice invaded by Rezin and Pekah in the reign of Ahaz; see the Analysis of the chapter.
That Rezin … – This confederacy was formed in the time of Jotham; 2Ki 15:37. But it was not carried into execution during his reign. It is evident from this place, that it was executed in the early part of the reign of Ahaz; probably in the first or second year of his reign.
Syria – – ‘aram, so called from Aram Gen 10:22-23, a son of Shem, and who populated its chief provinces. It comprehended the country lying between the Euphrates east, the Mediterranean west, Cilicia north, and Phenicia, Judea, and Arabia south; see the notes at Isa 17:1-14. Syria of the two rivers is Mesopotamia. Syria of Damascus, so called because Damascus was its capital, extended eastward along Mount Libanus, but its limits varied according to the power of the princes of Damascus. After the reign of the Seleucidae, Syria came to denote the kingdom or region of which Antioch was the capital. Here it denotes the Syria lying around Damascus, and of which Damascus was the capital. – Calmet.
King of Israel – Of the ten tribes, called the kingdom of Israel, or Samaria; Note, Isa 1:1.
Went up – Jerusalem was situated on hills, and on the highest part of the land. But it is possible that this language is derived from the fact that it was the capital. The language is used even when the region from which the traveler comes does not lie lower than the city. Thus it is not uncommon to speak of going up to London, Paris, etc.
Could not prevail – Hebrew, Could not fight against it, that is, with happy result, or with success. He was not able to take it. That the allied kings really besieged Ahaz, is evident from 2Ki 16:5 : They came up to Jerusalem to war, and they besieged Ahaz, but they could not overcome him. The reason why they could not take Jerusalem was, probably, not only because it was a strong place and well defended, but because there was intelligence that their own dominions were threatened with an invasion by the Assyrians, and they could not protract their siege of Jerusalem long enough to take it.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Isa 7:1-9
Rezin . . . and Pekah . . . went up toward Jerusalem to war against it
The confederacy against Jerusalem
The reason of this war is not stated: but from the desire of those kings to dethrone Ahaz, and place on the throne in Jerusalem another, even Ben Tabeal, it may be inferred that
Ahaz refused to join these two powers in a general rising against Assyria.
Obviously, Ahaz was well advised in not taking a step of such decided opposition to Nineveh: for had he done so, the legions of that empire would only have spread desolation in Judah twenty or thirty years earlier than they did. To a certain extent, the policy commended by Isaiah was adopted: Ahaz did not take up his stand against Assyria. The prophet, of course, wanted more. For he urged an absolute and complete neutrality, in which Ahaz would have nothing at all to do with this power. So far as
Ahaz acted on the prophets advice, he was successful: for this confederacy against Jerusalem proved a failure. (B. Blake, B. D.)
Ahaz and Isaiah, a contrast
Ahaz is timid and helpless, takes no position, and displays no promptitude or courage. Isaiah, on the contrary, steps forward with assurance: he is collected and calm: and his complete control of the political situation impresses us forcibly. (Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.)
Isaiahs interview with Ahaz
At the date of Isaiahs interview with
Ahaz the application to Assyria was meditated, but not actually carried into effect. To understand this interview two things must be borne in mind.
Firstly, Isaiah is aware of the kings intention to solicit aid from Assyria, but it is not openly admitted between them. Secondly, the power and resources of the allied kings, especially of Rezin, so impressed the popular imagination that they were held to be practically invincible; Isaiah views both differently; describes them as smoked out firebrands, and intimates that he considers the terror of the people to be unreasonable. (Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.)
The prophet and the king
God speaks comfort to many who not only are not worthy of it, but do not so much as inquire after it. (M. Henry.)
Unsuccessful attacks upon the Christian stronghold
We can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth: clever arguments, witty retorts, brilliant repartees, criticisms that dazzle by their brightness and exasperate by their acerbity, come and go, and Jerusalem stands, sunlit, fair, invincible. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER VII
The king of Judah and the royal family being in the utmost
consternation on receiving accounts of the invasion of the
kings of Syria and Israel, the prophet is sent to assure them
that God would make good his promises to David and his house;
so that, although they might be corrected, they could not be
destroyed, while these prophecies remained to be accomplished,
1-9.
The Lord gives Ahaz a sign that the confederacy against Judah
shall be broken, which sign strikingly points out the
miraculous conception of the Messiah, who was to spring from
the tribe of Judah, 10-16.
Prediction of very heavy calamities which the Assyrians would
inflict upon the land of Judea, 17-25.
The confederacy of Rezin, king of Syria, and Pekah, king of Israel, against the kingdom of Judah, was formed in the time of Jotham; and perhaps the effects of it were felt in the latter part of his reign; see 2Kg 15:37, and note on Isa 1:7-9. However, in the very beginning of the reign of Ahaz, they jointly invaded Judah with a powerful army, and threatened to destroy or to dethrone the house of David. The king and royal family being in the utmost consternation on receiving advises of their designs, Isaiah is sent to them to support and comfort them in their present distress, by assuring them that God would make good his promises to David and his house. This makes the subject of this, and the following, and the beginning of the ninth chapters, in which there are many and great difficulties.
Chap. vii. begins with an historical account of the occasion of this prophecy; and then follows, Isa 7:4-16, a prediction of the ill success of the designs of the Israelites and Syrians against Judah; and from thence to the end of the chapter, a denunciation of the calamities to be brought upon the king and people of Judah by the Assyrians, whom they had now hired to assist them. Chap. viii. has a pretty close connection with the foregoing; it contains a confirmation of the prophecy before given of the approaching destruction of the kingdoms of Israel and Syria by the Assyrians, of the denunciation of the invasion of Judah by the same Assyrians. Verses 9, 10, Isa 8:9; Isa 8:10, give a repeated general assurance, that all the designs of the enemies of God’s people shall be in the end disappointed and brought to naught; Isa 8:11, &c., admonitions and threatenings, (I do not attempt a more particular explanation of this very difficult part,) concluding with an illustrious prophecy Isa 9:1-6, of the manifestation of Messiah, the transcendent dignity of his character, and the universality and eternal duration of his kingdom.
NOTES ON CHAP. VII
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
In the days of Ahaz, a most wicked king; yet no prophecies are more comfortable than those which were delivered in his time; God so ordering it, partly for the encouragement of the faithful that lived under his tyrannical and impious reign; and partly to manifest the riches and freeness of his grace, in conferring such favours upon a most worthless generation.
To war against it; which they attempted before in Jothams reign, 2Ki 15:37, but now more seriously undertook, though without success, as is noted here, and 2Ki 16:5.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. AhazIn the first years ofhis reign the design of the two kings against Judah was carried out,which was formed in Jotham’s reign (2Ki15:37).
SyriaHebrew, Aram(Gen 10:22; Gen 10:23),originally the whole region between the Euphrates and Mediterranean,including Assyria, of which Syria is an abbreviation;here the region round Damascus, and along Mount Libanus.
JerusalemAn actualsiege of it took place, but was foiled (2Ki16:5).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah king of Judah,…. Here begins a new prophecy under the reign of another king; who, though a wicked king, had religious ancestors; and who are mentioned, not, as the Jewish writers u generally say, because it was owing to their worthiness that the enemies of Ahaz could not prevail against him; but because it was under these kings the prophet had prophesied: what is contained in the first five chapters were delivered in the times of Uzziah; and the vision in the sixth was in the times of Jotham, in the beginning of his reign; and what is said here, and in some following chapters, was in the time of Ahaz; so that this is mentioned to fix and carry on the date of the prophecy:
[that] Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah, the son of Remaliah king of Israel, went up towards Jerusalem to war against it; at the latter end of Jotham’s reign, and the beginning of Ahaz’s; these two separately came up against Judah, and greatly distressed and afflicted the kingdom, slew many, and carried others captive, 2Ki 15:37 but afterwards, in the third w or fourth x year of Ahaz, as it is said, they joined together to besiege Jerusalem, which this refers to, 2Ki 16:5:
but could not prevail against it; or “he could not”; that is, according to Aben Ezra, the king of Israel, Pekah, the son of Remaliah; but, according to Kimchi, it was Rezin king of Syria, who, he says, was the principal in the war, and brought Pekah along with him; but it may very well be understood of them both, since in 2Ki 16:5, the plural number is used; “and they could not”; and so the Septuagint, Vulgate Latin, and Oriental versions here.
u Jarchi & Kimchi in loc. & Yalkut Simeoni, ex Bereshit Rabba, sect. 63. fol. 54. 4. w Yalkut Simeoni in loc. x Seder Olam Rabba, c. 23. p. 85. Jarchi in ver. 14.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
As the following prophecies could not be understood apart from the historical circumstances to which they refer, the prophet commences with a historical announcement. ”It came to pass, in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah ( Uziyhu) , king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Aramaea, and Pekah ( Pekach) the son of Remaliah ( Remalyhu) , king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, and ( he) could not make war upon it.” We have the same words, with only slight variations, in the history of the reign of Ahaz in 2Ki 16:5. That the author of the book of Kings copied them from the book of Isaiah, will be very apparent when we come to examine the historical chapters (36-39) in their relation to the parallel sections of the book of Kings. In the passage before us, the want of independence on the part of the author of the book of Kings is confirmed by the fact that he not only repeats, but also interprets, the words of Isaiah. Instead of saying, “And (he) could not make war upon it,” he says, “And they besieged Ahaz, and could not make war.” The singular yacol (he could) of Isaiah is changed into the simpler plural, whilst the statement that the two allies could not assault or storm Jerusalem (which must be the meaning of nilcham al in the passage before us), is more clearly defined by the additional information that they did besiege Ahaz, but to no purpose ( tzur al , the usual expression for obsidione claudere ; cf., Deu 20:19). The statement that “they besieged Ahaz” cannot merely signify that “they attempted to besiege him,” although nothing further is known about this siege. But happily we have two accounts of the Syro-Ephraimitish war (2 Kings 16 and 2 Chron 28). The two historical books complete one another. The book of Kings relates that the invasion of Judah by the two allies commenced at the end of Jotham’s reign (2Ki 15:37); and in addition to the statement taken from Isa 7:1, it also mentions that Rezin conquered the seaport town of Elath, which then belonged to the kingdom of Judah; whilst the Chronicles notice the fact that Rezin brought a number of Judaean captives to Damascus, and that Pekah conquered Ahaz in a bloody and destructive battle. Indisputable as the credibility of these events may be, it is nevertheless very difficult to connect them together, either substantially or chronologically, in a certain and reliable manner, as Caspari has attempted to do in his monograph on the Syro-Ephraimitish war (1849). We may refer here to our own manner of dovetailing the historical accounts of Ahaz and the Syro-Ephraimitish war in the introduction to the present work (p. 23ff.). If we could assume that (not ) was the authentic reading, and that the failure of the attempt to take Jerusalem, which is mentioned here, was occasioned by the strength of the city itself, and not by the intervention of Assyria – so that Isa 7:1 did not contain such an anticipation as we have supposed, although summary anticipations of this kind were customary with biblical historians, and more especially with Isaiah – the course of events might be arranged in the following manner, viz., that whilst Rezin was on his way to Elath, Pekah resolved to attack Jerusalem, but failed in his attempt; but that Rezin was more successful in his expedition, which was a much easier one, and after the conquest of Elath united his forces with those of his allies.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| The Distress of Ahaz; Comfort Administered to Ahaz. | B. C. 740. |
1 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it. 2 And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind. 3 Then said the LORD unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller’s field; 4 And say unto him, Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither be fainthearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah. 5 Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah, have taken evil counsel against thee, saying, 6 Let us go up against Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal: 7 Thus saith the Lord GOD, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass. 8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people. 9 And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah’s son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.
The prophet Isaiah had his commission renewed in the year that king Uzziah died, ch. vi. 1. Jotham his son reigned, and reigned well, sixteen years. All that time, no doubt, Isaiah prophesied as he was commanded, and yet we have not in this book any of his prophecies dated in the reign of Jotham; but this, which is put first, was in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham. Many excellent useful sermons he preached which were not published and left upon record; for, if all that was memorable had been written, the world could not have contained the books, John xxi. 25. Perhaps in the reign of Ahaz, a wicked king, he had not opportunity to preach so much at court as in Jotham’s time, and therefore then he wrote the more, for a testimony against them. Here is,
I. A very formidable design laid against Jerusalem by Rezin king of Syria and Pekah king of Israel, two neighbouring potentates, who had of late made descents upon Judah severally. At the end of the reign of Jotham, the Lord began to send against Judah Rezin and Pekah, 2 Kings xv. 37. But now, in the second or third year of the reign of Ahaz, encouraged by their former successes, they entered into an alliance against Judah. Because Ahaz, though he found the sword over his head, began his reign with idolatry, God delivered him into the hand of the king of Syria and of the king of Israel (2 Chron. xxviii. 5), and a great slaughter they made in his kingdom, Isa 7:6; Isa 7:7. Flushed with this victory, they went up towards Jerusalem, the royal city, to war against it, to besiege it, and make themselves masters of it; but it proved in the issue that they could not gain their point. Note, The sin of a land brings foreign invasions upon it and betrays the most advantageous posts and passes to the enemy; and God sometimes makes one wicked nation a scourge to another; but judgment, ordinarily, begins at the house of God.
II. The great distress that Ahaz and his court were in when they received advice of this design: It was told the house of David that Syria and Ephraim had signed a league against Judah, v. 2. This degenerate royal family is called the house of David, to put us in mind of that article of God’s covenant with David (Ps. lxxxix. 30-33), If his children forsake my law, I will chasten their transgression with the rod; but my loving-kindness will I not utterly take away, which is remarkably fulfilled in this chapter. News being brought that the two armies of Syria and Israel were joined, and had taken the field, the court, the city, and the country, were thrown into consternation; The heart of Ahaz was moved with fear, and then no wonder that the heart of his people was so, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind. They were tossed and shaken, and put into a great disorder and confusion, were wavering and uncertain in their counsels, hurried hither and thither, and could not fix in any steady resolution. They yielded to the storm, and gave up all for gone, concluding it in vain to make any resistance. Now that which caused this fright was the sense of guilt and the weakness of their faith. They had made God their enemy, and knew not how to make him their friend, and therefore their fears tyrannised over them; while those whose consciences are kept void of offence, and whose hearts are fixed, trusting in God, need not be afraid of evil tidings; though the earth be removed, yet will not they fear; but the wicked flee at the shaking of a leaf, Lev. xxvi. 36.
III. The orders and directions given to Isaiah to go and encourage Ahaz in his distress; not for his own sake (he deserved to hear nothing from God but words of terror, which might add affliction to his grief), but because he was a son of David and king of Judah. God had kindness for him for his father’s sake, who must not be forgotten, and for his people’s sake, who must not be abandoned, but would be encouraged if Ahaz were. Observe,
1. God appointed the prophet to meet Ahaz, though he did not send to the prophet to speak with him, nor desire him to enquire of the Lord for him (v. 3): Go to meet Ahaz. Note, God is often found of those who seek him not, much more will he be found of those who seek him diligently. He speaks comfort to many who not only are not worthy of it, but do not so much as enquire after it.
2. He ordered him to take his little son with him, because he carried a sermon in his name, Shear-jashub–A remnant shall return. The prophets sometimes recorded what they preached in the significant names of their children (as Hos 1:4; Hos 1:6; Hos 1:9); therefore Isaiah’s children are said to be for signs, ch. viii. 18. This son was so called for the encouragement of those of God’s people who were carried captive, assuring them that they should return, at least a remnant of them, which was more than they could pretend to merit; yet at this time God was better than his word; for he took care not only that a remnant should return, but the whole number of those whom the confederate forces of Syria and Israel had taken prisoners, 2 Chron. xxviii. 15.
3. He directed him where he should find Ahaz. He was to meet with him not in the temple, or the synagogue, or royal chapel, but at the end of the conduit of the upper pool, where he was, probably with many of his servants about him, contriving how to order the water-works, so as to secure them to the city, or deprive the enemy of the benefits of them (Isa 22:9-11; 2Ch 32:3; 2Ch 32:4), or giving some necessary directions for the fortifying of the city as well as they could; and perhaps finding every thing in a bad posture or defence, the conduit out of repair, as well as other things gone to decay, his fears increased, and he was now in greater perplexity than ever; therefore, Go, meet him there. Note, God sometimes sends comforts to his people very seasonably, and, what time they are most afraid, encourages them to trust in him.
4. He put words in his mouth, else the prophet would not have known how to bring a message of good to such a bad man, a sinner in Zion, that ought to be afraid; but God intended it for the support of faithful Israelites.
(1.) The prophet must rebuke their fears, and advise them by no means to yield to them, but keep their temper, and preserve the possession of their own souls (v. 4): Take heed, and be quiet. Note, In order to comfort there is need of caution; that we may be quiet, it is necessary that we take heed and watch against those things that threaten to disquiet us. “Fear not with this amazement, this fear, that weakens, and has torment; neither let thy heart be tender, so as to melt and fail within thee; but pluck up thy spirits, have a good heart on it, and be courageous; let not fear betray the succours which reason and religion offer for thy support.” Note, Those who expect God should help them must help themselves, Ps. xxvii. 14.
(2.) He must teach them to despise their enemies, not in pride, or security, or incogitancy (nothing more dangerous than so to despise an enemy), but in faith and dependence upon God. Ahaz’s fear called them two powerful politic princes, for either of whom he was an unequal match, but, if united, he durst not look them in the face, nor make head against them. “No,” says the prophet, “they are two tails of smoking firebrands; they are angry, they are fierce, they are furious, as firebrands, as fireballs; and they make one another worse by being in a confederacy, as sticks of fire put together burn the more violently. But they are only smoking firebrands: and where there is smoke there is some fire, but it may be not so much as was feared. Their threatenings will vanish into smoke. Pharaoh king of Egypt is but a noise (Jer. xlvi. 17), and Rezin king of Syria but a smoke; and such are all the enemies of God’s church, smoking flax, that will soon be quenched. Nay, they are but tails of smoking firebrands, in a manner burnt out already; their force is spent; they have consumed themselves with the heat of their own anger; you may put your foot on them, and tread them out.” The two kingdoms of Syria and Israel were now near expiring. Note, The more we have an eye to God as a consuming fire the less reason we shall have to fear men, though they are ever so furious, nay, we shall be able to despise them as smoking firebrands.
(3.) He must assure them that the present design of these high allies (so they thought themselves) against Jerusalem should certainly be defeated and come to nothing, v. 5-7. [1.] That very thing which Ahaz thought most formidable is made the ground of their defeat–and that was the depth of their designs and the height of their hopes: “Therefore they shall be baffled and sent back with shame, because they have taken evil counsel against thee, which is an offence to God. These firebrands are a smoke in his nose (ch. lxv. 5), and therefore must be extinguished.” First, They are very spiteful and malicious, and, therefore they shall not prosper. Judah had done them no wrong; they had no pretence to quarrel with Ahaz; but, without any reason, they said, Let us go up against Judah, and vex it. Note, Those that are vexatious cannot expect to be prosperous, those that love to do mischief cannot expect to do well. Secondly, They are very secure, and confident of success. They will vex Judah by going up against it; yet that is not all: they do not doubt but to make a breach in the wall of Jerusalem wide enough for them to march their army in at; or they count upon dissecting or dividing the kingdom into two parts, one for the king of Israel, the other for the king of Syria, who had agreed in one viceroy–a king to be set in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal, some obscure person, it is uncertain whether a Syrian or an Israelite. So sure were they of gaining their point that they divided the prey before they had caught it. Note, Those that are most scornful are commonly least successful, for surely God scorns the scorners. [2.] God himself gives them his word that the attempt should not take effect (v. 7): “Thus saith the Lord God, the sovereign Lord of all, who brings the counsel of the heathen to naught (Ps. xxxiii. 10), It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass; their measures shall all be broken, and they shall not be able to bring to pass their enterprise.” Note, Whatever stands against God, or thinks to stand without him, cannot stand long. Man purposes, but God disposes; and who is he that saith and it cometh to pass if the Lord commands it not or countermands it? Lam. iii. 37. See Prov. xix. 21.
(4.) He must give them a prospect of the destruction of these enemies, at last, that were now such a terror to them. [1.] They should neither of them enlarge their dominions, nor push their conquests any further; The head city of Syria is Damascus, and the head man of Damascus is Rezin; this he glories in, and this let him be content with, v. 8. The head city of Ephraim has long been Samaria, and the head man in Samaria is now Pekah the son of Remaliah. These shall be made to know their own, their bounds are fixed, and they shall not pass them, to make themselves masters of the cities of Judah, much less to make Jerusalem their prey. Note, As God has appointed men the bounds of their habitation (Acts xvii. 26), so he has appointed princes the bounds of their dominion, within which they ought to confine themselves, and not encroach upon their neighbours’ rights. [2.] Ephraim, which perhaps was the more malicious and forward enemy of the two, should shortly be quite rooted out, and should be so far from seizing other people’s lands that they should not be able to hold their own. Interpreters are much at a loss how to compute the sixty-five years within which Ephraim shall cease to be a people; for the captivity of the ten tribes was but eleven years after this: and some make it a mistake of the transcriber, and think it should be read within six and five years, just eleven. But it is hard to allow that. Others make it to be sixty-five years from the time that the prophet Amos first foretold the ruin of the kingdom of the ten tribes; and some late interpreters make it to look as far forward as the last desolation of that country by Esarhaddon, which was about sixty-five years after this; then Ephraim was so broken that it was no more a people. Now it was the greatest folly in the world for those to be ruining their neighbours who were themselves marked for ruin, and so near to it. See what a prophet told them at this time, when they were triumphing over Judah, 2 Chron. xxviii. 10. Are there not with you, even with you, sins against the Lord your God?
(5.) He must urge them to mix faith with those assurances which he had given them (v. 9): “If you will not believe what is said to you, surely you shall not be established; your shaken and disordered state shall not be established, your unquiet unsettled spirit shall not; though the things told you are very encouraging, yet they will not be so to you, unless you believe them, and be willing to take God’s word.” Note, The grace of faith is absolutely necessary to the quieting and composing of the mind in the midst of all the tosses of this present time, 2 Chron. xx. 20.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
ISAIAH – CHAPTER 7
JEHOVAH’S DEALINGS WITH ISRAEL, (Isa 7:1 to Isa 12:6)
A SIGN FOR AHAZ
This chapter is set in the period of a struggle between Judah and the coalition made up of Syria and Ephraim (the 10 tribes of Israel). Ahaz, king of Judah, is terrified by the expectation of imminent invasion, when the prophet comes with a word designed for his comfort. If he will only trust in Jehovah, Judah will be delivered. He is even urged to “ask a sign” of Jehovah’s good intention, but refuses. Then, he is given a sign – far-reaching in its significance, but one that the king may see and believe. The birth of a child will signify Jehovah’s presence with, and preservation of, Judah.
Verse 1-9: A WORD OF ASSURANCE FOR THE HOUSE OF DAVID
1. Rezin, king of Syria, and Pekah, the son of Remaliah king of Israel, have come to wage war against Jerusalem, but have not been able to prevail, (Verse 1, 6-7).
2. When Ahaz hears of the coalition between Syria and Ephraim against Judah, his heart, and the hearts of his people, begin to shake – as a tree before a mighty wind, (Verse 2).
3. The Lord sends Isaiah to the frightened king, along with his firstborn son – whose symbolic name was a pledge of Jehovah’s faithful preservation of a holy remnant of His believing people. “Sherjashub” means “A remnant shall return”; that is “Repent!” (Verse 3).
4. The king is to be careful, but calm and fearless before these two “tails of smoking firebrands”, (Verse 4; comp. Isa 30:15; Isa 10:24; Isa 25:4).
5. It is their intention to create a schism in Judah and set up the son of Tabeal as king in Jerusalem; but they will not succeed. This is the Lord’s own word about it, (Verse 5-7; comp. Isa 8:10; Isa 28:13; Psa 2:4-6).
6. In verses 8-9a the prophet reveals that within 65 years the northern kingdom (Ephraim, or Israel) will be shattered as a nation
7. If Ahaz is to be secure, he must have firm confidence in Jehovah, his God, (Verse 9b; comp. Isa 5:24; Isa 8:6-8; Isa 30:12-14; 2Ch 20:20-24). But Ahaz wants no part of a faith-walk!
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
1. And it came to pass. Here is related a remarkable prophecy about the wonderful deliverance of Jerusalem, when it appeared to have been utterly ruined. Now the Prophet explains all the circumstances, that by means of them the miracle may be more fully displayed, and to make it manifest, that not by the wisdom or power of man, but by the favor of God, the city has been preserved. For so ungrateful were the people, that, at the close of this transaction, they would not have understood that they had been delivered by the hand of the Lord, if all the circumstances had not been expressly brought to their remembrance. And, indeed, there were very few persons who, in the hour of danger, ventured to hope what Isaiah promised; because they judged of themselves and of the state of public affairs from present appearances. In order, therefore, to make known the remarkable kindness of God, he enters into all the details, that they may perceive from what danger and from whose hand they have been delivered. Let us also understand that this kindness was conferred on ungrateful men, that the Church might be preserved, and that Christ might afterwards appear.
It ought to be observed that the Prophet speaks of the second war which was fought by Rezin and Pekah; and this may easily be inferred from the sacred history; for in the former war Ahaz was vanquished, and a vast multitude were carried into captivity, who were at length restored by the Israelites, when the Prophet, in the name of God, commanded that it should be done. Having again collected an army, (2Kg 16:5,) the kings of Israel and Syria attacked Ahaz, because they thought that he had been worn out by the former war, and had no power to resist. The mention of this second war is intended to show the greatness of the miracle; for Ahaz had not strength left to resist so great a multitude, the flower of the whole nation having been swept away by the former war, and such of the people as remained being quite dispirited, and not yet recovered from the terror arising out of their recent defeat. So much the more, therefore, are the goodness and power of God displayed, that, pitying so great distress, he gave assistance to his people, and in a moment rescued them from the jaws of death, when all regarded their condition as hopeless.
Went up. This may be regarded as a statement and summary of the whole transaction; for he mentions the subjects on which he is about to speak, and in the Hebrew modes of expression briefly glances at those matters which he will afterwards explain more fully and at large. From the first he tells the result, that the expedition of the two kings was unsuccessful, and afterwards he will assign the reasons why Jerusalem could not be stormed; but before coming to that, he briefly notices the plan or design of King Ahaz.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
PURPOSES AND PANICS
Isa. 7:1-2. And it came to pass, in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, &c.
In this brief record of events [781] that occurred so long ago, we may find suggestions of truths which it will be well for us to lay to heart to-day.
[781] For a statement of these events, see following paper: THE VIRGINS SON.
I. Men often confidently form purposes which they find it impossible to fulfil (Isa. 7:1). Rezin and Pekah no doubt were sure their project would be successful; they left no means untried to make it a success; they had many things to encourage them (2Ch. 28:5-7); success seemed certain, yet they failed! In Isa. 7:6 we have another statement of their purpose, and in Isa. 7:7 we are told the real reason why it failed: GOD determined that it should not stand. This is an illustration of much that takes place in our own day, in our own life. Purposes daringly conceived, and wisely and energetically prosecuted, come to nothing; and in such cases GOD is often the real hindrance. He hinders, not because He has any capricious delight in frustrating our plans, but because in them we intend only our own self-aggrandisement. It is with our purposes as with our prayers (Jas. 4:3). If He hinders, no alliance formed with men can profit us; even Rezin will help in vain.
1. In forming our plans, let us remember and acknowledge our dependence on the permission and help of God (Jas. 4:13-15; Psa. 127:1). If plans should be formed for our hurt or overthrow, let us comfort ourselves by remembering that all men are under Gods control. The confederacy may be very powerful: most elaborate preparations may be made for the accomplishment of its purpose; but there can be no success unless the Lord will (Dan. 3:16-18).
II. Men often give way to unreasonable panics (Isa. 7:2). Panics are very common, very painful, very dangerous and hurtful. Their cause: lack of faith in God. Without faith in the controlling providence of God, men are naturally as liable to alarm as is a wealthy man who on a foggy night has to make his way through a dangerous quarter of a strange city; he knows not whether the footsteps he hears behind him are those of a policeman or of a garotter! Firmness is the reward of faithof intelligent confidence exercised by righteous men in a righteous God (Psa. 3:6; Psa. 56:11; Psa. 91:5; Psa. 112:7-8, &c.). Deliverance from fear is one of the respects in which godliness has the promise of the life that now is. This blessing may be yours, if you will; yours in times of domestic, of commercial, of national alarm. You may be delivered, if you will, from the supreme fearfear of death. Christ came into the world for the purpose of delivering you from it (Heb. 2:14-15). Yield yourself to be really His, and your end shall be peace (Psa. 23:4; Psa. 73:26).
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
FEARS AND COMFORTS
Isa. 7:1-9. And it came to pass, in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, &c.
The historical statements [778] in these verses afford illustrations of spiritual truths.
[778] For a statement of these circumstances see following paper: THE VIRGINS SON.
I. The powers of evil are confederate against the Lords people (Isa. 7:1-2; Isa. 7:6). By the combined forces of evil, Gods chosen ones have always been assailed. The conflict began in Eden, and has continued ever since. These combined forces attacked our Lord, and appeared for a time, outwardly at least, to conquer. We must expect similar assaults (Joh. 16:33). The ultimate object of these foes is to destroy our spiritual life.
II. The Lords people are often terrified by the action of their foes. Two things may contribute to this.
1. A sense of personal guilt. Conscience often slumbers in prosperity, but awakens and alarms us when danger threatens. No doubt Ahaz remembered his sin, when he saw his foes were coming.
2. Distrust of the Lord. It does not appear that Ahaz told the Lord about his trouble, or sought His help. His idolatry had led him into unbeliefa frequent cause of the Christians terrors. He looks at his troubles, and sinks, because he does not lay hold on Christ (Mat. 14:30).
III. God seeks to allay the fears of His people in the hour of their trouble. This is done in three ways.
1. By exhorting them to keep their minds calm. Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither be faint-hearted. Picture Ahaz restless, excited, his breast fainting, hope and courage failing. How timely was the prophets exhortation! how helpful it might have been to Ahaz! Who of us does not know the blessedness of such an appeal? We have been excited, trembling, fainting, because of temporal dangers or spiritual foes, and in our agitation have been likely to do something foolish. But a voice has said, Fear not; be calm! Who says, Fear not? The loving, omnipotent Saviour, who is able to deliver us.
2. By showing His people the weakness of their foes. They are only the two tails of smoking fire-brands. You think them powerful, but they are really weak (1Jn. 4:4).
3. By predicting the failure of the plans of their foes (Isa. 7:7-9)a prediction which was fulfilled sixty-five years afterwards, when Esarhaddon desolated the country, and filled it with foreigners. So God shows to us the weakness of our foes, and predicts their failure.
IV. God shows His people that faith is necessary for the establishment of their peace (Isa. 7:9. See also 2Ch. 20:20; Isa. 26:3).H. F. Walker.
FAITHS IMPREGNABLE CITADEL
Isa. 7:1-9. And it came to pass, in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, &c.
I. There are many things calculated to fill us with fearsufferings, losses, temptations, death, &c. Especially alarming are combinations of evil: when they threaten, we are apt to feel as did Ahaz and his people (Isa. 7:2). Afflictions seldom come singly: sickness brings poverty in its train, &c.; and the heart is apt to fail before such accumulations of misfortune.
II. But God guarantees the safety of those who trust in Him.
1. He controls all events (Isa. 7:7). The Prince of Orange, when he took the field against France and the Emperor, said he had made an alliance with Heaven, and feared not for the result. Much more may the believer be confident in the warfare of life (H. E. I. 200203, 2372, 2373, 4049, 40554058).
2. It is only while we trust in Him that we are thus in alliance with Him. Only by trusting in Him are we kept from trusting in that which cannot deliver usourselves or our fellow-men, to the exclusion of God and the rejection of His proffered help. Only by trusting in Him are our hearts kept in peace (chap. Isa. 26:3. H. E. I. 1893, 1894, 19111919, 19231926). Only by trusting in Him do we give Him the glory which is His due, and which He will not give to another (H. E. I. 4054).
III. The guarantee of safety which God offers to all who trust Him extends to the soul as well as the body. Because of our sins, and the enemies they bring against us, we might well fear; but in the Gospel help is offered, or perfect safety is guaranteed to them that believe.
IV. The inevitable result of refusal to accept the help which God mercifully offers us is ruin. Ahaz, refusing the sign offered him, and trusting in Assyria, was overthrown by his ally. There is deadly peril in any other alliance than that which God offers to form with us. Said our Lord to all who are tempted to apostacy, Remember Lots wife, and in like manner we may say to all who are tempted to disregard and reject Gods offers of help, Remember Ahaz!John Johnston.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
II.
CRISIS AND THE CHRIST (IMMANUEL)
CHAPTERS 7 12
CHAPTER SEVEN
A. PROMISE OF IMMANUEL
1.
THE CRISIS Isa. 7:1-9
TEXT: Isa. 7:1-9
1
And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz, the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up to Jerusalem to war against it; but could not prevail against it.
2
And it was told the house of David saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart trembled, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the forest tremble with the wind.
3
Then said Jehovah unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shearjashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool, in the highway of the fullers field;
4
and say unto him, Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither let thy heart be faint, because of these two tails of smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin and Syria, and of the son of Remaliah.
5
Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah, have purposed evil against thee saying,
6
Let us go up against Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set up a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeel;
7
thus saith the Lord Jehovah, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.
8
For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Epharaim be broken in pieces, so that it shall not be a people:
9
And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliahs son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.
QUERIES
a.
Why was Isaiah told to take his son to meet Ahaz?
b.
Who is Tabeel?
c.
Who is warned “to believe?
PARAPHRASE
During the reign of Ahaz (the son of Jotham and grandson of Uzziah), Jerusalem was attacked by King Rezin of Syria and King Pekah of Israel (the son of Remaliah). But it was not taken; the city stood. However, when the news came to the royal court, Syria is allied with Israel against us! the hearts of the king and his people trembled with fear as the trees of a forest shake in a storm. Then the Lord said to Isaiah, Go out to meet King Ahaz, you and Shear-jashub, your son. You will find him at the end of the aqueduct which leads from Gihon Spring to the upper reservoir, near the road that leads down to the bleaching field. Tell him to quit worrying, the Lord said. Tell him he neednt be frightened by the fierce anger of those two has-beens, Rezin and Pekah. Yes, the kings of Syria and Israel are coming against you. They say, We will invade Judah and throw her people into panic, then well fight our way into Jerusalem and install the son of Tabeel as their King. But the Lord God says, This plan will not succeed, for Damascus will remain the capital of Syria alone, and King Rezins kingdom will not increase its boundaries. And within sixty-five years Ephraim, too, will be crushed and broken. Samaria is the capital of Ephraim alone and King Pekahs power will not increase. You dont believe Me? If you want me to protect you, you must learn to believe what I say!
COMMENTS
Isa. 7:1-2 THE CONFEDERACY: Rezin, King of Syria, and Pekah, King of Israel (Ephraim) in Samaria, had formed a coalition against Assyria. It is probable that they tried to get the Judean ruler to join with them against Assyria. Rezin and Pekah first attacked Judah when Jotham was still on the throne (2Ki. 15:37) probably to coerce the Judean ruler to join their alliance against Assyria. In 2Ch. 28:5 ff we learn that Ahaz was delivered into the hands of the Syrians who smote him and 120,000 men of Judah were slain. But Ahaz and his forces were suddenly released at Jericho and returned to Jerusalem. Then in 2Ki. 16:5 we learn of a third attack of Rezin and Pekah upon Jerusalem. At this time Ahaz was prepared to become a satellite-state to Assyria in return for Assyrias protection against the northern coalition (Cf. 2Ki. 16:7-9). It was, no doubt, just prior to Ahazs overture to the Assyrians that Isaiah met with Ahaz to deliver the Lords promise that the coalition of Rezin and Pekah would not be able to stand against Judah. Ahaz was beginning to be overcome with fear toward Syria and Israel. The coalition was determined to get rid of Ahaz and place a man on Judahs throne who would do their bidding.
Isa. 7:3-9 THE COMFORT: Isaiah and his son, Shearjashub (A remnant shall return) were sent to meet Ahaz at a precise pointthe point where the water from the upper pool emptied into the conduit. The boy was to serve as a symbolic sign of hope. Ahaz was told to be quiet and calm. Rezin and Pekah were lots of smoke but no fire according to the Lord. They are burned-out, smoldering stumps. God knows their threatenings and He knows that in 65 years they will both have disappeared utterly. The coalition wishes to set up the son of Tabeal (the original form of the name suggests he was a Syrian) on the throne of Judah in the place of Ahaz. But God promises, It shall not stand, and it shall not come to pass. Israel and Syria have only human heads (Isa. 7:8) while the head of Judah is the Lord God. In 721722 B.C. Sargon took Samaria (2Ki. 17:16-24) and in 669 B.C. Esar-Haddon of Babylon sent colonists to occupy Samaria and entirely destroyed the nationality of Israel. This was 65 years from the time of Isaiahs prediction here (733 or 734 B.C.). All Ahaz had to do was to accept this promise and believe God and he would be established on the throne of Judah. But Ahaz would not believe it (Cf. 2Ki. 16:7-18; 2Ch. 28:16-20).
QUIZ
1.
What was the purpose of the confederacy of Syria and Israel?
2.
Why had they attacked Judah?
3.
What was the attitude of Ahaz toward the confederacy?
4.
Why was Isaiah sent to speak with Ahaz?
5.
What was Gods promise to king Ahaz through the prophet Isaiah?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
VII.
(1) It came to pass in the days of Ahaz.The whole reign of Jotham comes between Isaiah 6, 7. On Isaiahs life during that period, see Introduction. The work of the prophet now carries him into the main current of history, as recorded in 2 Kings 15, 16; 2 Chronicles 28, and in Assyrian inscriptions. The facts to be borne in mind are(1) that the kingdom of Israel under Menahem had already become tributary to Assyria (2Ki. 15:19-20); (2) that the object of the alliance between Pekah, a bold and ambitious usurper, and Rezin, was to organise a resistance against Assyria, such as that in which Uzziah had taken part (Schrader, Keil-Inschriften, pp. 395-421, quoted by Cheyne), that first Jotham (2Ki. 15:37), and then Ahaz, apparently refused to join the confederacy, and that the object of the attack of the allied kings was either to force Ahaz to join, or else to depose him, bring the dynasty of David to a close, and set a follower of their own, probably a Syrian, on the throne of Judah.
But could not prevail against it.The words obviously refer to a special stage in the campaign. The king of Syria seems to have been the leading spirit of the confederacy. 2Ch. 28:5-15 represents Judah as having sustained a great and almost overwhelming defeat. Jerusalem, however, though besieged (2Ki. 16:5) was not absolutely taken (2Ki. 16:5); 2Ki. 16:6 records the capture of the port of Elath, on the Gulf of Akaba, by Rezin.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
(1) We may deal with it as though the Gospel of St. Matthew had never been written, as though the facts which it records had no place in the history of mankind. From this point of view we get what seems at first a comparatively simple exposition. The prophet offers a sign to the faithless king, and the sign is this: he points to some young bride in either sense of that word, and says that she shall conceive and bear a son. The fulfilment of that prediction in a matter which lay outside the range of human knowledge was to be the sign for Ahaz and his court, and she should give that son a name which would rebuke the faithlessness of the king. Immanuel, God with us, would be a nomen et omen, witnessing, not of an incarnate Deity, but of His living and abiding presence. Who was the mother of the child on this theory we have no data for deciding. As the two other children of the prophet bore, like Hoseas (Isa. 7:3; Isa. 8:3), mysterious and prophetic names, the most probable conjecture seems to be that it was Isaiahs own wife, still young, and, as it were, still a bride, or possibly a second wife whom he had married, or was about to marry, after the death of his first. Other guesses have pointed to one of the women of the harem of Ahaz who may have been with him when Isaiah spoke. The hypothesis of some critics that such a one became the mother of Hezekiah, and that he was the Immanuel of the prophets thoughts, breaks down under the test of dates. Hezekiah, at the time the prophecy was uttered, was a boy of at least nine years of age (2Ki. 16:2; 2Ki. 18:2). Of this child so born Isaiah predicts that he shall grow up in a time of suffering and privation (Isa. 7:15), and that before he has attained to manhood the confederacy of Rezin and Remaliah shall come to a disastrous end. So far all is at least coherent. Immanuel, as a person, stands on the same level as Shear-jashub, representing a great idea to which Isaiah again appeals in Isa. 8:8; Isa. 8:10, but not identified with the Christ, or even with any expectations of the Christ. On the other hand, there are phenomena in Isaiahs prophetic work at large which this explanation does not adequately include. The land of Israel at least appears to be described as in some peculiar sense the land of Immanuel (Isa. 8:10). Isaiah is clearly expecting, even in the first volume that bears his name, not to speak of Isaiah 40-66, the arrival, at some undefined point in the future, of one whose nature, work and character, shall be represented by the marvellous series of names of Isa. 9:6, in whom the spirit of Jehovah, the fear of Jehovah, shall dwell in their fulnesswho shall be of the stem of Jesse, and whose reign shall be as the realised ideal of a golden age (Isa. 11:1-10). That expectation connects itself with a like prophecy, associated as this is with the childbirth of a travailing woman, in Mic. 5:3-5. In what relation, we ask, did Immanuel stand to these confessedly Messianic predictions?
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
PART 2.
Afflictions from Assyrian oppressions are assuaged by consolations from Immanuel
THE DIVINE SIGN.
Apart from historical circumstances, the following prophecies cannot be understood.
1. And it came to pass Isaiah’s recorded prophecies under the reigns of Uzziah and Jotham have closed, and those under Ahaz here begin. Jotham and his father were good kings, and their reigns were the most prosperous in the annals of Judah. One element of idolatry, however, was not discouraged the high places were not destroyed. (See note on Isa 2:6; and for a full discussion on “High Places,” see Smith’s Dict. of the Bible.) This, of course, emboldened the people in some practices hostile to the religion of Jehovah, and the long term of national prosperity led to indulgence among the younger generation in many fascinating forms of idolatry. In consequence, Judah showed to the searching thought of the envious rulers of adjacent kingdoms such signs of national degeneracy and weakness as encouraged them to form schemes of aggression. But they delayed their assault till Jotham’s death and the accession of his son B.C. 742 when the first great attack was made, and the army of Ahaz was destroyed, and two hundred thousand captives, (see 2Ch 28:5-15,) which, at the instance of a prophet at Samaria, Oded by name, were returned to Judah. It seems to be at a point of time between this great first success of the enemy and his final retreat that the narrative here begins, and the word “and” in the text connects the two events.
In the days of Ahaz The true age of Ahaz when he began to reign was probably twenty-five; (see Septuagint at 2Ch 28:1😉 otherwise he became the father of Hezekiah at ten years of age. Ahaz seems to have been trained (probably through maternal influence and direction) in an atmosphere of idolatry. He erected statues of Baal, and joined in the rites of Moloch, 2Ch 28:1-5. His kingdom began early to suffer retribution. Patriotism wanes when God is dishonoured. So at this time. In the course of his reign trouble arose all around the horizon. Ammonites broke from their vassalage. Edomites, becoming free, assaulted the southern, and Philistines the western, borders. This state of things came from complications in the last of Jotham’s reign. Egypt, in the southwest, and Assyria, in the northeast, were the great powers that alternately kept the intervening small kingdoms in a state of semi-subjection. They used these lesser kingdoms at convenience in their hostile operations on each other. At this time Assyria seems to be in the ascendant. Damascus chafes at being tributary to Assyria, and Rezin, her king, readily consents to confederate with Pekah, the usurper, king over Israel, (2Ki 15:25,) who wants to humble the hitherto prosperous Judah. Egypt favours any confederation that will protect her frontier against her formidable rival, Assyria.
This appears to be the situation in the last of Jotham’s reign. The history in 2Ki 15:37 to 2Ki 16:9, is fragmentary, but it hints, and the Assyrian inscriptions confirm, that the leaguers Pekah and Rezin made an unsuccessful raid against Judah under Jotham, who unfortunately died while yet in his vigour, and left the wicked and weak Ahaz an easier prey to their designs. A second inroad was made on Judah with the results above mentioned, namely, an immense slaughter of troops and a great capture of women and children from among the villages. But Jerusalem was yet too well fortified to be taken. And this explains the last words of this verse, could not prevail against it. The geographical positions are thus: Syria, of which Damascus is the capital and Rezin the king, is northeast, and between Israel and Assyria; and Ephraim, or Israel, is north of Judah, and between that kingdom and that of Syria.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
God Appeals to Ahaz Asking Him To Trust Him ( Isa 7:1-9 ).
Syria and Israel, in seeking to join an alliance against Assyria, called on Judah to join them, and when Ahaz was reluctant, determined to bring him to heel. (As far as we know up to this point Judah had not had to pay tribute to Assyria, probably because of the remoteness of its capital). But Yahweh tells Ahaz that he is right to reject any part in the alliance, but must rather trust in Him. Unfortunately, and very foolishly, however, Ahaz has rather decided to submit to Assyria, pay them tribute, and call on them for assistance, thus bringing Judah within the sphere of the Assyrian Empire.
Analysis of Isa 7:1-9.
a And it came about in the days of Ahaz, the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin, the king of Syria and Pekah, the son of Remaliah, went up to Jerusalem to war against it (Isa 7:1 a).
b But they could not prevail against it (Isa 7:1 b).
c And it was told the house of David, saying, ‘Syria is confederate with (or ‘has settled on’) Ephraim’, and his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the forest are moved with the wind (Isa 7:2).
d Then Yahweh said to Isaiah, Go out now to meet Ahaz, you and Shearjashub your son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the launderer’s field (Isa 7:3).
d And say to him, “Take notice and be quiet. Do not be afraid, nor let your heart be faint, because of these two tails of smoking firebrands
c For the fierce anger of Rezin and Syria, and the son of Remaliah, who are saying, ‘Let us go up against Judah and vex it, and let us make a breach in it for us, and set up a king in its midst, even the son of Tabeel (Isa 7:4-6).
b Thus says the Lord Yahweh, “It will not stand, nor will it come about.” (Isa 7:7).
a For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin, and within sixty five years will Ephraim be broken in pieces that it be not a people. And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah’s son. If you do not believe, surely you will not be established (Isa 7:8-9).
In ‘a’ Rezin and the son of Remaliah come up against Judah, and in the parallel God promises that they will be broken in pieces. In ‘b’ they could not prevail against Israel, and in the parallel this prevailing that Judah were afraid of will not come about. In ‘c’ the house of David were afraid because of Syria and Ephraim, and in the parallel the reason for their fear is described, the attitude of the kings of Syrian and Israel. In ‘d’ Isaiah goes to meet Ahaz, and in the parallel the meeting is in order to assure him that he need not be afraid.
Isa 7:1
‘And it came about in the days of Ahaz, the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin, the king of Syria and Pekah, the son of Remaliah, went up to Jerusalem to war against it. But they could not prevail against it.’
The verse begins by stating Ahaz’s credentials. He is a true son of the Davidic house, the grandson of the great King Uzziah. It then follows this up with a summary of what is about to happen.
So this verse is a summary verse, and Isa 7:2 takes us back in time before it. It is setting the context of the passage, the prospective new invasion by Syria and Israel, and stressing that it will not finally succeed. Jerusalem will not be taken. This was a regular method of presentation of history from Genesis onwards.
Alternately it may be summarising the previous invasion by the alliance. But the above seems more likely.
We are not here given the reason for the invasion, except that it was of Yahweh (2Ki 15:37; 2Ki 16:5) with the intention of making Ahaz think again about his idolatry (2Ch 28:19), but humanly speaking it almost certainly because Ahaz had refused to join an alliance against a threatening Assyria. With Assyria threatening from the north Syria and Israel, along with other rebels, were wide open to attack, and they were seeking allies. It would seem that Edom and Philistia had been willing to join them (2Ch 28:17-18). Presumably, however, representations to Ahaz had not been favourably received. Thus they determined that they would bring Ahaz to heel and enforce the support of Judah by replacing Ahaz with a puppet king.
This in fact helps to explain why Ahaz finally did later appeal to Assyria (2Ki 16:8-9). Once he had refused to trust God for help, they were the obvious allies to help his cause. It is very probable that he was not really fully aware of the power of the forces to whom he was looking. He was probably looking for a temporary alliance, obtained by the giving of a present, not to be permanently swallowed up. Assyria had in the past appeared, and then disappeared again. But like Hezekiah after him he was just not fully aware of the strength and ambitions of the one to whom he appealed (although sufficiently aware to recognise the folly of combining against him).
Here in microcosm was what God had said would happen to Judah. A backsliding, a failure to respond in trust and obedience, followed by another backsliding that would lead to disaster.
Isa 7:2
‘And it was told the house of David, saying, ‘Syria is confederate with (or ‘has settled on’) Ephraim.’ And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the forest are moved with the wind.’
The news of the prospective invasion by Syria and Israel (the latter often called Ephraim, because Ephraim was the largest tribe) reached Ahaz. The fact that the Syrians had gathered in force and had stationed themselves in (‘settled on’) Israel, joining forces with the Israelite army, was alarming. And both he and the people were afraid. Their hearts were stirred as trees are stirred by the force of the wind, shaking violently without cessation. Note the reference to the house of David. The inference is that as a member of the house of David he should have stood firm on the promises of God made to that house. He should have looked to the God of David. Compare Psalms 2. He should have been aware that none could stir themselves against God’s anointed and prevail. But instead he cowered before the enemy. His faith was lacking and he clung to his idolatry.
Isa 7:3-7
‘Then Yahweh said to Isaiah, Go out now to meet Ahaz, you and Shearjashub your son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the launderer’s field, and say to him, “Take notice and be quiet. Do not be afraid, nor let your heart be faint, because of these two tails of smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin and Syria, and the son of Remaliah, who are saying, ‘Let us go up against Judah and vex it, and let us make a breach in it for us, and set up a king in its midst, even the son of Tabeel.’ Thus says the Lord Yahweh, It will not stand, nor will it come about.” ’
God in His goodness sends Isaiah to speak to the faithless Ahaz. He is to seek to win Ahaz back to God’s covenant, which was in fact His very purpose in the proposed invasion. So Yahweh tells Isaiah to go, along with Shearjashub his son, to meet Ahaz. The name Shearjashub means ‘a remnant will return’, which is probably why he was to accompany his father. He would be a living reminder of the message of Isaiah. This confirms Isaiah’s vivid awareness even at this stage of the central content of his own message, a message of departure from and return to Yahweh, possibly with exile and return in mind (compare Isa 6:12). It should also have acted as a warning to the king of the house of David, for we cannot doubt that Isaiah had proclaimed to him his message from God.
‘A remnant will return’ stressed both coming judgment and subsequent mercy, but always with the recognition that repentance could delay judgment. So the name of Sheerjashub hung like a warning notice of what the future could hold.
‘At the end of the conduit (aqueduct) of the upper pool in the highway of the launderer’s field.’ This aqueduct was in process of being built to seek to ensure a water supply in case of siege. Although not fully adequate, for it went overground, it was better than nothing. It would serve until it was discovered and destroyed by the enemy. It was part of Ahaz’s fearful preparation for what was coming. It would seem that he was supervising the work himself. The launderer’s field would be where the washing of clothes was done in the river, presumably because the water was ample there, and fairly clear.
Yahweh’s word to him was to trust Yahweh and thus gain confidence. ‘Take notice and be quiet. Do not be afraid, nor let your heart be faint.’ If only Ahaz would listen to Yahweh and return to Him, then he could have full confidence that Yahweh would be with him. Returning to the covenant (‘taking note’) would mean that he could have quiet confidence in Yahweh’s willingness to deliver. Then his fear would evaporate and his heart would cease to be faint. This is confirmation that Yahweh approves of his stance against joining the alliance, and is yet ready to work through the house of David and be with him if only Ahaz will repent.
‘Because of these two tails of smoking firebrands (or ‘smouldering stubs’), for the fierce anger of Rezin and Syria, and the son of Remaliah, who are saying, ‘Let us go up against Judah and vex it, and let us make a breach in it for us, and set up a king in its midst, even the son of Tabeel.’ Thus says the Lord Yahweh, It will not stand, nor will it come about.’
God’s contempt for the enemy is clear, especially for ‘the son of Remaliah’ who is not even named. They are but like two tails of foxes or jackals to which firebrands have been tied. That is their combined arsenal! (Or alternately like two smouldering stubs, soon to be extinguished). He promises that their attempt to replace Ahaz will fail. The plot to install ‘the son of Tabeel’ as puppet king will not succeed. Tabeel was probably a pretender to the throne of David, a connection with the royal house who was seeking his main chance.
However, the description of the two ‘sons’, the son of Remaliah and the son of Tabeel (whom the alliance hoped would potentially in the future represent the people of God) in terms of the name of the house that they came from rather than by their own names is significant for another reason. There is a clear implied contrast with ‘the son of David’. These men are not the true heirs of David. They are the sons of Remaliah and Tabeel. Therefore they should not be relied on. Furthermore Ahaz should ask himself what chance the house of Remaliah and the house of Tabeel could possibly have against the house of David, the anointed of Yahweh, if only Ahaz would trust Yahweh.
Notice the grace of God. ‘Thus says the Lord Yahweh, It will not stand, nor will it come about.’ He gives this guarantee before Ahaz has repented, with the hope that he will be grateful and repent, recognising that Yahweh of hosts is the only One to be relied on for defence, and thus resubmitting to the covenant.
‘The son of Tabeel.’ Tabeel was possibly a son of Uzziah or Jotham by an Aramaean princess connected to Beth Tab’el, a place known from contemporary Aramaean inscriptions as an Aramaean land in northern Transjordan.
Isa 7:8-9
‘For the head of Syria is Damascus,
And the head of Damascus is Rezin,
And within sixty five years will Ephraim be broken in pieces that it be not a people.
And the head of Ephraim is Samaria,
And the head of Samaria is Remaliah’s son.
If you do not believe, surely you will not be established.’
Set out in this way the balance of the statement is clear. What is in mind is the future of Israel and Judah, the two sections of God’s covenant people. In the first case doom awaits, for, because of their trust in Rezin rather than in Yahweh. As a result Israel (Ephraim) will cease to be a people, because they have finally rejected the covenant by their alliance with Syria. They have rejected dependence on Yahweh and placed it in Rezin. In the second case possible doom is threatened for Judah and Jerusalem depending on Ahaz’s response. Judah’s future too is in the balance. The question is, will Ahaz depend on the Lord Yahweh, or on the son of Remaliah, whose dependence is on Rezin?
Ephraim (Israel) have chosen to rely on Syria rather than Yahweh. Well, let him consider. What is Syria? They are summed up in Damascus and finally in their king, Rezin. Thus Ephraim are stayed on Rezin. But king Rezin is not a reliable stay. That is why Ephraim’s fate is sealed. They have chosen King Rezin and his gods and rejected the Lord Yahweh and the Davidic house. Thus their future is hopeless. Defeat awaits them and within sixty five years they will even cease to be a people at all.
And once a large number of Israelites were deported as a result of the Assyrian invasion, and once foreign settlers and leaders were incorporated into the land of Israel by Esarhaddon in 671 BC about sixty five years later, that was what happened. Israel was no more (although many would have fled to Judah maintaining God’s people as ‘Israel’).
Now what about Ahaz? Ahaz was facing both. He of the house of David now had to choose. He could elect to have the son of Remaliah to depend on, but before doing so he should consider what weak support the son of Remaliah was depending on. He was depending, not on God, but on Rezin. Is he, therefore, the son of David, going to yield to, and depend on, these two weak supports? Or is he, as Yahweh’s Anointed (1Sa 12:3; 1Sa 24:6 ff; 1Sa 26:9 ff; 2Sa 1:14; Psa 2:2; Lam 4:20), going to trust the Lord Yahweh, the One Who provides unfailing support? That is the question. (The question of Assyrian alliance has possibly not yet been determined). Unless he chooses to believe on Yahweh he will indeed not be established. He too, and his people, will be removed from the scene.
Perhaps also Ahaz was supposed to read further into this the unspoken inference and consider Judah’s own idealistic position. Had the parallel been stated this would have read, ‘the head of Judah is Jerusalem the city of David, and the head of Jerusalem is the son of David.’ This should then have awoken him to the true situation. How can David’s son possibly depend on anyone but Yahweh, who had chosen David as His kingly representative on earth, and Jerusalem as His dwelling place?
The overall message that comes to us from this passage is, ‘if God be for us who can be against us?’ But in the event we must trust and not be afraid, otherwise we will not be established.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Isaiah’s Prophecy to King Ahaz Isa 7:1-25 gives the account of Isaiah’s prophecy to King Ahaz during a time when the kings of Syria and northern Israel joined forces and came against Judah. At the time of this troubling news the Lord sends the prophet Isaiah to give the king a word of promise. The Lord knew the king’s heart was wicked; yet, in His mercy for His people the Lord offered them deliverance, if they would only believe and accept this divine word.
A similar account of this event is found in 2Ki 16:1-20, which records the wickedness of King Ahaz. Because of this threat Syria and Israel he turned to the king of Assyria rather than to the Lord. Ahaz hired him to fight against Syria by stripping gold and silver from the Temple building and robbing the treasures dedicated to the Lord. Assyria responded by attacking Syria and killing their king, relieving Ahaz of his immediate danger. Ahaz responded to his perceived victory by further defiling the sacred Temple in Jerusalem. He was so impressed by the Assyrian king and his gods that he commissioned a replica of his pagan altar, set it up in the Temple, and charged the priest to begin making his daily sacrifices upon it. King Ahaz also stripped more of the precious metals off of the Temple building and gave them to the Assyrian king as a token of gratitude.
Isa 7:1 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it.
Isa 7:1
1. Uzziah – Eleventh king of Judah 809-8 to 757-6 B.C., reigned 52 years.
2. Jotham – Twelfth king of Judah, 758 – 741 B.C., reigned 16 years.
3. Ahaz – Thirteenth king of Judah, 741-726 B.C., reigned about 16 years.
4. Hezekiah – Fourteenth king of Judah, 726 – 701 B.C., reigned 25 years.
King Uzziah’s death is mentioned in Isa 6:1, at which time Isaiah received his divine commission as a prophet to his people. Jotham reigned in Judah for sixteen years, at which time “the LORD began to send against Judah Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah.” (2Ki 15:37) King Jotham is mentioned only twice in the book of Isaiah (Isa 1:1; Isa 7:1). King Ahaz is mentioned seven times in the book of Isaiah (Isa 1:1; Isa 7:1; Isa 7:3; Isa 7:10, Isaiah 12: Isa 14:28; Isa 38:8).
Isa 7:2 And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind.
Isa 7:2
Isa 7:3 Then said the LORD unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shearjashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller’s field;
Isa 7:3
Isa 7:4 And say unto him, Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither be fainthearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah.
Isa 7:4
Isa 7:5 Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah, have taken evil counsel against thee, saying,
Isa 7:6 Isa 7:6
[24] John Gill, Isaiah, in John Gill’s Expositor, in e-Sword, v. 7.7.7 [CD-ROM] (Franklin, Tennessee: e-Sword, 2000-2005), comments on Isaiah 7:6.
Isa 7:7 Thus saith the Lord GOD, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.
Isa 7:8 Isa 7:9 Isa 7:10 Isa 7:11 Isa 7:11
Isa 7:12 But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the LORD.
Isa 7:13 Isa 7:13
[25] Charles Spurgeon, The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, vol. 39, electronic edition (1839), in Christian Library Series, vol. 6, Charles H. Spurgeon Collection, in The Ages Digital Library [CD-ROM] (Rio, WI: AGES Library, 1996), 272.
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Isa 7:14
Isa 7:14 Word Study on “a virgin” Strong says the Hebrew word “virgin” “almah” ( ) (H5959) word means, “a lass, damsel, maid, virgin.” The Enhanced Strong says it is used time in the Old Testament, being translated in the KJV as, “virgin 4, maid 2, damsels 1.” Strong says this Hebrew word is a diminutive of its masculine form “elem” ( ) (H5958), meaning “a lad, a young man,” and comes from the primitive root “alam” ( ) (H5956), which means, “to veil, conceal.” Thus, a young virgin is a woman whose nakedness has never been uncovered by a man.
Comments – A lot of discussion has been made as to the use of the Hebrew word “almah” in this passage, because it also means “young woman”. Many modern translations support the concept of “virgin”. But there was very little difference in the Jewish minds, since a young woman who was unmarried and living with her parents was a virgin. They were one and the same. Therefore, this word was quite appropriate to the text. But to our western minds, living in societies of promiscuity, there is a big difference between the two persons.
NIV, “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.”
Yet, some modern translations go so far as to place emphasis upon the meaning of a “young woman”.
RSV, “the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Imman’u-el.”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Prophecies Against Israel Isa 1:2 to Isa 12:6 contains a collection of prophecies against the nation of Israel. The phrase, “for all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still,” is repeated five times within this passage of Scripture (Isa 5:25; Isa 9:12; Isa 9:17; Isa 9:21; Isa 10:4).
Also found within this first major section of Isaiah are three prophecies of the Messiah’s birth. These prophecies reflect three characteristics of the Messiah. He will be born of a virgin as the Son of God dwelling with mankind (Isa 7:14-15). He will rule over Israel in the Davidic lineage (Isa 9:6-7). He will come from the seed of David and be anointed as was David (Isa 11:1-5).
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
God Promises Help Against Syria and Ephraim
v. 1. And it came to pass in the days of Alias, the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, v. 2. And it was told the house of David, v. 3. Then said the Lord unto Isaiah, v. 4. and say unto him, v. 5. Because Syria, v. 6. Let us go up against Judah and vex it, v. 7. thus saith the Lord God, It shall not stand, v. 8. For the head of Syria, v. 9. And the head of Ephraim,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
SECTION IV. PROPHECIES CONNECTED WITH THE SYRO–ISRAELITE WAR (Isaiah 7-10:4).
EXPOSITION
Isa 7:1-9
THE PROPHECY GIVEN TO AHAZ AT THE TIME OF THE SYRO–ISRAELITISH WAR. The Syro-Israelitish war is touched on both in Kings and Chronicles. In Kings the alliance between Rezin and Pekah is distinctly declared, as also the fact that they conjointly besieged Jerusalem (2Ki 16:5). From Chronicles we learn that, before the siege, Ahaz was twice defeated with great loss, once by the Syrians (2Ch 28:5), and once by the Israelites (2Ch 28:6). He was probably, therefore, reduced to great straits at the time when Isaiah received directions to seek an interview with him, and communicate to him a comforting message from Jehovah.
Isa 7:1
In the days of Ahaz. The reign of Ahaz covered, probably, the space between B.C. 743 and in B.C. 727. The march on Jerusalem appears to have fallen somewhat late in his reign. Rezin the King of Syria. Rezin is mentioned as King of Damascus by Tiglath-Pfieser II. in several of his inscriptions. In one, which seems to belong to B.C. 732 or 731, he states that he defeated Rezin and slew him. Pekah the son of Remaliah (see 2Ki 15:25). Pekah had been an officer under Pekahiah, the son and successor of Menahem; but had revolted, put Pekahiah to death in his palace, and seized the crown. It is probable that he and Rezin were anxious to form a confederacy for the purpose of resisting the advance of the Assyrian power, and, distrusting Ahaz, desired to place on the throne of Judah a person on whom they could thoroughly depend (see Isa 7:6). It was not their design to conquer the Jewish kingdom, but only to change the sovereign. Toward Jerusalem; rather, to Jerusalem. The allies reached the city and commenced the siege (2Ki 16:5). Could not prevail against it; literally, prevailed not in fighting against it.
Isa 7:2
It was told the house of David. Before the actual siege began, news of the alliance reached Ahaz. It is said to have been” told the house of David,” because the design was to supersede the family of David by anotherapparently a Syrianhouse (see note on Isa 7:6). Syria is confederate with Ephraim; literally, rests upon Ephraim. Under ordinary circumstances the kingdoms of Syria and Israel were hostile the one to the other (see 1Ki 15:20; 1Ki 20:1-3; 1Ki 22:3-36; 2Ki 5:2; 2Ki 6:8-24; 2Ki 8:29; 2Ki 10:32; 2Ki 13:3, 2Ki 13:22, 2Ki 13:25). But occasionally, under the pressure of a great danger, the relations were changed, and a temporary league was formed. The inscriptions of Shalmaneser II. show such a league to have existed in the time of Benhadad II. and Ahab. The invasion of Pul, and the threatening attitude of Tiglath-Pileser. It had now once more drown the two countries together. On the use of the word “Ephraim” to designate the kingdom of Israel, see Hosea, passim. His heart was moved; or, shook. If the two kings had each been able separately to inflict on him such loss (see the introductory paragraph), what must he not expect, now that both were about to attack him together? It is not clear whether Ahuz had as yet applied to Assyria for help or not.
Isa 7:3
Thou, and Shear-Jashub thy son. The name Shear-Jashub, “a remnant shall return,” may have been given to Isaiah’s son by revelation, as Ewald thinks it was; or Isaiah may have given it to testify his faith both in the threats and in the promises of which he had been made the mouth-piece. The command to take him with him on the present occasion was probably given on account of his name, that the attention of Ahaz might be called to it. The conduit of the upper pool is mentioned also in 2Ki 18:17. It was probably a subterranean duct which brought water into the city from the high ground outside the Damascus gate. Ahaz may have visited it in order to see that it was made available for his own use, but not for the enemy’s.
Isa 7:4
Take heed, and be quiet; or, see that thou keep quiet; i.e. “be not disturbed; do not resort to strange and extreme measures; in quietness and confidence should be your strength” (see Isa 30:15). The two tails of these smoking firebrands. Rezin and Pekah are called “two tails,” or “two stumps of smoking firebrands,” as persons who had been dangerous, but whose power of doing harm was on the polar of departing from them. They could not now kindle a flame; they could only “smoke.” The son of Remaliah. Pekah seems to be called “Remaliah’s son” in contempt (comp. Isa 7:5, Isa 7:9), Remaliah having been a man of no distinction (2Ki 15:25).
Isa 7:6
Make a breach therein. The word employed means properly “making a breach in a city wall” (2Ki 25:4; 2Ki 2:1-25 Citron. 32:1; Jer 39:2; Eze 26:10), but is used also in a metaphorical sense for injuring and ruining a country (see especially 2Ch 21:17). The son of Tabeal; or, Tubal. “Tab-ill” appears to be a Syrian name, founded upon the same pattern as Tab-rimmon (1Ki 15:18), rite one meaning “God is good, “the other “Rimmon is good.” We cannot, however, conclude from the name that the family of Tabeal was monotheistic (Kay), for El was one of the many Syrian gods as much as Rimmon.
Isa 7:7
Thus saith the Lord God; literally, the Lord Jehovah, as in Isa 28:10; Isa 40:10; Isa 48:16, etc. It shall not stand; i.e. “the design shall not hold good, it shall not be accomplished.” Rezin and Pekah have planned to set aside the issue of David, to which God had promised his throne (2Sa 7:11-16; Psa 89:27-37), and to act up a new line of kings unconnected with David. They think to frustrate the everlasting counsel of God. Such an attempt was of necessity futile.
Isa 7:8
For the head of Syria is Damascus, etc. Syria and Ephraim have merely human headsthe one Rezin, the other (Isa 7:9) Pekah; but Judah, it is implied, has a Divine Head, even Jehovah. How, then, should mere mortals think to oppose their will and their designs to God’s? Of course, their designs must come to naught. Within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, etc. If this prophecy was delivered, as we have supposed, in B.C. 733 (see note on Isa 7:1), sixty-five years later would bring us to B.C. 669. This was the year in which Esar-haddon, having made his son, Asshur-bani-pal, King of Assyria, transferred his own residence to Babylon, and probably the year in which he sent from Babylonia and the adjacent countries a number of colonists who occupied Samaria, and entirely destroyed the nationality, which, fifty-three years earlier, had received a rude blow from Sargon (comp. Ezr 4:2, Ezr 4:9, Ezr 4:10, with 2Ki 17:6-24 and 2Ch 33:11). It is questioned whether, under the circumstances, the prophet can have comforted Ahaz with this distant prospect, and suggested that in the present chapter prophecies pronounced at widely distant periods have been mixed up (Cheyne); but there is no such appearance of dislocation in Isa 7:1-25; in its present form, as necessitates any such theory; and, while it may be granted that the comfort of the promise given in Isa 7:8 would be slight, it cannot be said that it would be nil; it may, therefore, have been (as it seems to us) without impropriety added to the main promise, which is that of Isa 7:7. The entire clause, from “and within” to “not a people,” must be regarded as parenthetic.
Isa 7:9
If ye will not believe, etc. Translate, If ye will not hold this faith fast, surely ye will not stand fast. Full faith in the promise of Isa 7:7 would have enabled Ahaz to dispense with all plans of earthly policy, and to “stand fast in the Lord,” without calling in the aid of any “arm of flesh.” Distrust of the promise would lead him to take steps which would not tend to “establish” him, but would make his position more insecure (see 2Ki 16:7-18; 2Ch 28:16, 2Ch 28:20).
Isa 7:10-16
THE SIGN OF IMMANUEL. The supposition that there was a considerable interval between Isa 7:9 and Isa 7:10 (Cheyne) is quite gratuitous. Nothing in the text marks any such interval. God had sent Ahaz one message by his prophet (Isa 7:4-9). It had apparently been received in silence, at any rate without acknowledgment. The faith had seemed to be lacking which should have embraced with gladness the promise given (see the last clause of Isa 7:9). God, however, will give the unhappy monarch another chance. And so he scuds him a second message, the offer of a sign which should make belief in the first message easier to him (Isa 7:11). Ahaz proudly rejects this offer (Isa 7:12). Then the sign of “Immanuel” is givennot to Ahaz individually, but to the whole “house of David,” and through them to the entire Jewish people. “A virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, whose name shall be called Immanuel; and before this child shall have grown to the age of moral discernment, God’s people will have been delivered, and their enemies made a desolation” (Isa 7:14-16). The exact bearing of the “sign” will be best discussed in the comment upon Isa 7:14.
Isa 7:10
The Lord spake again unto Ahaz. As before (Isa 7:3, Isa 7:4) by the mouth of his prophet.
Isa 7:11
Ask thee a sign. Asking for a sign is right or wrong, praiseworthy or blamable, according to the spirit in which the request is made. The Pharisees in our Lord’s time “asked for a sign,” but would not have believed any the more had they received the sign for which they asked. Gideon asked for a sign to strengthen his faith (Jdg 6:37, Jdg 6:39), and received it, and in the strength of it went forth boldly against the Midianites. When God himself proposed to give a sign, and allowed his creature to choose what the sign should be, there could be no possible wrong-doing in a ready acceptance of the offer, which should have called forth gratitude and thanks. Ask it either in the depth, or in the height above; i.e. “Ask any sign thou wilt, either in hell or in heaven”nothing shall be refused thee.
Isa 7:12
I will not ask, neither will I tempt the Lord. Ahaz, who has no wish for a sign, because he has no wish to believe in any other salvation than flint which will follow from the realization of his own schemes, finds a plausible reason for declining to ask for one in those passages of the Law which forbade men to” tempt God” (Exo 17:7; Deu 6:16). But it could not be “tempt-tug God” to comply with a Divine invitation; rather it was tempting him to refuse compliance.
Isa 7:13
O house of David (comp. Isa 7:2). It is not Ahaz alone, but the “house of David,” which is on its trial. Men are conspiring to remove it (Isa 7:6). If it will not be saved in God’s way, it will have to be removed by God himself. Is it a small thing for you to weary men? i.e. “Are you not content with wearying men; with disregarding all my warnings and so wearying me? Must you go further, and weary God” (or, “wear out his patience”) “by rejecting his gracious offers?” My God. In Isa 7:11 Isaiah had called Jehovah “thy God;” but as Ahaz, by rejecting God’s offer, had rejected God, he speaks of him now as “my God.”
Isa 7:14
Therefore. To show that your perversity cannot change God’s designs, which will be accomplished, whether you hear or whether you forbear. The Lord himself; i.e. “the Lord himself, of his own free will, unasked.” Will give you a sign. “Signs” were of various kinds. They might be actual miracles performed to attest a Divine commission (Exo 4:3-9); or judgments of God, significative of his power and justice (Exo 10:2); or memorials of something in the past (Exo 13:9, Exo 13:16); or pledges of something still future. Signs of this last-mentioned kind might be miracles (Jdg 6:36-40; 2Ki 20:8-11), or prophetic announcements (Exo 3:12; 1Sa 2:34; 2Ki 19:29). These last would only have the effect of signs on those who witnessed their accomplishment. Behold. “A forewarning of a great event” (Cheyne). A virgin shall conceive. It is questioned whether the word translated “virgin,” viz. ‘almah, has necessarily that meaning; but it is admitted that the meaning is borne out by every other place in which the word occurs m the Old Testament (Gen 24:43; Exo 2:8; Psa 68:25; Pro 30:19; Son 1:3; Son 6:8). The LXX; writing two centuries before the birth of Christ, translate by . The rendering “virgin” has the support of the best modern Hebraists, as Lowth, Gesenins, Ewald, Delitzsch, Kay. It is observed with reason that unless ‘almah is translated “virgin,” there is no announcement made worthy of the grand prelude: “The Lord himself shall give you a signBehold!” The Hebrew, however, has not “a virgin,” but “the virgin”, which points to some special virgin, pro-eminent above all others. And shall call; better than the marginal rendering, thou shalt call. It was regarded as the privilege of a mother to determine her child’s name (Gen 4:25; Gen 16:11; Gen 29:32-35; Gen 30:6-13, Gen 30:18-21, Gen 30:24; Gen 35:18, etc.), although formally the father gave it (Gen 16:15; 2Sa 12:24; Luk 1:62, 83). Immanuel. Translated for us by St. Matthew (Mat 1:23) as “God with us” ( ). (Comp. Isa 8:8, Isa 8:10.)
Isa 7:15
Butter and honey shall he eat. His fare shall be of the simplest kind (comp. Isa 7:22). That he may know; rather, till he shall know (Rosenmller); i.e. till he come to years of discretion.
Isa 7:16
The land, etc. Translate, The land shall be desolate, before whose two kings thou art afraid. The “land” must certainly be that of the two confederate kings, Rezin and Pekah, the Syro-Ephraim-itic land, or Syria and Samaria. “Desolate” may be used physically or politically. A land is “desolate” politically when it loses the last vestige of independence.
Isa 7:17-25
THE DANGER TO JUDAH FROM ASSYRIA. The perversity of Ahaz, already rebuked in Isa 7:13, is further punished by a threat, that upon him, and upon his people, and upon his father’s house, shall come shortly a dire calamity. The very power whose aid he is himself bent on invoking shall be the scourge to chastise both king and people (Isa 7:17-20). The land shall be made bare as by a razor (Isa 7:20). Cultivation shall cease; its scant inhabitants will support themselves by keeping a few cows and sheep (Isa 7:21), and will nourish themselves on dairy produce, and the honey that the wild bees produce (Isa 7:22). Briers and thorns will come up everywhere; wild beasts will increase; cattle will browse on the hills that were once carefully cultivated to their summits (Isa 7:23-25).
Isa 7:17
The Lord shall bring upon thee, etc. The transition from promises to threatenings is abrupt, and calculated to impress any one who was to any extent impressible. But Ahaz seems not to have had “ears to hear.” From the day that Ephraim departed from Judah; i.e. from the time of the revolt under Jeroboam (1Ki 12:16-24)an evil day, which rankled in the mind of all true Judaeans. Even the King of Assyria. The construction is awkward, since “the King of Assyria’ cannot well stand in apposition with “days.” Hence many take the words for a gloss that has been accidentally intruded into the text (Lowth, Gesenius, Hitzig, Knobel, Cheyne). Others, however, see in the grammatical anomaly a grace of composition.
Isa 7:18
The Lord shall hiss (see Isa 5:26, and note ad loc.). For the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt. The “fly of Egypt,” like the “bee of Assyria,” represents the military force of the nation, which God summons to take part in the coming affliction of Judaea. The prophetic glance may be extended over the entire period of Judah’s decadence, and the “flies“ summoned may include those which clustered about Neco at Megiddo, and carried off Jehoahaz from Jerusalem (2Ki 23:29-34). There may be allusion also to Egyptian ravages in the reigns of Sargon, Sennacherib, and Esar-haddon. In any general review of the period we shall find it stated that, from the time of Sargon to that of Cyrus, Judaea was the battle-ground upon which the forces of Assyria (or Assyro-Babylonia) and Egypt contended for the empire of western Asia. The desolation of the land during this period was produced almost as much by the Egyptian “fly” as by the Assyrian “bee.” The “rivers of Egypt” are the Nile, its branches, and perhaps the great canals by which its waters were distributed. The bee that is in the land of Assyria. The choice of the terms “bee“ and “fly,” to represent respectively the hosts of Assyria and Egypt, is not without significance. Egyptian armies were swarms, hastily levied, and very imperfectly disciplined. Assyrian were bodies of trained troops accustomed to war, and almost as well disciplined as the Romans.
Isa 7:19
And rest; or, settle. In the desolate valleys. Gesenius and Vance Smith translate “the precipitous valleys;” Mr. Cheyne, “the steeply walled valleys.” But the cognate word used in Isa 5:6 can only mean “waste,” which supports the rendering of the Authorized Version. The exact word used does not occur elsewhere. Upon all bushes; rather, upon all pastures.
Isa 7:20
Shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired; rather, with the hired razor; i.e. the razor that Ahaz will have hired (2Ki 16:8). The metaphor well expresses the stripping of the land bare by plunder and exaction (comp. Eze 5:1, Eze 5:12, and 2Ch 28:19-21). God would use Tiglath-Pileser as his instrument to distress Ahaz. By them beyond the river; or, in the parts beyond the river. “The river” is undoubtedly the Euphrates, and they who dwell beyond it the Assyrians. By the King of Assyria. Once more a gloss is suspected, as in Isa 7:17. The meaning would certainly be sufficiently plain without the clause. The head the hair of the feet the beard. These three represent all the hair on any part of the body. Judah is to be completely stripped.
Isa 7:21
A man shall nourish a young cow, and two sheep; literally, two ewes. A stop having been put to cultivation, men shall return to the pastoral life, but shall not possess more than two or three head of cattle apiece, the Assyrians having swept off most of the beasts. Tiglath-Pileser, in his inscriptions, mentions his carrying off homed cattle and sheep to the amount of many thousands from the countries which he overran or conquered.
Isa 7:22
For the abundance of milk that they shall give. The small number of the cattle will allow of each having abundant pasture. Hence they will give an abundance of milk. He shall eat butter; rather, curdsthe solid food most readily obtained from milk (comp. above, Isa 7:15). Curdled milk and wild honey should form the simple diet of the remnant left in the land. It is, of course, possible to understand this in a spiritual sense, of simple doctrine and gospel honey out of the flinty rock of the Law; but there is no reason to think that the prophet intended his words in any but the most literal sense.
Isa 7:23
A thousand vines at a thousand silverlings. By “silverlings” our translators mean “pieces of silver,” probably shekels. “A thousand vines at a thousand shekels” may mean either a thousand vines worth that amount, or a thousand vines rented at that sum annually (comp. Son 8:11). The latter would point to vineyards of unusual goodness, since the shekel is at least eighteen pence, and the present rent of a vineyard in Palestine is at the rate of a piastre for each vine, or 2d. The general meaning would seem to be that not even the best vineyards would be cultivated, but would lie waste, and grow only “briers and thorns.”
Isa 7:24
With arrows and with bows. Only the hunter will go there, armed with his weapons of chase, to kill the wild animals that will haunt the thickets.
Isa 7:25
On all hills that shall be digged; rather, that shall have been digged in former times, whether for corn cultivation or for any other. There shall not come thither the fear of briers (so Ewald and Kay). But almost all other commentators translate, “Thou shalt not come thither for fear of briers,” etc. The briers and thorns of the East tear the clothes and the flesh. It shall be; i.e. “each such place shall be.” For the sending forth of oxen; rather, for the sending in of oxen. Men shall send their cattle into them, as alone able to penetrate the jungle without hurt.
Supplementary Note
Isa 7:14
Note on the general purport of the Immanuel prophecy. Few prophecies have been the subject of so much controversy, or called forth such a variety of exegesis, as this prophecy of Immanuel. Rosenmller gives a list of twenty-eight authors who have written dissertations upon it, and himself adds a twenty-ninth. Yet the subject is far from being exhausted. It is still asked:
(1) Were the mother and son persons belonging to the time of Isaiah himself, and if so, what persons? Or,
(2) Were they the Virgin Mary and her Son Jesus? Or,
(3) Had the prophecy a double fulfillment, first in certain persons who lived in Isaiah’s time, and secondly in Jesus and his mother?
I. The first theory is that of the Jewish commentators. Originally, they suggested that the mother was Abi, the wife of Ahaz (2Ki 18:2), and the son Hezekiah, who delivered Judah from the Assyrian power. But this was early disproved by showing that, according to the numbers of Kings (2Ki 16:2; 2Ki 18:2), Hezekiah was at least nine years old in the first year of Ahaz, before which this prophecy could not have been delivered (Isa 7:1). The second suggestion made identified the mother with Isaiah’s wife, the “prophetess” of Isa 8:3, and made the son a child of his, called actually Immanuel, or else his son Maher-shalal-hash-baz (Isa 8:1) under a symbolical designation. But ha-‘almah, “the virgin,” would be a very strange title for Isaiah to have given his wife, and the rank assigned to Immanuel in Isa 8:8 would not suit any son of Isaiah’s. It remains to regard the ‘almah as “some young woman actually present,” name, rank, and position unknown, and Immanuel as her son, also otherwise unknown (Cheyne). But the grand exordium, “The Lord himself shall give you a signBehold!” and the rank of Immanuel (Isa 8:8), are alike against this.
II. The purely Messianic theory is maintained by Rosenmller and Dr. Kay, but without any consideration of its difficulties. The birth of Christ was an event more than seven hundred years distant. In what sense and to what persons could it be a “sign” of the coming deliverance of the land from Rezin and Pekah? And, upon the purely Messianic theory, what is the meaning of verse 16? Syria and Samaria were, in fact, crushed within a few years of the delivery of the prophecy. Why is their desolation put off, apparently, till the coming of the Messiah, and even till he has reached a certain age? Mr. Cheyne meets these difficulties by the startling statement that Isaiah expected the advent of the Messiah to synchronize with the Assyrian invasion, and consequently thought that before Rezin and Pekah were crushed he would have reached the age of discernment. But he does not seem to see that in this case the sigma was altogether disappointing and illusory. Time is an essential element of a prophecy which turns upon the word “before” (verse 16). If this faith of Isaiah’s disciples was aroused and their hopes raised by the announcement that Immanuel was just about to be born (Mr. Cheyne translates, “A virgin is with child”), what would be the revulsion of feeling when no Immanuel appeared?
III. May not the true account of the matter be that suggested by Bishop Lowththat the prophecy had a double bearing and a double fulfillment? “The obvious and literal meaning of the prophecy is this,” he says: “that within the time that a young woman, now a virgin, should conceive and bring forth a child, and that child should arrive at such an age as to distinguish between good and evil, that is, within a few years, the enemies of Judah should be destroyed.” But the prophecy was so worded, he adds, as to have a further meaning, which wan even “the original design and principal intention of the prophet,” viz. the Messianic one. All the expressions of the prophecy do not suit both its intentionssome are selected with reference to the first, others with reference to the second fulfillmentbut all suit one or the other, and some suit both. The first child may have received the name Immanuel (comp. Ittiel) from a faithful Jewish mother, who believed that God was with his people, whatever dangers threatened, and may have reached years of discretion about the time that Samaria was carried away captive. The second child is the true “Immanuel,” “God with us,” the king of Isa 8:8; it is his mother who is pointed at in the expression, “the virgin,” and on his account is the grand preamble; through him the people of God, the true Israel, is delivered from its spiritual enemies, sin and Satantwo kings who continually threaten it.
HOMILETICS
Isa 7:1-7
The designs of the wicked, however well laid, easily brought to naught by God.
It would be difficult to find a scheme, humanly speaking, more prudent and promising than that now formed by Rezin and Pekah. They had each measured their strength against that of Ahaz singly, and had come off decided victors from the encounter. What doubt could there be of success when their arms were united? And success would be a matter of the greatest importance to them. It would enable them to form a compact alliance of three considerable warlike nations against the aggressive power which was threatening all Western Asia with subjugation. It would put an end to the perpetual little wars in which they had been for centuries wasting their strength, and weakening themselves for resistance against an alien conqueror. But God speaks the word: “It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass;” and the promising scheme drops through, ends in disaster. Rezin, its framer, instead of triumphing over Ahaz, is himself attacked by Tiglath-Pileser; his territories are invaded, his capital besieged and taken, his people carried away captive, and himself slain (2Ki 16:9). Pekah, Rezin’s aider and abettor, is then exposed to the full brunt of Assyrian invasion, is attacked, defeated, loses cities and provinces, and, though not slain by the Assyrians, is left so weak and so disgraced, that he is shortly dethroned by a new usurper, Hoshea, who murders him for his own security (2Ki 15:29, 2Ki 15:30). The “house of David,” threatened with removal by the confederates, escapes the crisis unhurt, and continues to occupy the throne of Judah for another century and a half, while the kingdoms of Syria and Israel fall within a few years, and their inhabitants are deported to far-distant regions (2Ki 16:9; 2Ki 17:6; 1Ch 15:26). We may learn from this
I. THE MADNESS OF OPPOSING GOD. Syria and Ephraim were confederate against Judah. They knew that Judah was in an especial way God’s people. They designed to set aside the house of David. They knew, or at any rate Ephraim knew, that the throne belonged to the descendants of David by God’s promise. Thus they set themselves against God knowingly. They thought their wisdom would be greater or their strength superior to his. But thus to think is utter madness. The “foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men” (1Co 1:24). In vain do “the kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his Anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision” (Psa 2:2-4). God had only to put it into the heart of the King of Assyria to make an immediate expedition, and all the fine schemes of the confederates, which needed time for their execution, came at once to naught, and were confounded. The would-be allies were crushed separately; their victim escaped them; and “the house of David” outlasted both their own.
II. THE WISDOM OF FULL TRUST IN GOD. When once God had sent him the message, “It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass,” Ahaz might have rested securely on the promise, and have been content simply to “stand still and see the salvation of God.” But he can only have had a weak and imperfect trust in Isaiah’s words. He must bethink himself how he may escape his foes; he must bring in another to help him besides God. Accordingly, he “goes to Assyria.” He takes the silver and gold out of the royal palace and out of the temple treasury, and sends them to Tiglath-Pileser, with the offer of becoming his servant (2Ki 16:7, 2Ki 16:8), and he probably flatters himself that he has done well, and owes his escape from Rezin and Pekah to himself. But he has really taken a step on the downward path which will conduct the house of David and the people of Judah to ruin. He has placed himself under an idolater, and paved the way for new idolatries (2Ki 16:10-16). He has helped to sweep away two states, which, while they continued, served as a breakwater to keep the waves of invasion off his own kingdom. He has called in one, who, from the true point of view, has really “distressed him, and strengthened him not” (2Ch 28:20). How much wiser would he have been to have accepted God’s promise in full faith, and not supplemented it by his own “inventions” (Ecc 7:29) God would have found a way to help him and save him, which would have involved no such evil consequences as those which flowed from his own self-willed action.
Isa 7:11-14
Rightful and wrongful asking for signs.
To ask for a sign is sometimes spoken of in Scripture as indicative of want of faith, and therefore as an offence to God:
“An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign” (Mat 12:39), “This is an evil generation; they seek a sign” (Luk 11:29). “Jesus sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign? Verily I say unto you, There shall no sign be given to this generation” (Mar 8:12). “The Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom’ (1Co 1:22). On the other hand, it is sometimes spoken of without any dispraise, and seems to be viewed as natural, rightful, even as a sort of proof of faith. Ahaz, in the present passage, is bidden to “ask a sign, and is blamed for refusing to do so. His refusal “wearies“ God (Isa 7:13). The disciples ask our Lord, unrebuked,” What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” (Mat 24:3). Hezekiah asks Isaiah, “What shall be the sign that the Lord will heal me, and that I shall go up into the house of the Lord the third day?” (2Ki 20:8; comp. Isa 38:22). Can any tests be laid down whereby the right and the wrong may be distinguished in this matter? We think that some may.
I. IT IS RIGHT TO ASK FOR A SIGN.
1. When a person comes forward and claims our obedience as a Divine teacher or leader. Moses anticipated that his countrymen in Egypt would refuse to listen to him if he presented himself to them without credentials, and was given at once the power of working certain miracles as signs that he was commissioned by God (Exo 4:1-9). As soon as Jesus came forward to teach and to preach, he was asked, not unreasonably or improperly, “What sign showest thou?” (Joh 2:18), and responded, without blaming those who asked him, by a reference to the greatest of his miracles, his resurrection. The apostles were authorized to work miracles as signs of their Divine mission.
2. When we have an invitation from God through his accredited messenger, as Ahaz had, to ask a sign.
3. When we feel that much depends on our decision in a practical mattere.g. the lives of otherswe may humbly ask, as Gideon did (Jdg 6:36-40), that God will, if he so please, give us some external indication, or else such strength of internal conviction as will assure us what his will is; only in such cases we must be careful to make our request conditional on its being acceptable to him, and we must be ready, if it be not granted, to act in the matter to the best of our ability on such light as is vouchsafed us.
II. IT IS WRONG TO ASK FOR A SIGN.
1. In a captious spirit, with an intention to cavil at it, and (if possible) not accept it. This was the condition of mind of the Pharisees, who would not have believed even had Christ come down from the cross before their eyes, as they asked him to do (Mat 27:42).
2. When we have already had abundant signs given us, and there is no reasonable ground for doubt or hesitation as to our duty. This was the case of those Jews who still “required a sign” (1Co 1:22) after the Resurrection and Ascension.
3. When we ask for it merely to gratify our curiosity, as Herod Antipas just before the Crucifixion (Luk 23:8).
4. When we arbitrarily fix on our own sign, and determine to regard the result, whatever it be, as a sign from heaven. This is the case of those who choose to decide a practical matter by sortes Virgiliance, or sortes Biblicae, or any other appeal to chance. They are not entitled to ask God for signs of this kind, or to regard such signs as significant of his will. To trust to them is not faith, but superstition.
Isa 7:14
Jesus our Immanuel.
I. REASONS FOR BELIEVING THIS.
1. None but Jesus was ever born of a pure virgin.
2. None but Jesus was ever “God with us.”
3. None but Jesus ever knew truly “to refuse the evil and choose the good.”
II. DUTIES FLOWING FROM THE BELIEF.
1. If Jesus is “God with us,” we must obey him.
2. If Jesus is “God with us,” we must trust him.
3. If Jesus is “God with us,” we must strive to imitate him.
4. If Jesus is “God with us,” we must continually worship and pray to him.
5. If Jesus is “God with us,” we must love him.
III. DOCTRINES INCLUDED IN THE BELIEF.
1. The Divinity of Christ, since he is “God with us.”
2. His humanity, since he is conceived and born of a woman, and eats earthly food.
3. His love and pardoning grace, since he is “with us,” not against us; on our side, not our adversary.
4. His atonement for our sins, since without atonement he could not pardon.
Isa 7:17-20
Our pleasant vices whips for our own backs.
Ahaz has made up his mind to “hire” the keen razor that lies beyond the far waters of the Euphrates, in Mesopotamia and Assyria Proper. He means to meet the danger which he sees to be impending, by his own wisdom and in his own strength. His ally, Tigiath-Pileser, “the great king, the King of Assyria” (2Ki 18:28), shall crush the hosts of Pekah and Rezin, save Judah and Jerusalem from harm, nay, perhaps exalt Judah to the position which was his before Israel revolted under Jeroboam. But God has decreed otherwise. He will endorse Abaz’s scheme to a certain extent; he will employ the sword of Tiglath-Pileser to destroy Rezin (2Ki 16:9) and chastise Pekah; but he will then make him a scourge to chastise Ahaz himself. The razor hired by Ahaz shall shave Judaea as clean as Samaria, exhausting the land utterly, and leaving it with comparatively few inhabitants. Ahaz shall find that he is not really “helped“ by his ally, but only “distressed” and injured (2Ch 28:20, 2Ch 28:21). In all this we have a specimen of one of the ordinary modes in which God works out his will. He “hoists us with our own petard,” scourges us with the whip which we have ourselves made for another purpose. Ambition brings men into places where they are fain to cry, “Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown.” Avarice indulged makes them grudge themselves the slightest enjoyment. Successful plotting deprives them of all feeling of security, putting their lives and liberties into the power of those who may at any time betray them. The attainment of the highest position at which they have ever aimed leaves them a prey to ennui and disappointment. Rebekah’s plan for the advancement of her favorite son succeeds; but it deprives her of her son’s society for a great part of her life. Absalom’s rebellion against David raises him to the throne, but brings him to an untimely end within a few months. Judas carries out his scheme of betrayal with complete success, and in consequence of his success hangs himself, In our youth we forge those fetters of habit which make us miserable in our old age. We plan, and scheme, and build castles, and laboriously achieve the accomplishment of our plans to a certain extent, with the result that we are Utterly dissatisfied, and would like to pull all down and begin again. “Our mischief falls on our own head, and our wickedness on our own pate” (Psa 7:16). God turns our wisdom into foolishness, and crushes us beneath the structures that our own hands have erected.
HOMILIES BY E. JOHNSON
Isa 7:1-9
The prophet comforts the king.
I. THE POLITICAL OUTLOOK. The kings and chieftains of Palestine were in dread of the great Assyrian power. Under the weak rule of Ahaz Judah had sunk very low, and the King of Damascus, with the King of Ephraim, think it a favorable opportunity to attack the little kingdom, and so strengthen themselves against the Assyrians. “Far down to the gulf of Akaba the shock of invasion was felt. Elath, the favorite seaport of Jehoshaphat and Uzziah, was made over to the Edomites” (2Ki 16:6; 2Ki 15:37). Jerusalem was now threatened, and a usurper was to be placed on David’s throne (Isa 7:6).
II. THE ALARM OF THE ROYAL FAMILY. (Isa 7:2.) News is brought to the palace “Aram encampeth in Ephraim;” the junction of the forces of Syria and Israel had taken place. A shivering fear, like the wind swaying the trees of the forest, passed over their hearts. The court went forth to inspect the fortifications and the waterworks, and came to “the end of the conduit of the upper reservoir, upon the path to the fuller’s field”a well-known spot (cf. Isa 36:2; 2Ki 18:1-37.).
III. THE MEETING WITH ISAIAH. At this spot the prophet, with his son, stood before them. It seems that by Divine intimation the prophet had called the boy Shear-Jashub, which means “Remnant-shall-be-converted,” reminding us of the hope of his calling (Isa 6:1-13.). He would look upon the boy as a living pledge, not only of conjugal affection, but of Divine promise for a nobler Israel. See how he dwells upon the thought in Isa 10:20-22. Inspired by this confidence, he now addresses the king.
IV. COMFORT FOR THE FAINT–HEARTED. “Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, and be not faint-hearted.” A calm, collected mind is a match for any danger. Agitation and fear magnify the ill; stout resolve reduces it to its true proportions. The worst is ever in our own fancy.
“Some of your hurts you have cured,
And the sharpest you still have survived;
But what torments of grief you endured
From evils which never arrived!”
The timid king sees a fiery mass of war rolling towards him; the stout heart of the prophet contemptuously defies the two kings as “two stumps of smoking firebrands.” If we would comfort men, we must, like the prophet, tell them to draw upon the resources God has placed in the soul: intelligence, prudence, self-reliance, and self-help. There is no true self-trust which is not at the same time a trust in God.
IV. THE DEEPEST SOURCE OF STRENGTH AND COMFORT. What are the heads of the Syrian power and of Israel’s power against Judah’s Head, the Lord? Damascus and Samaria will rear their fronts in vain against Jerusalem, if Jerusalem only trust in Jehovah. (Ewald supposes that the words,” Judah’s head is Jerusalem, and Jerusalem’s head is Jehovah,” have fallen out of the text, Isa 10:9.) Only have confidence. There is a play upon words in the original which we might represent in English by: “Fear not, fail not;” or, “Firm in faith is free from scathe; “or,” If ye confide not, abide ye shall not.”
1. Confidence, presence of mind, is a duty in times of danger.
2. It may be gained, if we will fall back upon God as our Leader and Defense. “The Lord is on my side: I will not fear what men shall do unto me.”J.
Isa 7:10-17
Faith triumphing over doubt.
Faith in the Eternal personified in the prophet, to whom all things desirable are to be hoped for, all things to be hoped for are possible; and distrust, the weakness of mere flesh and blood, represented in the timid Ahaz. Such is the illusion of appearances. The outwardly kingly man is the coward; the real king of men is the plain-looking prophet.
I. THE CHALLENGE OF FAITH. In the Name of Jehovah, Isaiah bids the king ask a sign from abovea sign “going deep down to hell or high into heaven.” Truth should be its own evidence to every mind; intuition is better than proof. Isaiah has seen and listened to God in the depths of his own spirit, and no sign in the air above or in the earth beneath can give him more assurance than he already possesses. Would any man but listen and look, he should find the shrine, the oracle, the Shechinah, in his own heart. Within that awful volume of the heart, it may be said, lies the mystery of mysteries. Yet not to all is it given to read therein clearly; all other reading, even in dead tongues, is easier.
“Happiest they of human race
To whom our God has granted grace
To read, to fear, to hope, to pray,
To lift the latch and force the way!”
The duller eye, untrained to such visions, needs the large bold characters of the visible sign. “It comes in with its palpable meaning to aid human weakness. The prophets complained of the craving for signs, yet were compelled to comply with it. Men trust their senses more than they trust the ghostly and majestic shape of abstract truth; and the appeal to the ear, as the Roman poet said, produces but a sluggish movement in the mind compared with the appeal to the faithful eye. We must all confess ourselves weak; needing to see before we can believe, instead of believing that we may see. Yet such incidents as this may remind us that there is a Spirit to help our infirmities, and restore its poise to the mind unhinged by doubt. When Midian threatened Israel in the days of old, God’s voice was heard by Gideon: “The Lord is with thee, thou mighty man of valor.” Yet the heart of the hero still quailed. “O my Lord, if the Lord be with us, why then is all this befallen us? and where be all his miracles which our fathers told us of?” (Jdg 6:12, sqq.). Again the voice came: “Go and save Israel: have not I sent thee?” And again the diffident reply: “O my Lord, wherewith shall I save Israel? behold, my family is poor, and I am the least in my father’s clan.” Then the sign is asked for and granted; the fire, bursting from the rock, consumes Gideon’s offering. God, in the strength of an almighty wisdom, “reasons together” with men. In our day it is equally hard to “hold on and hope hard in the subtle thing called spirit;” and we crave as urgently for signs, though not of the same kind.
II. THE EXCUSE OF MISTRUST. The king alleges that he dare not “tempt Jehovah.” True, this was a deep reproach of old against Israel’s temper. At Rephidim, in the wilderness, Moses stigmatized the demand of the people for water by this phrase, “Is the Lord among us or not?” (Exo 17:2). There lay the canker of guilty skepticism. In a general way the same thing is seen in our time, in the impatient demand that the difficulties of the great problem of the universe shall be cleared up to our private satisfaction. Who gave us the right thus to interrogate and cross-examine him whose works, as a whole, witness to his goodness and love? God did not copy our puny schemes in this construction; nor does he manage the universe as we manage a business, an expedition, the government of a state. “Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God,” meansYou shall not weigh him in the scales of your finite intelligence, nor call upon him to execute your wishes as if they were the same as his holy will. So difficult is it to distinguish the plea of honesty and humility from that of dishonesty and disbelief, it looks as if Ahaz might be right, and Isaiah wrong; the latter too bold, the former more reverent. Scripture may be made to mean anything and everything; the right heart alone reads the right meaning for particular time, place, and person. While it is the mark of presumption to “tempt God,” it is the symptom of unbelief when proffered light and help are refused.
III. THE PERSEVERANCE OF FAITH. With a rebuke of the king’s spirit, charging him in effect with despising the goodness and tending to weary the patience of God, the prophet proceeds with his unasked-for message. What are we to learn from the expression, “wearying God?” All such poetical figures of Scripture have their deep meaning. To despise the riches of God’s forbearance, to grieve his Spirit, to quench his Spirit,these are ways of pointing out and stigmatizing that indifference and coldness to the true and Divine which may be a worse symptom than open hostility. We may either neglect to ask Divine guidance, we may disobey it when we have it intimated, or we may refuse its proffer. Perhaps this last state of mind is the worst. It shows the heart to be already prepossessed and biased. Ahaz was, in fact, under the influence of his false prophets and soothsayers. But why should he decline to hear at least what Isaiah had to say? He should have recognized that there were “two sides” in the great question at issue. Ahaz then warns us against listening to ex parte counsels. He who will only attend to the flattering echoes of his own wishes, is like him who trusteth in his own heart and who proves a fool. From Isaiah, again, the lesson comes back of faithful perseverance in our word and work, in spite of indifference, which threatens to blunt our edge and paralyze our energy. When a matter is on the conscience, let it come forth, “whether men will hear or whether they will forbear.” We calculate consequences too much; and while few have the courage to risk danger by preaching unwelcome truth, perhaps fewer still have the faith in its worth to insist on pressing it upon reluctant ears.
IV. THE SIGN FROM JEHOVAH.
1. It will be of mixed import. Partly it will confirm previous expectation, and partly it will intimate what had not been expected. It proclaims a happy event which Ahaz had not looked for, but also a calamity which he might have averted had he possessed greater faith and truth. Mysteriously, our wishes or fears have some creative influence on our future. “Omens follow those who look to them,” whether for good or evil.
“Man is his own star; and the soul that can
Render a perfect and an honest man,
Commands all light, all influence, and all fate;
Nothing to him falls early or too late.
Our acts our angels are, or good or ill,
Our fatal shadows that walk by us still.”
(Beaumont and Fletcher.)
2. The Immanuel. In a dark saying the prophet opens his mouth. “Lo! haalmah“ (the maiden, she who is no longer a girl, nor yet an old woman) “will conceive, and bear a son, and then call his name With-us-God.” Time is thus hinted at; it will be soon, perhaps in a year’s time. Also the certainty and the joy of deliverance, as the boy’s name betokens. It is the very rallying cry of Israel: “God with us.” We must have a watchword in every noble cause, that shall condense its purport and sound the tocsin to every true aspiration and energy within. So the Crusaders shouted “Dieu le veut!” at the preaching of Peter the Hermit; so were English warriors heartened in the olden days by the cry of “England and St. George!” Notice how this phrase echoes and re-echoes“Immanuel, God-with-us”in Isa 8:8, Isa 8:10 (cf. Isa 9:6). Every great. man raised up from time to time among us in politics, in religion, to deliver, to lead, to counsel, is, in his way, an heroic reflection of Israel’s Messiah. To prophetic faith and hope a Messiah, a Deliverer, is ever at the doors. If the Eternal lives and reigns, and fulfils himself by the agency of men, we need not fear that when the hour strikes, the hero, with all the credentials of his anointing, will appear.
3. Speedy help. “Jehovah shall help thee, and that right early,” is a chronic promise. When the boy is approaching years of maturity and of judgment, his food will be curds and honey; that is, before he comes to manhood, Ephraim and Damascus will be discomfited, and a new “golden age” will have set in. No more is known about any particular youth of Isaiah’s time to whom the mystic prediction could refer than is known about the illustrious boy of Virgil’s prophetic Eclogue, who was to restore good King Saturn’s reign (Ecl. 4.). It is a misunderstanding of the nature of prophecy when we try to fix its forecasts to place or time. A prophecy is never fulfilled as we expect. It refers to a world not bounded by our horizons, and to a history which does not fall into our time perspective. This ideal Immanuel was destined yet to float before the pious hope of the nation for many centuries, till it was united with the real in the person of Jesus.
4. The chastisement that must precede prosperity. The great Assyrian conquest and the desolation it brings must come, in punishment of the unfaithfulness of the royal house, and the estrangement of the nation from Jehovah’s ways. It is only after long trial in the fire and thorough regeneration that prosperity can come. It is a doubtful picture of the future, in which rays of glory strike athwart dark masses of gloom. Such is ever our outlook, whether for personal history, as for Isaiah in the preceding chapter, or for a nation, as here. Never has the hope of Christ been wanting, never the promise of his coming died out; and never proclaimed without the intimation of woes and tribulations first to come. Christ’s own forecasts of the future (see the closing chapters of Matthew) present the like half-veiled, half-revealed perspective. We must ever look out upon the coming time with confidence or with mistrust, according as our hearts are stayed, like Isaiah’s, upon Jehovah, or weak, because trusting only to the arm of flesh, or to the irrational dreams of superstition, like Ahaz.J.
Isa 7:18-25
War-pictures.
I. INVADING HOSTS. The armies of Egypt and Assyria are compared to swarms of bees. As the bee-master calls to his winged slaves with a peculiar sound, so at the call of Jehovah the swarms of Israel’s foes will come on, with swords that sting, and settle down in the low-lying pastures of the land, in the rock-clefts, the hedges of thorn, and the pastures. (For the image of the bees, compare Deu 1:44; Psa 118:1-29.) In Joe 2:1-32. we find a splendid picture of locusts as pictorial of an invading army.
II. DEVASTATION. Another striking image. The land, devoured by strangers, will be like a man clean shaven from top to toe of all his manly ornament of hair and beard. Like a keen razor will be the sweeping penal judgment of Jehovah on the holy laud. The rich vineyards will disappear. No pruning nor digging will go forward. Briers and thorns, quick usurpers of the neglected corn-fields, will flourish, and the courts of the houses will be weed-grown (cf. Isa 5:6; Isa 32:13). Here and there will be seen a cow and a sheep or two, grazing as on a great common or desert. The farmer will disappear, or will return to the wild nomad life, living on the produce of his few cattle and on honey. Thorns and thistles will replace the vines, and the hunter will wander with bow and arrow where once the husbandman had been seen busy with spade or plough. The hoe will cease from its work, for, alas! with hope of fruit the “fear of thorns and thistles” has ceased; and the ox and the sheep will find free pasture everywhere. We have seen Landseer’s two striking pictures, “War” and “Peace,” in the National Gallery, and can feel their pathos. To look out from peace and plenty upon a perspective of smoke, bloodshed, and desolation is that to which the prophet calls the king. Yet amidst the gloom appears the figure, mystically hinted, of the young Messiah. And, indeed, it was in the midst of down-trodden Galilee, over which armies had so often tramped, that Jesus appeared, and adopted the holy and comforting mission of the Messiah as his own (Luk 4:1-44.).J.
HOMILIES BY W.M. STATHAM
Isa 7:9
No faith, no fixity.
“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.” Faith is older than the Law. It is, in fact, the eider principle of all Divine teachings. Believe. “For he that cometh to God must believe that he is.” Moreover, it is a living principle. It is not a cold precept, but is vital with trust and confidence.
I. THE PROPHETIC REVELATION. It is very wonderful, and very distinct. See the succeeding (Isa 7:14): “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” Well, therefore, has Isaiah been called” the evangelical prophet,” seeing that we have in his words the revelation of an immaculate Messiah and a suffering Messiah.
II. THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE. That we are not “established” unless we believe is a principle, not only of particular but of universal application. We must believe in each other to have commerce established. Home itself is never secure without mutual trust, and there can be no established character in religion unless we have that faith without which it is impossible to please God, and which gives vital energy to all other graces.
III. THE ABSOLUTE CONDITION. “If ye will not believe.” Here is the responsibility of the soul. And doubtless we are responsible for our beliefs. We are to weigh, to judge, to consider, to prove all things. “Judge, I pray you,” says God in this same Book of Isaiah (Isa 5:3), “betwixt me and my vineyard.” The condition must be absolute. It is not a threat; it is a statement of that which cannot be other than so. If I do not believe that corn will grow, I shall not plant it. If I do not believe that God is able and willing to save, I shall not be amongst those who believe to the saving of their souls. If I do not believe that spiritual aid will be given to perfect my. graces, I shall not pray for it. “If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”W.M.S.
HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON
Isa 7:1-9
The establishing power of faith.
The practical force of this prophetic utterance is found in the final words of it: “If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established” (Isa 7:9). We may see in them a declaration expressly personal. They intimate to Ahaz that if he, the present King of Judah, does not put his faith in the minister and in the message of the Lord, his kingdom and his power will suffer loss.
1. His faith was sorely tried. “His heart was moved as the trees of the wood by the wind” when he heard that two powerful monarchs were confederate against him (Isa 7:1, Isa 7:2). It required no little faith to accept, without reserve, the assurances of Isaiah (verses 4-9).
2. But he had solid ground on which to build his hope. The history of his country should have made it perfectly practicable to believe that, whatever the Lord had decided upon, all the hosts of heathendom would be unable to withstand.
3. His human fears proved too strong for his religious convictions.
4. The prophet warned him that with the failure of his faith would come material loss. This minatory prediction was only too painfully fulfilled. Elath, a port on the Red Sea, was lost to the kingdom (2Ki 16:6); great numbers of the people were slaughtered (2Ch 28:6); many captives were carried away (2Ch 28:8); Judah became tributary to Assyria (2Ki 16:8, 2Ki 16:9). “The Lord brought Judah low because of Ahaz” (2Ch 28:19). He was not established; he was enfeebled and humiliated.
The lesson which the passage, particularly these final words, conveys to us is this, that WHEN FAITH FAILS, POWER DEPARTS; that faith is the one sustaining power which will establish us in the spiritual position to which we have attained. We look, therefore, at this broad principle applicable to every one.
1. As Christian men we enjoy an excellent estate. We are “kings and priests unto God;” we are made to “sit in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” “Now are we the sons of God,” and all the joys and privileges of sonship are ours.
2. But our position is threatened by powerful adversaries. There come up against us the foes of our raceworldly allurements, fleshly indulgences, incitements to spiritual pride and unbelief, temptations to fall into selfishness or into untruthfulness, etc.
3. Only a living faith will uphold us in our integrity. We must have the faith which
(1) enables us to realize the nearness of the living God;
(2) makes spiritual realities and successes seem to our souls the great things they are;
(3) brings near to our hearts the future world, with its judgment and its reward;
(4) calls down from above, by believing prayer, Divine direction and support. Without this living faith, we may expect the enemy to overcome us; with it, we may hope to be established in our high and blest estate.C.
Isa 7:10-13
Sin and duty in regard to signs.
The passage is interesting for this among other reasons, that Ahaz is charged with guilt for declining that course the resort to which became the national sin (1Co 1:22), and for using words which were afterwards employed by the Savior himself in repelling the attack of the evil one (Mat 4:7). We are, therefore, reminded
I. THAT THE WORTH OR UNWORTHINESS OF AN ACTION DEPENDS LARGELY ON ITS ATTENDANT CONDITIONS. The Jews who sought a sign from Christ were rebuked by him for so doing (Mat 12:38, Mat 12:39). Ahaz is reproved for not asking for one on this occasion. The circumstances of the two cases made all the difference. In the ease of the Pharisees, abundant miraculous evidence had already been granted, and they demanded a work of a particular kind after their own fancy; in the case of Ahaz, he deliberately refused the special privilege which God offered him. That which is right and wise under certain circumstances may be wrong and foolish under others. Many things which are proper to youth are improper to age, and vice versa; language which is devotion on the lips of the half-enlightened would be irreverence in the mouth of the children of privilege. Clearly instructed by God, the Israelites were simply obedient and courageous when they expelled the Canaanites from the country and occupied their land, but an invasion of another’s territory and expulsion or slaughter of its inhabitants without such express authority from above would be a crime of the greatest magnitude; etc.
II. THAT WE DO WELL TO SHRINK HONESTLY AND EARNESTLY FROM TEMPTING GOD. Honestly; for an insincere profession of doing so is of no account. Ahaz probably used this as a mere pretext with which to cover his real unwillingness to have the will of God unmistakably revealed. And earnestly; for to tempt God is a serious sin and a calamitous mistake. We do tempt him when we neglect our duty as citizens of this world or as travelers to eternity, or when we deliberately run great risks, whether bodily or spiritual, unwarrantably presuming on God’s interposing power or inexhaustible grace.
III. THAT WE SHOULD GRATEFULLY ACCEPT THE LOWER AS WELL AS THE HIGHER INFLUENCES WHICH GOD OFFERS US. A sign such as Jehovah offered Ahaz was a privilege of a lower order than the exhortation of his servant Isaiah. A miracle which appeals to the senses and the imagination is not so high and pure an influence as a sacred truth which appeals to the conscience and the reason. Yet it had its own value, and was not to be disregarded or declined. We should fear God, should exercise faith in Jesus Christ, should serve our race, first stud most because it is our sacred duty so to do; but we may well be animated and impelled by other and less lofty considerationsby the fear of offending God, by the hope of gaining his favor and his reward, by a desire to win the gratitude of those we serve, by a wish to please those to whom we are related. The superfine purity which will not be moved by any but the very highest considerations does not suit our human nature, and is not sanctioned in the Divine Word.
IV. THAT THE PATIENCE OF A LONG–SUFFERING GOD MAY BE OUTWORN BY OUR PERVERSITY. “Will ye weary my God also?” (verse 13). Much is said in Scripture of the patience of God. He is “slow to anger, and of great mercy” (Psa 145:8). We read of “the riches of his forbearance and long-suffering” (Rom 2:4). And they who are honestly trying to please and serve him may count on his considerateness, though their efforts be imperfect and their mistakes be many. But they who pertinaciously refuse his yoke, and stubbornly go on their own way when he is calling them to walk in his paths, may find that it is only too possible to “weary him also,” and to bring down irreparable evil on their souls.C.
Isa 7:14
The presence of God.
We naturally ask the questionIn what ways is God ours? “Immanuel;” in what respect is he one of whom we can say that he is “God with us;” how and where is his presence to be found and to be felt? There are many answers to this question; there is
I. THE ANSWER OF SACRED POETRY. That the presence of God is seen in the results of his Divine handiwork, in the foundations and pillars of the earth, in the “meanest flower that blows,” in the varied forms of life; that it only needs a true imagination to see him in all the objects and scenes of his creative power; that “every bush’s afire with God, but only he who sees takes off his shoes.”
II. THE ANSWER OF PHILOSOPHY. That his presence is in all-surrounding nature, in which he is immanent; that though all nature does not include Deity, the Divine power is present in all things, sustaining, energizing, renewing; the “laws of nature” are the regular activities of God.
III. THE ANSWER OF NATURAL RELIGION. That he is with us in his omnipresent and observant Spirit; that he fills immensity with his presence, being everywhere and observing everything, and taking notice of every human soul; that the Infinite One is he who cannot be absent from any sphere or be ignorant of any action.
IV. THE ANSWER, OF THE EARLIER REVELATION. That his presence is in his overruling providence; that God is with us, not only “besetting us behind and before,” not only “understanding our thought afar off,” but also “laying his hand upon us,” directing our course, ordering our steps (Psa 37:23), making plain our path before our face, causing all things to work together for our good, defending us in danger, delivering us from trouble, establishing us in life and strength and joy (see Gen 39:2; 1Sa 3:19; 1Sa 18:12; 2Ki 18:7; Mat 28:20).
V. THE ANSWER OF THE LATER REVELATION. That his presence was in his Divine Son. The time came when the words of the text proved to have indeed “a springing and germinant fulfillment;” for a virgin did conceive, and bring forth a Son, and he was the “Immanuel” of the human race, God with usthat One who dwelt amongst us, and could say, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” They who walked with him and watched his life, and who understood and appreciated him, recognized the spirit, the character, the life, of God himself. In his mind were the thoughts, in his words the truth, in his deeds the principles, in his death the love, in his mission the purpose, of God. When “Jesus was here among men,” God was with us as never before, as never since.
VI. THE ANSWER OF OUR OWN CONSCIOUSNESS. That his presence is in and through his Holy Spirit. God is with us because in us; present, therefore, in the deepest, truest, most potent, and influential of all ways and forms; in us, enlightening our minds, subduing our wills, enlarging our hearts, uplifting our souls, strengthening and sanctifying our spiritual nature. Then, indeed, is he nearest to us when he comes unto us and makes his abode with us, and thus “dwells in us and we in him.” Our duty, which is our privilege, is
(1) to realize, increasingly, the nearness of the living God;
(2) to rejoice, practically, in the coming of God to man in the presence of the virgin-born Immanuel;
(3) to gain, by believing prayer, the presence of the Divine Spirit in the sanctuary of our own soul.C.
Isa 7:17-25
Divine retribution.
The reference of these verses is clearly national; nevertheless they may be pointed so as to bear upon individual men; for we may be sure that it is on the same principles on which God governs communities that he rules the heart and life of each one of his subjects. We gather concerning Divine retribution
I. THAT IT MAY BE WROUGHT BY VARIOUS INSTRUMENTALITIES.
1. Sometimes by unconscious instruments.
(1) It may be, as here, by men acting blindly. Egypt and Assyria would be wholly unaware that they were employed by God to do his punitive work. It often happens that men suppose themselves to be simply seeking their own ends when they are really fulfilling the purpose of the Most High.
(2) Or it more frequently is by the regular action of physical or social laws.
2. Sometimes by conscious agents. As when the parent utters his strong displeasure in the Name of the heavenly Father, or the Church passes its sentence of reproach or exclusion in the Name of the Divine Master.
II. THAT IT MAY TAKE ONE OR MORE OF VARIOUS FORMS. Retribution may assume the form of:
1. Diminution. (Isa 7:21-23.) All diminution is not directly caused by sin, but sin always tends to despoil and to diminish. The result of doing wrong is to come down from the higher estate to the lower, from power to feebleness, from eminence to obscurity, from influence to nothingness.
2. Dishonor. “It shall also consume the beard” (Isa 7:20). When men have long persisted in folly and in transgression they become the mark of general dishonor. From qualified respect down, through all stages of ill opinion, to absolute aversion and contempt, does sin conduct its victims. Sin may start in lofty defiance, but it ends in lowest shame.
3. Degradation. (Isa 7:24, Isa 7:25.) The country that was once cultivated by the hand of skilful diligence is left to yield the wretched and useless crop of “briers and thorns.” The mind that once produced noble thoughts now yields guilty imaginations; the heart that was once full of holy love is now crowded with unworthy passions; the spirit that once soared heavenward with lofty hopes now circles round ignoble aims and ambitions that are of earth and sense; the life which once brought forth all honorable and admirable activities has nothing to offer now but selfish schemes or even deeds of darkness.C.
HOMILIES BY R. TUCK
Isa 7:1, Isa 7:2
National calamity with God and without God.
The historical circumstances connected with this and the following two chapters throw light on the object and meaning of the prophecy. At the close of Jotham’s reign, both the neighboring nations of Israel and of Syria invaded the country of Judah, wasting and desolating it. Now, in the beginning of the reign of Ahaz, they agreed to unite their forces, and so they hoped to take even the chief city, dethrone the reigning king, and partition the land between them. News of this confederacy reached Ahaz, and produced the utmost consternation and bewilderment both in him and in the people of Jerusalem. Hurried efforts were made to fortify the city, and especially to secure the water-stores, on which their ability to stand a siege so directly depended. Plans were also formed to secure the help of the King of Assyria, though the price of such help would too surely be the loss of national independence, and the payment of tribute to Assyria. In those degenerate days few people even thought of seeking help from Jehovah, the mighty God of their fathers. While busy, inspecting the waterworks, and probably filled with new anxiety on finding them neglected and out of repair, Ahaz sees the prophet of Jehovah approach. Isaiah’s message is full of mercy and encouragement. He would quiet the unreasoning and unreasonable fears of the king; he speaks slightingly of Rezin and Pekah, as only two tails of smoking firebrands, whose strength is almost spent; they can only smoke, not blaze, and their kingdoms are hasting to decay. He bids the king not to think for a moment of leaning on Assyria, but to trust in the living God. He graciously offers, in God’s Name, a sign for the confirming of his faith, bidding Ahaz even choose such a one as he felt would convince him. The king stubbornly refuses; and then Isaiah gives one, after sternly rebuking the false humility of the king. The sign is a figurative and poetical assurance that, within some three or four years, the power of his present enemies would be utterly broken. And then mercy passes into judgment, and the prophet sternly reveals the consequences that will follow any leaning upon Assyria. In the text we have a state of public affairs that might well cause alarm, and we dwell on the spirit in which times of national peril may and should be met.
I. NATIONAL CALAMITY WITHOUT THOUGHT OF GOD THE OVERRULER. Just this we have in the historical connection of the text. Viewed politically, there were grave and perilous complications. Assyria was pushing its way towards the Mediterranean. Syria and Israel were in its way. Instead of resisting their more serious Eastern foe, they confederated to injure the small country of Judah, which blocked their way southwards towards Egypt. Rezin had seized Elath, Judah’s great commercial port on the Red Sea, and Pekah had overrun the territory of Judah. There was a general panic. King and people alike askedHow could they resist this combination of the neighboring countries against them? A great fear possessed the king, and drove him to the most impolitic action he could possibly take. Having no sense of reliance on God, consciously severed by his willfulness from God, he sought alliance with Assyria, and brought ruin on himself and his neighbor-foes. The figure of the trees waving to and fro confusedly in the wind, is expressive of the man who is not stayed on God, but left to the uncertainties of a judgment based only on circumstances.
II. NATIONAL CALAMITY WITH THE THOUGHT OF GOD THE OVERRULER. This is the contrast suggested in the passage, If Ahaz had been a God-fearing man, how differently he would have locked on these circumstances! If he had been a David, or a Jehoshaphat, or a Hezekiah, a man with the fear of God before his eyes, he would have met the perilous conditions with calmness, and seen in them an occasion for
(1) special prayer;
(2) renewed dependence;
(3) and the testing of the sincerity of his trust;
(4) also a call to watching for the Divine will;
(5) and the requirement to set himself in an attitude of obedience, ready at once, and heartily, to follow the Divine lead.
Apply to modern complexities of party politics and international complications, as well as to times of national calamity, by disease, or by depressed trade. Show what a vantage-ground he occupies who believes in God as the God of nations, looks for his providential rulings and overrulings, and knows that he “makes the wrath of man praise him, and restrains the remainder of that wrath.” Show how quiet a nation may be when it knows that national polity is directed in the fear of him who must be called the “God of the whole earth.”R.T.
Isa 7:7
Man proposes, God disposes.
Recalling the scheme at which Rezin and Pekah had been so busy, arranging everything so cleverly, and making so sure of a speedy and triumphant success, Jehovah, sovereign Ruler and Judge, looks from above upon it all, and says of it, “It shall not stand, neither shall it be.” “The plan shall not even take practical shape, much less would it achieve a permanent success.” “They should neither of them, Syria nor Israel, enlarge their dominions nor push their conquests any further; they shall be made to know their own; their bounds are fixed, and they shall not pass them” (Matthew Henry).
I. THE LIMITS OF MAN‘S FREEDOM. He is
(1) free to think;
(2) free to judge;
(3) free to plan.
There is a sense in which man has dominion over the world in which he is set, and over the circumstances in which he is placed. God, in a sense, put man, separate from himself, in the garden of this world, and stands aloof to see what he will do. Man has the trust of
(1) intelligence, so that he may estimate things and the relations of things;
(2) free-will, so that he may choose his course of action, But it is limited intelligencelimited
(a) by brain-capacity;
(b) educational opportunity;
(c) conditions of health;
(d) surrounding prejudices;
(e) measures and degrees of Divine revelation.
And it is carefully circumscribed free-willgraciously limited because man’s decisions are constantly made upon
(a) imperfect knowledge, and
(b) upon impulses of biased feeling.
The will of man is also limited by the condition of its accordance with the supreme will of God. Man can plan, purpose, and propose; but there he must stop until he can gain Divine permission to carry out his plans. If he dares to force his plans into action against God, he will surely find that he does but run “upon the bosses of Jehovah’s buckler.” Who hath ever resisted God and prospered?
II. THE ILLIMITABLE CHARACTER OF GOD‘S CONTROL. There is the firmest and most peremptory tone in this declaration, “It shall not stand.” Affirming his authority over all nations, the Lord of hosts says, “Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance” (Isa 19:25). God controls
(1) the minds that plan;
(2) the bodies that execute;
(3) the spheres and circumstances in which the plan is to be worked.
Watching everything, God has the arresting hand, and can say, “Thus far shalt thou go, and no further.”R.T.
Isa 7:9
The faith-condition.
“If ye have no faith, verily ye shall not have continuance” (Cheyne’s translation). “If ye hold not fast, verily ye shall not stand fast.” See the expression illustrated in Jehoshaphat, when going out to meet the army of the Moabites and Ammonites (2Ch 20:20). Habakkuk gives the same sentiment in his familiar expression, “The just shall live by his faith.” Faith in him and in his Word is the one universal condition that God demands, and righteously demands, in view
(1) of what he is;
(2) of what he is in relation to us; and
(3) of what he has already done for his people, in the experience of which we have shared.
God’s law for creatures dependent on him is, “Trust me.” God’s grace for his creatures is, “Response to trust.” He unfolds his best blessings to those who can both trust and hope in him. The demand for faith, as the condition of receiving Divine blessings, may be traced in the Divine dealings with men through all the ages and dispensations.
I. GOD REQUIRED FAITH IN THE PATRIARCHS. Enoch was translated as a response to a life of faith; Noah was saved from the flood because he believed; Abraham’s faith was “counted for righteousness.” They all “died in faith.” The glory on their lives is the shining of God’s acceptance given to men of faith.
II. GOD REQUIRED FAITH IN THE ISRAELITES. For forty years he was teaching them the trust-lesson. And if the Divine reproaches and reprovals and chastisements could be gathered up into a sentence, they would read thus: “You will not trust me wholly.” “The Lord said unto Moses, How long will this people despise me? and how long will they not believe, for all the signs which I have showed among them?” (Num 14:11). Those Israelites “could not enter in because of their unbelief” (Heb 3:19).
III. GOD REQUIRED FAITH IN THE TIME OF THE KINGS. This was the one demand made in God’s Name by the prophets; and striking illustrative incidents may be found in the mission of Elijah, and in the reigns of Asa, Jehoshaphat, and Hezekiah.
IV. GOD REQUIRED FAITH WHEN SPEAKING TO MEN THROUGH CHRIST. Illustrate
(1) his effort to secure faith in sufferers before he healed them; and
(2) his reproaches of his disciples, again, and again saying to them, “O ye of little faith!”
“How is it that ye have no faith. Impress that this is God s necessary condition still, and for us. Whence proceed sterility and unfruitfulness in the knowledge of Christ, and inefficiency to good works, and the life of righteousness? The answer isWe have not “faith, even as a grain of mustard seed.”R.T.
Isa 7:12
True and false humility.
We are to understand that Ahaz had already made up his mind to resort to Assyria for help; probably he had even already sent his ambassadors to Tiglath-Pileser, and he would not be deterred from his purpose by any promise or threatening of Jehovah’s But he dissembled, and tried to get out of his difficulty by hypocritically pretending that he was deterred from asking a sign by a religious fear of tempting the Lord. His words sound as if he were humble and reverent; his heart was strong in its self-willed purposes. He says, “Neither will I tempt the Lord,” as if it could be a tempting of God to do that which God directed and invited him to do. Remember that, in such passages as this, the word “tempt” means, “Put God to the test, as if you doubted him.” Dr. Kay, in ‘Speaker’s Commentary,’ says, “In his estrangement of heart Ahaz had come to look on God as his enemy, as a dangerous person who was thwarting him in his most cherished plans, and from whom, therefore, it were best to stand entirely aloof. If he should ask a sign and it were to be granted him, would he not be bound by his own act and deed to confess the greatness of his past sins, to give up his politic plans for the future, to submit to the bends and fetters of the old cycle of religious teaching from which he had shaken himself free? ‘Can we find some searching test by which true humility can be distinguished from false? (It is assumed that humility is explained and enforced as the proper attitude for man to take, and spirit for man to cherish, in the presence of God.)
I. TRUE HUMILITY SUBMITS AND OBEYS. If Ahaz had been truly humble, he would have responded at once to the Divine invitation. Illustrate from Moses shrinking from obedience to the commands which God gave him. True humility will always say, “If God has called me to do anything, I must do it; I can do it, and I may be quite sure his grace will be with me or the doing. True humility is bold unto obedience.
II. FALSE HUMILITY SUBMITS, BUT DOES NOT OBEY. This is precisely the attitude of Ahaz. He submits; he takes the humble posture; he speaks the humble words; lout he does not obey. His humility is but hypocrisy. Bishop Hall says, “Art imitates nature, and the nearer it comes to nature in its effects, it is the more excellent. Grace is the new nature of a Christian, and hypocrisy that art that counterfeits it; and the more exquisite it is in imitation it is the more plausible to men, but the more abominable to God. It may frame a spiritual man in image so to the life that not only others, but even the hypocrite himself, may admire it, and, favoring his own artifice, may be deceived so far as to say and to think it lives, and fall in love with it; but he is no less abhorred by the Searcher of hearts than pleasing to himself.” And Matthew Henry says, “A secret disaffection to God is often disguised with the specious colors of respect to him; and those who are resolved that they will not trust God yet pretend that they will not tempt him.” It may be impressed that the truly humble man is more jealous of God’s honor than of his own, and therefore promptly submits and obeys; but the man who is not really humble is anxious about his own honor, and only makes a show of being jealous of God’s. Ahaz needed this counsel, and so do we: “Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time.” And the greatest test of this great grace isDoes it lead its possessor to follow and obey?R.T.
Isa 7:14-16
The nature of the Messianic prophecies.
This being the first in the Book of Isaiah recognized as Messianic, the general subject may be illustrated in connection with it. Isaiah here gives a sign. Looking upon some woman in the king’s presence who at the time was a virgin, he, in effect, says, “You shall know that Jehovah is the living God, and the all-sufficient Helper of his people, by this.Before this woman can bear a son, and that son grow old enough to know good from evil, your land shall be delivered, and your enemies overthrown.” Many Christian interpreters see in this a direct reference to Messiah, as the Virgin’s Son; a reference which makes them quite indifferent to the connection of the passage with events then transpiring. There are some cases in which we must admit that the prediction almost wholly concerns the Messiah. It is nearly impossible to exhaust Isaiah lift, for instance, by any local and historical references. But in most cases we shall find that the Messianic meaning of the passage is its second reference, its inner and less evident teaching. The words immediately relate to some existing condition or national prospects, and through these they have to reveal the higher truth. We ought not to be surprised at this; we should rather expect it, as in perfect harmony with the idea of revelation to the Jews. Their history was a series of deliverances and redemptions; a succession of types of the coming spiritual redemption. Their religion was a set of complicated signs, all more or less keeping up the expectation of him who was to come. What, then, could be more natural and proper than that the prophecies should do, what the history and the religion had before donebear within their external form a deeper meaning, and help to lift the soul of the nation on towards its great glory, the coming, as a member of the Isaiah race, of the long-promised r, Seed of the woman” who should “bruise the serpent’s head?” The general fact that many of the prophecies do refer to the life and times of Christ cannot reasonably be doubted; but difficulties will be found in the treatment of each particular case. The language must be carefully weighed, the figures skillfully considered, and the connections adequately explained, ere any decision can be arrived at. We illustrate the difficulties by considering the very perplexing passage now before us.
I. The prophet gives a sign by renewing the promise of deliverance, and connecting it with the birth of a child, whose significant name is made a symbol of the Divine interposition, and his growth a measure of the subsequent events. Instead of saying that God would be present to deliver them, he says that the child shall be called ‘Immanuel,’ God with us. Instead of mentioning a term of years, he says, ‘Before the child is able to distinguish between good and evil.’ Instead of saying that until that time the land shall lie waste, he represents the child as eating curds and honey, spontaneous products, here put in opposition to the fruits of civilization. In a figurative manner, and using the large vague figures and metaphors characteristic of prophetic writing, Isaiah asserts that within some three or four years their deliverance would be effected.
II. But the question which is found so difficult to answer is thisOf what child does the prophet here speak? One class of writers suggest a child born in the ordinary course of nature, and in Isaiah’s days. Some say it was Hezekiah; others a younger son of Ahaz, by a second marriage; others refer the passage to the birth of the prophet’s own son, by a person then present, who is afterwards called “the prophetess.” Another class of writers affirm that intentional reference is made to two distinct children, and two birthsthat of Christ, as Immanuel, and that of Shear-Jashub, the son of Isaiah; and so a double meaning was given to the passage. Yet another class of writers refer these three verses directly and exclusively to the Messiah. One of this class says, “The passage describes the actual desolations of the early period of Christ’s life.” Another skillfully paraphrases one of the sentences thus: “Before the Messiah, if he were born now, could know to distinguish between good and evil.” And one suggests that Isaiah had a prophet’s vision of the birth of Messiah, and so spoke of it as though taking place then.
III. The conclusion of a sober and careful examination of this, and other so-called Messianic prophecies, will probably be that the sign or the figure always relates, more or less distinctly, to passing events and passing interests; but that no local associations can exhaust their meaning and mission. The spiritually minded will always discern more in the Bible than appears to those who treat it only as a common book. The Spirit, who is given to us, “searcheth all things,” even the deep things of God, the hidden references of his revelation.R.T.
Isa 7:14
The Immanuel-Child.
It is one of the most important facts concerning the manifestation of Christ, that he was “born of a virgin,” or, as the “Te Deum” expresses it, “He did not abhor the Virgin’s womb.” We dwell on two points.
I. IN THE VIRGIN‘S CHILD LIES HID THE MYSTERY OF THE INCARNATION. Isaiah could have had but faint and shadowy glimpses of those deeper meanings which we can find in his words. Reading his prophecy in the light of its fulfillment in the wonderful beginnings of Christianity, we can tell of a virgin unto whom the angel of the Lord came, saying, “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” That was the announcement of the coming of the one only true virgin’s Child. It is surely a surprising thing that we make so much of the great events of Christ’s life, and dwell with so much interest upon the circumstances of his death, and yet pay such comparatively slight attention to the original mystery, the wonder of his coming to earth at all, the marvel of the woman-born God. The Incarnation is the mystery of mysteries, and he who has received right impressions concerning it will find no further mysteries in our Redeemer’s life or death over which he will need to stumble. Men sayCan there be such things as miracles? Is there not an antecedent improbability that the order of nature, as we know it, should ever be changed? To receive the record of Christ’s birth of a virgin-mother is to settle the whole question of the miraculous. The Incarnation is put before us at the very beginning of the gospel history; it is the vestibule of the temple of the Christ. He who can venture past that entrance-hall will find no grander mystery in any of the courts or holy places. That Incarnation is so distinct from the ordinary working of human laws, so manifestly the operation, in the human sphere, of higher and Divine laws, that he who can receive Christ as the Child of the virgin-mother and the Divine Father, will find no miracle wrought during our Lord’s life raise any disturbing doubts. The idea of incarnation is not, indeed, peculiar to Christianity. It is found in other religions, especially in those of India and China. But the contrast they present is most significant. In other religions the incarnation is transient; it is more like the angelophanies of the Old Testament times, than like the living Man, Christ Jesus, of the New Testament. Theirs is only into the appearance of a man; this is into the reality of human flesh. Theirs is usually into some monstrous form of man or beast; this is into the simple but perfect form of a true manhood. Our faith is asked for the incarnate God. Born in accordance with human times; coming into the world as every member of the race must come; nourished for months with a mother’s own life. At once Man and God: born of the earth, earthy; born of heaven, heavenly and Divine. Deity in the dress of the human flesh; the Creator become a creature; the Lord of heaven and earth in the form of a servant. Infinity pressed into the hour of a mortal life. Immortality submitting to die. A babe, yet a King. An infant, yet a God. He who was from everlasting consenting to begin in time. That being the awful mystery of the Christ, it is no longer strange that he should heal diseases, feed multitudes, still the raging seas, and waken the slumbering dead; all difficulties begin to fade before us when we can say, “This was the Son of God.”
II. IN THE NAME, IMMANUEL, LIES HID THE MYSTERY OF THE REDEMPTION. If God is with his creatures, it can only be to bless and save them, to deliver them from evil, to bring them into full unity with himself, to establish them in all good. If God, who is love, is with his sinful, rebellious, self-willed children, it can only be that he may deliver them from the consequences of their transgressions, and recover them from the denudation of their sinfulness. There is light and hope for humanity in this great name; the name by which prophecy pointed to him who should come; the name by which he was called when he came; the name which fits in with Jesus. The full name is Immanuel-Jehoshua“God with us, saving us from our sins.”R.T.
Isa 7:16
The culture of conscience.
“Before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.” Some take this expression as referring to pleasant or unpleasant food; but it probably is used in a general moral sense. Compare the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, in Gen 2:9; Gen 3:5. For the expression as used in reference to children, see Deu 1:39. Isaiah evidently intends, by a figure of speech, to indicate two or three years, the time when a child may be regarded as getting out of his infancy of ignorance and innocence. Without discussing philosophically the nature of conscience, or the sense in which man has innate ideas, and keeping quite within the sphere of observation and experience in family life, we may say, with Reid, “Conscience, like all other powers, comes to maturity by insensible degrees, and may be more aided in its strength and vigor by proper culture.” The following, line of thought is given barely and suggestively, because its detailed treatment must depend on the philosophical and theological standpoint of the preacher.
I. WE BEGIN LIFE WITH DESIRES. AS soon as Eve was made she looked longingly on the beautiful fruits of the garden. The infants are crying for something, if it be only the light. Man wants. He is not sufficient to himself. And the wants are ever growing.
II. WE FIND THE SUPPLY OF SOME DESIRES BRINGS PLEASURE, and of some brings pain. So we begin to distinguish things by their attendant consequences in our feeling.
III. WE CALL THE PAINFUL EVIL, AND THE PLEASANT GOOD; and so establish for ourselves a standard which will test more than we at first imagine.
IV. PRESENTLY WE FIND THAT WE CONFUSE THINGS, AND CALL THINGS PLEASANT WHOSE CONSEQUENCES ARE EVIL. So we discover that our discernment needs educating; and
V. WE ARE BROUGHT TO SEEK A STANDARD BY WHICH TO JUDGE THINGS; that is away from, and beyond ourselves; and we learn to find the only sure educating force in the revealed will of God. Man knows with certainty what is evil and what is good, when he recognizes that God has set him in this world of sensible relations, and, pointing to some things, has said, “Thou mayest;” and to other things, “Thou shalt not.” Conscience is truly cultured only when it clearly witnesses to that of which God has, in his revelation, expressed his approval.R.T.
Isa 7:18-25
National judgment for national sins.
In this latter part of the chapter we have one of those highly elaborate, intense, and suggestive pictures which are peculiar to the books of the prophets. The mighty Assyrian army sweeps over the land; the people flee before them; they fill every corner; they eat up all the food; they carry away all the flocks and herds; a man can barely save one cow and two sheep; they consume the fruits; they trample down the shrubs; they bear off the people captive; they leave behind them a wilderness; there is nobody to rent or till the land; the few scattered inhabitants are content to live on the spontaneous products, milk and curds and honey; agriculture is entirely stopped, and the wild beasts are again encroaching on the arable and pasture lands. William Jay, of Bath, was accustomed to say, “God can punish individuals in this life, and in the next; but he can only punish nations, as such, in this life.” This may be further illustrated by reference to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, which was a direct national judgment on their sins as a nation, culminating in the judicial murder of their Messiah. The shout had risen, “His blood be on us, and on our children;” and so it was. We suggest the following points for consecutive illustration:
I. Some sins are distinctively national. Such as the high-handed dealings of modern nations with semi-civilized peoples.
II. Some judgments are distinctly national. Such as Isaiah refers to: loss of statesmen; or of male population; war, etc.
III. These are directly related, the one to the other, as are sowing and reaping.
IV. They are thus fitted together, as outward and evident illustrations of the relations between sin and punishment, for the individual.R.T.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Isa 7:1. And it came to pass, &c. The fifth sermon, which extends from this to the 13th chapter, is of a very mixed and various argument; partly doctrinal and redargutory, partly consolatory and prophetic. It may be divided into five parts: the first contained in this seventh chapter; the second from chap. Isa 8:1 to chap. Isa 9:7 the third from chap. Isa 9:7 to chap. Isa 10:5 the fourth from chap. Isa 10:5 to the end of that chapter; and the fifth is contained in the 11th and 12th chapters. The first part of this prophesy, which sets forth the fate of the Jewish nation with respect to the Ephraimites, Syrians, and Assyrians, contains a kind of introduction to the subsequent prophesies in this discourse. The kings of Syria and Israel (Rezin and Pekah) had conspired against Ahaz, and determined to dethrone him. Ahaz, in great straits, instead of turning to the God of his fathers, thought of applying for help to the king of Assyria. In this state of things, God commands the prophet to take his son Shear-jashub with him; to go and meet Ahaz, and assure him of the vain attempt, nay, of the speedy destruction of these two kings; and at the same time, to permit him to ask any sign which he should think proper of his deliverance. This he refuses, having but little confidence in God; wherefore God himself gives to the pious and true believers a sign more certain than all others,of the birth of the Messiah, the Immanuel, from a virgin; but to Ahaz, whose incredulity and hypocrisy were extremely displeasing to God, he denounces at the same time what he and his posterity should hereafter suffer from the king of Assyria, whose help he now regarded more than that of God. This is the argument of the first section of this discourse, whence we easily perceive its design, which is two-fold; first, to comfort the pious in Jerusalem, amid this great calamity which threatened their nation, and to testify the singular providence of God towards the house of David, which he had hitherto preserved, and would continue to preserve till the completion of his great design: and secondly, to upbraid the folly and ingratitude of Ahaz. The prophetic narration is two-fold; first, we have the occasion of its delivery, namely, the confederacy of the kings of Assyria and Israel, and the consternation of Ahaz and his people in consequence of it; Isa 7:1-2. Secondly, the revelation made to the prophet; Isa 7:3 to the end: and this revelation contains a consolatory prediction respecting the disappointment of the two kings of Israel and Syria, with a sign of that benefit given by God himself; Isa 7:3-16 and a convicting prediction directed to Ahaz, in which are denounced the evils which the king of Assyria should hereafter bring upon the Jewish nation, Isa 7:17-25.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
I.THE TWO CHIEF PROPHECIES CONCERNING THE BIRTH OF THE VIRGINS SON AND OF THE PROPHETS SON
Isa 7:1 to Isa 8:4
I.THE PROPHECY OF THE VIRGINS SON IMMANUEL
Isa 7:1-25
a) Isaiah and Ahaz at the conduit of the upper pool
Isa 7:1-9
1And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not 27prevail against it.
2And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria 28is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind. 3Then said the Lord unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and 29Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the 30highway of the fullers field; and say unto him,
4Take heed, and be quiet;
Fear not, 31neither be faint hearted
32For the two tails of these smoking fire-brands,
For the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah.
5Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah,
Have 33taken evil counsel against thee, saying,
6Let us go up against Judah, and 34 35vex it,
And let us make a breach therein for us,
And set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal:
7Thus saith the 36Lord God,
It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.
8For the head of Syria is Damascus,
And the head of Damascus is Rezin;
And within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, 37that it be not a people.
9And the head of Ephraim is Samaria.
And the head of Samaria is Remaliahs son.
38 39If ye will not believe, surely, ye shall not be established.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL
Chap. 7 Isa 7:1. is used not only of motion towards a place that is conceived of as higher (e. g., 1Ki 12:27 sqq.; 2Ki 24:1, and of the opposite, e. g. 1Ki 22:2; 2Ki 8:29) but also of any hostile proceeding, entering on a plan (1Sa 17:23; 1Sa 17:25; Mic 2:13; Neh 2:2, etc). changed 2Ki 16:5 to comes from the preceding , and from the additional idea, perhaps, that Rezin was the chief person.
Isa 7:2. is never used in the sense of niti, confidere. But it is used of swarms of birds, grasshoppers and flies, that settle down somewhere (Isa 7:19; Exo 10:14; 2Sa 21:10). Such is its meaning here: the army of Syria has settled down like a swarm of grasshoppers on the spot where the army of Ephraim was encamped. Comp. 2Sa 17:12. On the fem. after comp. 2Sa 8:5; 2Sa 10:10; coll. Isa 14:15; Isa 14:18.
Isa 7:3. occurs again in Isaiah only Isa 36:2. Isaiah used often beside here: Isa 36:2; Isa 11:16; Isa 19:23; Isa 33:8; Isa 40:3; Isa 49:11; Isa 59:7; Isa 62:10. only here and Isa 36:2, in Isaiah.
Isa 7:4. After should follow properly a negative notion, whence the word always has after it the conjunctions or or the preposition (as solitary exceptions, comp. Exo 19:12; Exo 23:13). Therefore a negation must be supplied out of the following , take heed of (unbelieving, thus sinful) disquietude, but rather be quiet. The direct causative Hiphil has evidently the meaning that Ahaz must control his anxiety, quiet himself. The word occurs in Isaiah again Isa 30:15; Isa 32:17; Isa 57:20, whereas the Niph. occurs in Isaiah only here. Niph. of ; with the exception of Psa 55:22, it always occurs in connection with or in the sense of becoming weak, timorous (Deu 20:3; Jer 51:46; 2Ki 22:19; Job 33:16); it does not occur again in Isa. Only once he uses the Pual Isa 1:6. (according to Isa 9:13-14; Isa 19:15) the tail, the end piece. (found beside only Amo 4:11; Zec 3:2) is the charred stick of wood that may have been used to stir the fire. smoking, only here in Isaiah, and Exo 20:18. , to understand the prefix to be of timewhile glowing (Drechsler, Delitzsch, Knobel, Gesenius ) seems to me unsuitable. marks the object of fear. following rather distributes the common notion smoking firebrands to the two so-named, as often stands after general expressions of number, (especially after ). Comp. Exo 12:19, whosoever eateth leaven shall be cut off . Gen 7:21; Gen 9:2; Gen 9:10. Comp. Ewald, 217 sq. The LXX. translates singularly , . P, etc. Gesenius correctly conjectures that the translator instead of reads , or rather .
Isa 7:6. is Hiph. from . The fundamental meaning is: to experience a shaking, a shock. From this are derived the meanings a) timere, trembling, quaking, (Isa 7:16, Exo 1:12; Num 22:3); b) taedere, fastidire. Disgust brings about a shock (comp. es schttelt mich) which, when it is powerful, occasions vomiting () (comp. e.g. Gen 27:46; Num 21:5); c) in the Hiphil: to wake up; for waking up is the effect of a shock that the sleeper experiences from without or within. In this sense, however, the Hiphil is evidently a direct causative, since it properly means to make a shaking, a shaker. Wherever else this Hiph. occurs, except our verse, it means to awake. Our verse is therefore the only one where the word occurs as the causative of the notion = timere (verse 16). Many expositors therefore have hesitated to take the word in this sense. Thus Fuerst (Concord., p. 988) would give our the meaning incidere, impungere, or abscindere, in that he combines it with thorn, or with tempus abscissionis, harvest. Gesenius, (Thes. p. 1208) proposes to read coarctemus, urgeamus, (Isa 29:2; Isa 29:7). However, as this Hiphil is in any case unusual, it seems better to take it in a sense that is suggested by something near at hand, Isa 7:16. The feminine suffix here and afterwards in and relates plainly to Judah as land. The meaning of the Hiph. is not quite clear. The fundamental meaning of the word is: to split. It is used of splitting wood (Ecc 10:9, coll. Gen 22:3) of eggshells (Isa 59:5) of the earth from which springs forth the fountain (Ps. 124:15) of the waters of the Red Sea (Psa 78:13); it is said that a besieged city is split when it is taken, that is, a breach is made in its walls (2Ki 25:4; Jer 39:2; Jer 52:7; Eze 26:10). In the last-named sense it is used 2Ch 32:1, where it is said of Sennacherib: He encamped against the fenced cities and thought , where the constructio praegnans is important to the exposition of our passage. The word however is also used of a land. 2Ch 21:17 we read of the Philistines and Arabians: they came up into Judah, , and carried away all the substance, etc. Beside the present place, the Hiph. occurs only 2Ki 3:26, where it is used of an intended breaking forth on the part of an enclosed army. According to all this, the use of the word for breaking through, forcing a fortified city, seems to me to settle the meaning. A land is forced, broken through, as well as a city, when the living wall that defends it, the defensive army is broken through. Thus the sense of our passage will be: let us break through it (the land of Judah) i. e., take it by breaking through the protecting army, and thereby take it to ourselves. There lies in the expression, beside the pregnant construction, at the same time a metonomy.
It is not known who the son of Tabeal was. is the Hebrew (comp. 1Ki 15:18); the ending changed in the pause from , whereby, perhaps intentionally, arises the meaning not good (good for nothing). If the name was of Israelitish origin (comp. ) then likely that Tabeal or his son was a fugitive of Judea of note. The name is found again Ezr 4:7. On the Assyrian monuments of the time of Tiglath-Pileser is mentioned however an I–ti–bi–i–lu, or Ti–bi–i–lu, with the addition mat A–ru–mu i. e., from the land of Aram.
Isa 7:8 b. The position of these words is surprising. Why do they not stand after Isa 7:9 a? And how is the at the beginning of Isa 7:8 to be construed? Is it that paratactic Vav, that is determined only by the connection? And what is it that so determines it? Shall we regard it as causal, which were quite grammatical? (Comp. Gen 24:50; Deu 17:16; Psa 7:10, etc. Ewalds Gram., 353 a; Gesen. 155, 1 c). Or shall we, like Chrysostom and Calvin, with whom Tholuck agrees, take it in the sense of or. interea? Take one or the other and it is not satisfactory. It seems to me to answer best, to assume that the words are a sample of the oracle-like, lapidary style (Lapidarstils) and thence no grammatically correct construction is to be looked for. Did the words in question stand after 9 b, whither Lowth has transposed them, then indeed the disposition of the sentence would be more correct, but the construction would be monotonous. occurring four times in succession would sound bad. By the interposition of Isa 7:8 b, this evil is avoided. Thus manifoldness is combined with equilibrium. And thus, without ignoring the difficulties, we will still recognize the possibility of the passage being genuine as it is, against which there is grammatically nothing to oppose (comp. Tholuck, Die Propheten und ihre Weissagungen, and Ewald). Examples of the construction Gen 40:13; Gen 40:19; Jos 1:11; 2Sa 12:22; Isa 21:16; Jer 28:3; Jer 28:11; Amo 4:7. is imp. Kal. from fractus est. Isa 30:31; Isa 31:4; Isa 51:6, etc. = , comp. Isa 17:1; Isa 23:1; Isa 62:10.
Isa 7:9. Niph. is firmum, stabilem, perennem esse (Isa 22:23; Isa 22:25; Isa 33:16; Isa 49:7; Isa 55:3; Isa 60:4). is pleonastic, but very expressive, and is to be treated as dependent on an ideal verbum dicendi (Num 22:29; Num 22:33; Psa 128:4).
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1. And it came to passwith the wind.
Isa 7:1-2. This war expedition of the united Syrians and Ephraimites is mentioned 2Ki 15:37; 2Ki 16:5 sq. and 2Ch 28:5 sq. Were one to follow the statement of 2Ki 15:30, then Pekah did not at all live to see Ahaz. For there it reads: And Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah, and smote him and slew him, and reigned in his stead in the twentieth year of Jotham the son of Uzziah. If Pekah was killed after Jothams death under Ahaz, it must any way read in the first year of Ahaz. But according to all other data, Pekah must undoubtedly have lived to see Ahaz. For 2Ki 15:1 it reads that Ahaz became king in the seventeenth year of Pekah, who, according to 2Ki 15:27, reigned twenty years. How otherwise could Pekah, according to Isa 7:1, wage war against Ahaz? How could Tiglath-Pileser, according to 2Ki 15:29, whom Ahaz summoned (2Ki 16:7), in Pekahs day, still occupy the region of Ephraim and carry the people away? But the statement of 2Ki 15:30 b proves itself false in other ways. For, 2Ki 15:32-33, we read that Jotham became king in the second year of Pekah, and reigned sixteen years. Accordingly Jotham must have died in the eighteenth year of Pekah. Therefore Pekah survived Jotham, and not Jotham Pekah, as 2Ki 15:30 gives the impression. Hitzig (Gesch. d. Volkes Isr. I. p. 212) makes the original form of the statement to be: And he killed him in the twentieth year of his reign, and became king in his stead; but the following of Jotham the son of Uzziah, etc., are the superscription of 2Ki 15:32 sqq.
However this may be, the statement of 2Ki 15:30 b is in any case incorrect. Therefore we have here a plain example of the corruption of the text, unless we assume an inexact or erroneous use of original sources.
Pekah not only survived Jotham, but he lived during three years of Ahaz, because, according to 2Ki 15:27, Pekah reigned twenty years, and in his seventeenth year Ahaz became king. Therefore in these three years must occur the events related in Isaiah 7, 8. Drechsler says correctly, the spoiling of Ephraim, spoken of 2Ki 15:29, presupposes the conception, birth, and learning to talk of Hasten-spoil, Quick-prey (Isa 8:3 sqq.); consequently one must say that the attack of Rezin and Pekah must be located in the first half of the three years that the latter lived in common with Ahaz.
Rezin was the last king of independent Syriafor by his overthrow it became an Assyrian province. The founder of the kingdom of Syria of Damascus was Rezin (), who, having run away from his lord Hadadeser, king of Syria of Zobah, gathered a horde of fighting men, and settled with them in Damascus (1Ki 11:23 sqq.). From that period we find the Syrian power, hitherto divided into many small kingdoms, concentrated under the king of Damascus. Rezin is followed by Hezion (, if he is not identical with as Ewald,Gesch. d. V. Isr. III. 151, and Thenius, on 1Ki 15:19, conjecture); he by his son Tabrimon, who, according to 1Ki 15:19, appears to have made a league with Abijam the king of Judah, which Benhadad, son and successor of Tabrimon, renewed with king Asa; an un-theocratic proceeding, which, according to 2Ch 16:7, provoked the sharp censure of the prophet Hanani. We have, then, here the example of a league that a king of Judah made with the heathen king of Syria in order to war upon Baasha, king of Israel, to which in addition must be observed the grave fact that Benhadad at the very time was in league with Baasha, and consequently must have been solicited to break an existing alliance.
Thus the league between Pekah and Rezin against Ahaz appears as a retribution for the league that Asa had made with Benhadad against Baasha. That Benhadad, whom we may call Benhadad I., was suceeeded by Benhadad II., of whom we read that he combined thirty-two kings under his supreme command against Israel (1Ki 20:1 sqq.). Benhadad II. was succeeded by Hazael, who murdered his master (1Ki 19:15; 2Ki 8:7 sqq.). Hazael was succeeded by Benhadad III., his son (2Ki 13:24); finally Rezin succeeded him; his name possibly is identical with that of Rezin, the founder of the dynasty, as Gesenius (Thesaur. p. 1307) and Baihinger (HerzogsReal-Encyclop. VII. p. 44) conjecture. The sounds and , as is well known, being nearly related (ds and ts; comp. and ,, and , and , and Aram. , etc.). But if and (Pro 14:28, where the word is parallel with ) and (Jdg 5:3; Psa 2:2, gravis, augustus, princeps, stand related in root and meaning, we would then see this kingdom of Damascus also begin and end with an Augustus.
Pekah, son of Remaliah, an otherwise unknown name, was of the king Pekahiah. Luther translates the word by Ritter = knight, but it means properly chariot warrior, because three always stood on a chariot (comp. Exo 14:7; Exo 15:4). It signifies a follower generally (2Ki 10:25), as well as particularly a favored follower, on whose hand the king leaned (2Ki 7:2; 2Ki 7:17; 2Ki 7:19). Pekah killed his master after a reign of two years (2Ki 15:23 sqq.). Like all other rulers of the kingdom of Israel, he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, 2Ki 15:28. Our passage is explained by the parallel passages, 2Ki 16:5 sqq. and 2Ch 28:5 sqq.
The words of 2Ki 16:5 sqq. correspond almost verbatim with Isa 7:1. Such difference as there is indicates that the author of 2 Kings meant, not that Jerusalem itself, but only the king, was hard pressed,meaning, of course, the king as representative of the land. Moreover that the author of 2 Kings drew from Isaiah, and not the reverse, appears to me beyond doubt. For 2 Kings is without doubt a much more recent book than Isaiah. At most, Isaiah could only have used one of the sources used by the writer of 2 Kings. But why need the Prophet look into the archives of the kingdom for a summary notice of an event of his own times, and known to all his contemporaries? Combining then the accounts of 2 Kings and 2 Chron. we obtain the following facts: 1, the hostile incursion of Rezin and Pekah into Judah; 2, a defeat of Ahaz by Rezin (2Ch 28:5); 3, a defeat of Ahaz by Pekah (Isa 7:6-15); 4, the taking of Elath by the Syrians (2Ki 16:6); 5, an expedition of Rezin and Pekah against Jerusalem (Isa 7:1), with which also the notice Isa 7:2 of the fact that Syria has settled upon Ephraim has more or less connection.
The question arises: Is the expedition referred to in our passage identical with that related 2 Kings and 2 Chron.? or if not, did it occur before or after the latter? At the first glance, indeed, one is liable to regard Isa 6:1 as a brief, summary notice of all the transactions of that war. But then it is surprising that this noticewith the promises that follow it in close connectiongives the impression that the war progressed in a way wholly favorable for Judah; whereas we know from the parallel passages that Judah suffered severe defeats and prodigious loss. Therefore we cannot take our verse as such a parallel and summary account. But it is impossible also that what our passage recounts preceded the defeats of which we have account in the parallel passage. For then the statements of our passages would equally disagree with the event. They would announce only good, whereas in reality great misfortunes occurred. We must therefore assume that our passage refers to an expedition that occurred after the events of 2Ki 16:5 sqq., and 2 Isa 28:5 sqq.; and we must conceive of the matter as follows: Rezin and Pekah operated at first separately, as is expressly indicated, 2Ch 28:5. The former, likely, traversed the East of Judahs territory and proceeded at once south toward Elath. But Pekah engaged in battle with Ahaz to the north of Jerusalem, with the bad result for Ahaz, related 2Ch 28:5 b sqq. After these preliminary successes, Rezin and Pekah united their armies and marched against Jerusalem itself. This is the expedition of which our passage informs us, and this is the meaning of Isa 7:2. The expedition, however, did not succeed. For Ahaz had applied to the King of Assyria, and the news that the latter was in motion in response to the request of Ahaz, moved the allied kings to hasten home into their countries. Thus is explained why Isa 7:1 speaks only of an intended war against the city of Jerusalem, and why the author of 2 Kings who mistook our passage for a general notice, and used it as such, resorted to the alterations we have noticed (viz., the omission of against it, and they besieged Ahaz, but could not overcome him 2Ki 16:5). This is essentially the view of Caspari too (in the Universitts-Programm ber den syrisch-ephraimitischen Krieg, Christiani, 1849), with which Delitzsch agrees (in his review of the foregoing writing in ReutersReport., April, 1851, reprinted in his commentary).
In regard to Isa 7:1 b, a double matter is to be noticed: 1. that it does not say he could not take it, or make a conquest of it or the like; but he could not make war upon it. That must plainly mean that Rezin and Pekah could not find even time to begin the siege. 2. The clause he could not, etc., must be construed as anticipation of the result, which the Prophet, after the well-known Hebrew manner of writing history, joins on to the account of the beginning. What follows then Isa 7:2, and after, is thus, as to time, to be thought of as coming between Isa 7:1 a and b.
To the house of David.
Isa 7:2. This expression (found again in Isaiah only, Isa 7:13; Isa 22:22) can, indeed, mean the race of David, (comp. 1Sa 20:16; 1Ki 12:16; 1Ki 12:20; 1Ki 12:26, etc.); and Isa 7:13 the plural , hear ye, seems really to commend this meaning. But the singular suffix in and his heart, his people, proves that the meaning is not just the same. Therefore it seems to me that house of David here means the palace, the royal residence. There was the seat of government, the kings cabinet; thither was the intelligence brought. It is as when one says: it was told the cabinet of St. James, or the Sublime Porte. Of course the expression involves reference to the living possessor of the government building, and the governing power, the king. Hence the language proceeds with pronouns (suffixes) in the singular.
2. Then said the Lordthe son of Remaliah.
Isa 7:3-4. The Prophet receives command to go and meet the king, who had gone out, and thus whose return was to be looked for. But he must not go alone, but in company with his son, Shear-jashub. The son is no where else mentioned. The name signifies the chief contents of all prophecy, according to its two aspects. In the notion Shear, is indicated the entire fulness of the divine judgments, that the Prophets had to announce: whereas Jashub opens up the glorious prospect of the final deliverance. [The name means a remnant may return.Tr.] Comp. Isa 1:8-9; Isa 4:3; Isa 6:13; Isa 10:20 sqq. (especially Isa 7:21 where the words expressly recur). We have shown in commenting on Jeremiah 3 sqq.; Jer 31:16-22 what an important part the notion to return, plays in Jeremiahs prophecy. The significance of Shear-jashubs name, however, makes us notice, too, that the Prophet himself bears a significant name. means salvation of Jehovah. And that the proclamation of salvation, comfort is the chief contents of His prophecies Israel has long known, and acknowledged. An old rabbinical saying, quoted by Abarb. reads comp. Introduction. Threatening and consolation therefore go to meet Ahaz embodied in the persons of Isaiah and his son, yet so that consolation predominates, as also the words that Isaiah has to speak are for the most part consolatory. Had Israel only been susceptible of this consolation!
The locality where Isaiah was to meet the king is mentioned Isa 36:2, and in the same words. There, Rabshakeh, the envoy of Sennacherib, according to that passage, held his interview with the men that Hezekiah sent out to him. It must, therefore, have been an open, roomy spot, suited for conferences. According to the researches of Robinson, against which the results of Krafft, Williams and Hitzig prove not to be tenable, (comp. Arnold in HerzogsR. Encycl. XVIII. p. 632 sq.), the upper-pool is identical with the Birket-el Mamilla, which in the west of Jerusalem his in the basin that forms the beginning of the Vale of Hinnom, about 2100 feet from the Jaffa Gate. Moreover this pool is identical with the old pool mentioned Isa 22:11. Hezekiah, when he saw that Sennacherib was coming (2Ch 32:2 sqq.), stopped up the fountains outside of the city, and conducted the water of the fountain of Gihon and that of the upper-pool in a new conduit between the two walls (Isa 22:11 coll.2Ki 20:20; 2Ch 32:30), in contrast with which it was that the upper-pool was called the older. The fullers field, the place where the fullers washed, fulled and dried their stuffs, must have been in the neighborhood of a pool. Now Josephus (Bell. Jud. V. 4, 2) speaks of a , fullers monument, that must have had its position north of the city. For this reason many (Williams, Krafft, Hitzig) look for the fullers field in the neighborhood of the fullers monument. But fullers field and fullers monument need not necessarily be near one another. For the latter does not necessarily concern the place of the fullers as such, but may have been erected on that spot to a fuller or by a fuller for any particular reason unknown to us. And anyway the existence of a pool in ancient times north of Jerusalem cannot be proved. Therefore the fullers field lay probably in the neighborhood of the upper-pool west of the city.
Ahaz had probably a similar end in view at the upper pool to Hezehiahs, according to 2Ch 32:2 sqq. It was to deprive the enemy of all fountains, brooks and pools, and yet preserve them for the use of the city. The end was obtained by covering them over above and conducting them into the city. Perhaps in this respect Ahaz did preparatory work for Hezekiah (comp. Arnold,l. c.). The Prophet warned the king against sinning through unbelieving despondency. The expression fear not, neither be fainthearted, is here and Jer 51:46, borrowed from Deu 20:3, where it is said to the people how they must conduct themselves when they stand opposed in fight to superior forces of the enemy. The expression occurs only in the three places named. Why Ahaz should not fear is expressed in this, that the enemy that threatened him are compared to quenched firebrands and stumps of torches. Two firebrands are mentioned in the first clause, and yet the idea is distributed over three bearers, Rezin, Syria and the son of Remaliah. We see that the Prophet takes prince and people as one; and here he names the two halves of the whole, as instantly afterwards Isa 7:5, Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, bat the second time he does not mention Rezin at all, but only opposes Syria to Ephraim and its king. There appears to me to lie in this an expression of contempt for Rezin, who first is named in connection with his nation and the second time, not at all, so that he plainly appears as a secondary person. On the other hand contempt was expressed for Pekah by calling him only the son of Remaliah. But what is the son of Remaliah, a man utterly unknown, opposed to the son of David!
3. Because Syriashall not be established.
Isa 7:5-9. The conclusion of the premise because Syria, etc., have taken evil counsel, etc., begins Isa 7:7, thus saith the Lord. The evil counsel is set forth Isa 7:6. It shall not come to pass, says literally, what is expressed figuratively by = it shall not stand. For there underlies the latter expression the figure of a prostrate body that attains to standing, therefore gets to its feet and to life. Comp. Isa 14:24; Isa 28:18; Isa 46:10; Pro 19:21. Had this promise been given at the first beginning of the Syro-Ephraimite war, it would have found no complete, corresponding fulfilment. For, as shown above, the counsel did not remain quite unaccomplished. Precisely the (Isa 7:6), the forcing a breach, succeeded, according to 2Ch 28:5. Hence we must, in accordance too with Isa 7:2, assume, that Isaiah addressed this prophecy to Ahaz after the beginning of the second act of that war.
For the head of Syria,etc.
Isa 7:8. These words are very difficult. Especially has the second clause of Isa 7:8, given great offense both by its contents and by its position. Many expositors therefore attempt, either to alter the text, or to reject the words to as a gloss. These, in some instances very ingenious, attempts may be found recapitulated in Gesenius. The Prophet had said, Isa 7:6, that Syria and Ephraim had the purpose of making the son of Tabeal king in Judah. That shall not come to pass, says Isa 7:7. This assertion is established by the double statement Isa 7:8-9. The latter consist of two members each, of which the first corresponds to the third, and the second to the fourth. The first and third member are constructed in pyramidal form: Syria, Damascus, Rezin,Ephraim, Samaria, Pekah. But the third member is quite conformed to the first in reference to what is affirmed of the subjects. Thus it says: the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin. And likewise; the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Pekah. Saying that Damascus had dominion over Syria and Rezin over Damascus, accurately designates the limits of the power of Rezin and Damascus. They may command within these limits and no more. Therefore they have not the power to set a king over Judah according to their pleasure. Moreover, if Damascus is head of Syria and Rezin the head of Damascus, the question arises, too: what sort of a head is it? Is it a strong, mighty head to which no other is equal, that is therefore safe in its sphere of power, and unassailable in it? This question must be negatived. For how can it be said of Damascus, the great, beautiful, and rich city, but still the profane and heathen city, that she enjoys the privilege of being unassailable; that she is able under all circumstances to protect and maintain her dominion? And what of Rezin? Is he an elect? Can his name give a guaranty of the permanence of the region he rules? Not at all. Quite otherwise is it in Judah, where Jerusalem, the city of God, stands opposed to the city of Damascus, and the theocratic king of Davids line to the profane, heathen ruler. Behind Jerusalem and the house of David, stands the Lord as the true head in chief of Israel. What is then the head of Syria, and Damascus compared with the head of Judah and Jerusalem? Thus is explained why Judah has nothing to fear from Rezin and Syria. But of Ephraim Isa 7:9, the same thing is affirmed. Plainly the Prophet would intimate that Pekah and Samaria, too, have only a sphere of power limited to Ephraim, and that Samaria is not to be brought into comparison with Jerusalem, nor the son of Remaliah with the son of David, that consequently, Ephraim is essentially the same as the heathen nation Syria, and just as little to be dreaded by Judah. Thus the meaning of Isa 7:8 a, and 9a, as also their relation to one another is perfectly clear. But what of the two other members Isa 7:8 b, 9b? If we had only to do with 9b, it would be an easy affair; for it contains a very appropriate conclusion to 8a, 9a. It is, if I may so speak, double-edged. Judah is not to appropriate unconditionally the comfort of the promise given to it. Only if it believes and obeys its Lord, need it have nothing to fear from Syria and Ephraim. But if it does not believe in the Lord, it shall itself fall to pieces as the others. It cannot be said that anything essential would be wanting if Isa 7:8 b were not there. Neither can it be said, that in that case an essential member would be abstracted from the outward structure. For 8a and 9a correspond; but 9b is the one conclusion that corresponds to both these members in common. Only if 9b, were wanting, would there be an essential member missing. For then it would appear strange that 9a, should have no conclusion like 8a, and an appropriate termination to the whole address would be wanting. But even if 8b appear unnecessary in the context, that is not saying that it is generally out of place. Many have affirmed this, because it contradicts Isa 7:16, because it does not suit the cheering character of the address, and because the Prophets anyway never have such exact figures. As regards the relation to Isa 7:16, it was long ago pointed out that to the desertion of the land, that was the consequence of the Syro-Ephraimite war (2Ki 15:29), in fact to the deportation by Salmanassar, not sixty-five years, but a much less number of years elapsed. Hence, after the example of Piscator, Jacob Cappellus and others, Usher (Ann. V. T., at the year 3,327) proposed to take as the concluding point of the sixty-five years, the planting of Assyrian subjects in the deserted region of Ephraim (2Ki 17:24) which, according to Ezr 4:2, took place under Esar-haddon. This fact, which indeed may be regarded as the sealing of the doom of Ephraim in regard to its existence as a state, must coincide with the time of Manasseh, and can with the carrying away this king, which according to the assumption of the Jewish chronology in Seder Olam. p. 67, took place in the twenty-second year of his reign. This would of course bring out the sixty-five years.
14 years of Ahaz.
29 years of Hezekiah.
22 years of Manasseh.
65 years.
This reckoning, indeed, rests on no sure data, but it is still possible, and we can meanwhile quiet ourselves and say: if the Prophet meant the sixty-five years so, there exists no contradiction of Isa 7:16, and , shall be forsaken, is not to be taken in an absolute sense. And the comfort that Ahaz was to find in the ruin of Ephraim that was to happen only after sixty-five years, was this, that he could say: a city devoted to remediless ruin, even though not in a very short time, is not to be feared. But as for the exact data of figures, Tholuck (D. Proph. u. ihre Weiss., 1861, p. 116 sqq.), has proved the existence of such in the Old Testament (Isa 16:14; Isa 20:3; Isa 21:16; Isa 38:5; comp. Eze 4:5 sqq.; etc.). Whatever may be thought of the reason of the matter, the fact itself cannot be denied; and I do not comprehend how Diestel (in KnobelsKomm. 4 Aufl. p. 66) can contend against this reality, on which everything here depends.
In order that Judah may partake of the blessing of this promise, it must itself fulfil a condition; the condition especially on which depends the blessed fulfilment of all promises: it must believe. If it believes not, which, alas, was the actual case, then it will not continue to exist itself.
[J. A. Alexander on Isa 7:4. The comparison of Rezin and Pekah to the tails or ends of firebrands, instead of firebrands themselves, is not a mere expression of contempt, nor a mere intimation of their approaching late, as Barnes and Henderson explain it, but a distinct allusion to the evil which they had already done, and which should never be repeated. If the emphasis were only on the use of the word tails, the tail of anything else would have been qually appropriate. The smoking remnant of a firebrand implies a previous flame, if not a conflagration. This confirms the conclusion before drawn, that Judah had already been ravaged.
Pekah being termed simply the son of Remaliah, is supposed by some to be intended to express contempt for him, though the difference may after all, be accidental, or have only a rhythmical design. The patronymic, like our English surname, can be used contemptuously only when it indicates ignoble origin, in which sense it may be applied to Pekah, who was a usurper
On Isa 7:5. The suppression of Pekahs proper name in this clause, and of Rezins altogether in the first, has given rise to various far-fetched explanations, though it seems in fact, to show that the use of names in the whole passage is rather euphonic or rhythmical than significant.
On Isa 7:9. Another rendering equally natural to that of Luther (viz.: if ye believe not, then ye abide not) is; if ye do not believe (it is) because ye are not to be established.]
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. On Isa 7:1. Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.Foerster.
2. On Isa 7:2. Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations. There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.Foerster.He that believes flees not (Isa 28:16). The righteous is bold as a lion (Pro 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jer 17:9). Cramer.
3. On Isa 7:9. (If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.) Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation. But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.Luther.
4. On Isa 7:10-12. Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent. But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith. For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lords Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lords Supper. Yet both have the same object and use. For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lords Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes. Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Gen 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Heb 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Mat 12:39; Mat 16:4; 1Co 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isa 7:13. Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zec 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of Gods eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.Foerster.
6. On Isa 7:14. The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. God with us comprises Gods entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity. In a narrower sense it means God-man (Mat 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (Joh 1:11; Joh 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuels work of the atonement (2Co 5:19; 1Ti 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (Joh 17:23; Joh 17:26; Joh 14:19-21; Joh 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Mat 28:20; Heb 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (Joh 10:16). The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Rev 21:3; Rev 21:23; Rev 22:5).Wilh. Fried. Roos.
Isa 8:7. On Isa 8:5 sqq. Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-dayssuch that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon set their bushel by the bigger-heap. It is but the devils temptation over again: I will give all this to thee.Cramer.Fons Siloa, etc. The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.Calvin on Joh 9:7.
8. On Isa 8:10. When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.Luther.Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.Cramer.
9. On Isa 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1Pe 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him. For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Mat 21:44). Cramer.
10. On Isa 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again Joh 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2Ti 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2Pe 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them. But revelations puff people up and make them insolent. Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.
Chap. 911. On Isa 9:1 sqq. (2). Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is , (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church. Foerster.
12. On Isa 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light. Thus Isaiah calls Him a light to the gentiles, Isa 42:6; Isa 49:6. The same Prophet says: Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come, Isa 60:1. And again Isa 9:19 : The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light. In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: The life was the light of men, Joh 1:4, and the light shined in the darkness, Joh 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, Joh 9:8. That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world, Joh 9:9. And further: And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, Joh 3:19. I am the light of the world, (Joh 8:12; Joh 9:5; comp. Joh 12:35).
13. On Isa 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophets gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luk 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isa 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion child, inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child. He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isa 7:10 sqq.; Isa 8:1 sqq.He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1Ti 1:15; Luk 2:7). For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Heb 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Rom 5:15; Joh 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word to us to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.Cramer.Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or ? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet. Foerster.
15. On Isa 9:5 (6). You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office. Luther.
16. On Isa 9:6. Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight. Augustine. Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual. Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to a child is born, and a son is given, Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. : respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, Joh 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.
In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us. The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him. J. J. Rambach, Betracht. ber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isa 9:6 (7). The government is on His shoulders. It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isa 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isa 46:1; Isa 46:7).Rambach. In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful. This name affects all the following. All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Heb 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hos 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.Rambach.
17. On Isa 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isa 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). Gods quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isa 10:5-7. God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.Heim and Hoffmann.
20. On Isa 10:5 sqq. Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness. (2Co 12:9).Luther.
21. On Isa 10:15. Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent. Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isa 5:26; Isa 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isa 10:20-27. In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.Diedrich.
Isaiah 11-23. On Isa 11:4. The staff of His mouth. Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.Cramer.
24. On Isa 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isa 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah). It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to the remnant of Israel, in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isa 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant. But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isa 11:1-5 were understood of Christs prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isa 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isa 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter. Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isa 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church. He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under Gods mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh. Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 1226. On Isa 12:4 sq. These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely (Psa 147:1). Cramer.
27. On Chap. 12 With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ! How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm! Weber, Der Pr. Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:
[28]Heb. resteth on Ephraim.
[29]That is, The remnant shall return.
[30]Or, causeway.
[31]Heb. let not thy heart be tender.
[32]Before these two smoking torch-ends.
[33]devised evil.
[34]Or, waken.
[35]shake it.
[36]the Lord Jehovah.
[37]Heb. from a people.
[38]Or, Do ye not believe? it is because ye are not stable.
[39]If ye believe not, then ye continue not.
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
Part of this chapter is historical, and part prophetical. The distress of Jerusalem gives occasion to introduce a memorable prophecy concerning Christ. The chapter closes with threatenings.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
If the Reader will consult the corresponding scripture, in the history of the kings of Judah and Israel, he will find that a considerable time had elapsed between the vision in the preceding chapter, and the opening of this. It is not said, what year of Ahaz’s reign it was w hen those kings came up against Jerusalem. But it could not have been less than sixteen or seventeen years after Uzziah died: for the whole reign of Jotham is passed over, and that continued sixteen years. See 2Ki 16 , and 2Ch 28 . The character of Ahaz is so largely given in those scriptures, that I refer the Reader to what is said of him, and his impiety, in these places.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
God with Us (Sunday after Christmas)
Isa 7:14
I. We may well say first, that all our best Christmas thoughts are summed up in this word. We think of the Holy Child not simply as heaven’s gift to the world, but as the coming down of heaven itself into the world. ‘Lo, I am with you alway,’ is the alpha and omega of the Incarnation. ‘Immanuel, God with us!’ That is the very meat and drink of our faith. The gift that came to the world that first Christmas morning has never been withdrawn for a moment. It is perennial and inexhaustible, new every morning, fresh every evening.
II. The word comes to us with equal appropriateness as we consider the approaching close of the year. It comes laden with suggestions of gratitude, and musical too with prophetic voices of glad and assuring promise. You have often been conscious of the Divine hand upon you, and a thousand times when you were not conscious you have discovered afterwards that it was most surely there. He who has been as the shadow of a great rock behind,’ as a covert from the tempest, as a guiding and protecting pillar of fire; He whose angel presence has journeyed with us through many a wilderness, and across many a divided sea, will just repeat Himself in the story which has yet to be written before our lives reach their final rest. Immanuel! there is no word like that. God with us. That is the best of all, it leaves nothing wanting.
III. And that is what we feel not only about ourselves but about the world at large. We might despair if we thought that God came and went, that Christ lived and died and vanished. But no thoughts of fear can ever disturb those who believe that the Incarnation meant a perpetual fact, a gift never recalled, a power that never ceases to work, a promise that is always hastening to its fulfilment There can be no doubt about the future of him whose faith is planted deep in and girded round by this truth of truths, ‘Immanuel, God with us’.
J. G. Greenhough, Christian Festivals and Anniversaries, p. 238.
References. VII. 14. “Plain Sermons” by contributors to the Tracts for the Times, vol. ix. p. 91. Canon Ainger, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlvii. 1895, p. 12. VII. 14, 15. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xl. No. 2392. VIII. 6. W. A. Gray, The Shadow of the Hand, p. 48. VIII. 6, 7. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Isaiah, p. 45. VIII. 11-20. V. S. S. Coles, Advent Meditations on Isaiah I.-XII. p. 69. VIII. 17. J. M. Neale, Sermons Preached in Sackville College Chapel, vol. i. p. 4. A. Murray, Waiting on God, p. 84. VIII. 18. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xx. No. 1194. VIII. 20. J. H. Blake, Penny Pulpit, vol. xiv. No. 810, p. 166. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. iv. No. 172. VIII. 22. V. S. S. Coles, Advent Meditations on Isaiah I.-XII. p. 73. IX. 1. C. S. Robinson, Simon Peter, p. 89. IX. 1, 2. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxvi. No. 2163. IX. 2. A. MacLeod, Days of Heaven Upon Earth, p. 262. W. H. Lyttelton, Missionary Sermons at Hagley, p. 13. IX. 2-7. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Isaiah, p. 48. IX. 3. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxviii. No. 2265. W. Michell, Plain Preaching to Poor People (5th Series), p. 1. J. Weller, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lii. 1897, p. 260. IX. 5, 6. Lyman Abbott, ibid. vol. xlix. 1896, p. 20. A. P. Stanley, Sermons on Special Occasions, p. 34.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
Panics and Answers
Isaiah 7-8
These chapters are, for popular purposes, practically sealed books. It would be difficult to say with definiteness what they mean. The instances referred to are all of high antiquity, and the immediate local reference would be of little interest to the majority of men, even if it could be determined specifically and finally. We must, therefore, study the two chapters with the view of discovering what we may that is applicable to our own experience, that falls into harmony with our own consciousness; and with a desire to apply what we may find with a strong and fearless hand to all the necessities which may arise in our own lives and experience.
It is wonderful how amongst the most ancient writings we come ever and anon upon words which we seem to know words which are quite modern in their meaning, and immediate in all their significance and application. For example, we have an instance ( Isa 7:1 ) which fairly typifies the many threatenings which have been directed against the city of God. We hear of men, be their names what they may, who “went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it.” The sentence thus divides itself easily into the two parts which are always making themselves so obvious to our own inspection and perusal of history. The men went up to Jerusalem “to war against it.” Had the statement ended there we should have said, They were strong men, they were confederated men; they had studied the problem well from a military point of view, and no doubt Jerusalem was crushed by their oppressive hand. How many persons do really terminate a report at a comma, and say, Have you heard what an attack has been made upon Christian doctrine, upon the Christian Church, upon the very idea of God? But that is a poor report to give; the inquiry is wholly misleading. Yet how often the sentence terminates in the inquiry! A new book is issued which is supposed to be very able in its argument, and most copious in its references; and people say in alarm, Have you heard that another assault has been made upon a Christian stronghold? What of it? The stronghold is still there; the men who inhabit it are looking quietly out of the windows, and wondering at the poor fools who are bruising their hands against the eternal granite. State the whole case. What vital Christian doctrine has been successfully assailed? The most brilliant lectures have been directed against the theological Jerusalem; men of riotous genius and power of expression have come up to laugh at God’s Jerusalem; but that must not be the whole statement which we make. Continue the verse as we find it, and we shall read, “but could not prevail against it.” Now we have a complete history. And this exactly represents the whole course of assault as directed against the Jerusalem of truth. This must be always so. “We can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth”: clever arguments, witty retorts, brilliant repartees, criticisms that dazzle by their brightness and exasperate by their acerbity, come and go, and Jerusalem stands, sunlit, fair, invincible.
Then, proceeding to the second verse, we have an instance of the many panics into which the city of God has been needlessly thrown. When the news was told to the house of David, saying, Syria leans upon Ephraim, or Syria is confederated with Ephraim, the two are one, the heart of Ahaz “was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind.” And yet the true Davidic spirit that was within Jerusalem felt no flutter of panic. The Spirit of the indwelling God is not represented even by the men who inhabit Jerusalem: they are of the flesh, their days are a handful, they are quailing under great infirmity, they are disturbed by something within themselves, and all this concurring with an outward untowardness of circumstance, eventuates in panic, in heart-fluttering, in heart-melting, so that even strong men say, Alas! what shall we do in face of this tremendous confederacy? God is the keeper of Jerusalem. The battle is not yours, but God’s. It is sad indeed when standard-bearers faint, and when those who keep look-out from the city towers begin to announce what they see in a voice of trembling, as if their hearts had been smitten with dismay; but God is King in Zion, the Lord reigneth; these men themselves are better than their fears; when they come really to reflect upon all the circumstances, they will say, “God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble. Therefore will not we fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea’: the panic is for a moment, the fluttering is a passing spasm; but the faith the deep, solemn, living confidence asserts itself in the long-run, and there is great quietness even though Rezin and Pekah thunder at the gates of the city. It is pitiful to see how many men give way under panic. There is only need to publish a book of blatant heterodoxy, and some persons will begin to fear that the ark of the Lord has been taken, and that the altar has been torn down stone by stone, so that not even the foundation is left. Such people have no true grasp of God; they have never known the mysterious joy of identification with God, such as is suggested by the words: We live, and move, and have our being in God. The Church, in her true conception of election and vocation, can be no more troubled than God himself can be distressed. When she detaches herself from the sovereignty of God, and looks upon herself as a merely human institution, subsisting upon covenants that are frangible and that admit of many different interpretations, she will be the sport of every wind, the laughing-stock of every new folly; but when the Church says, I am in God, I live in God, without him I have no life, I can do nothing of myself, I am as the branch in the living vine, I look to God, then she can no more be disconcerted, driven back, and ruined, than the eternal throne can shake because of the little winds that scourge themselves into gales, and disturb the brickwork of our common civilisation. Do we live in God? Are we enclosed with him in his sanctuary? Are the everlasting arms around us?
Then, proceeding further, we find an instance in which the only comforting answer could come from God:
“Then said the Lord unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller’s field; and say unto him, Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither be fainthearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah. Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah, have taken evil counsel against thee, saying, Let us go up against Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal: thus saith the Lord God, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass. For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people. And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah’s son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.” ( Isa 7:3-9 )
There is a point in human history at which God comes in, takes up the whole occasion, and rules it himself, saying, as it were, with ineffable gentleness, You cannot imagine this; a business so complicated is too hard for you; stand back, I will undertake for thee, O threatened Zion. So, “Then said the Lord unto Isaiah——” There is always some man to send, some man of purged lips, some man fire-touched, who will face the occasion under the inspiration and comfort of the Paraclete. Here, as ever, human ministry is employed to carry out divine purposes. Then here is a man sent of God so confident that he becomes contemptuous of the opposition. Isaiah said unto the king: “Be quiet; fear not, neither be fainthearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands.” The figure is that of two torches that have been burned down to the root, and nothing is left of them but smoke; the fire is nearly out, and a little wreath of smoke expresses the strength of these two firebrands. The contempt which Righteousness can assume is a terrible sarcasm. When Judgment laughs, the laugh is spectral and heartshaking; it sends a sense of dismay into the innermost parts of the spirit: when God laughs at our calamity, our calamity is multiplied by infinity.
“… for the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah.” Here is another touch of irony or scorn. Why was Pekah not mentioned by name? Because he was an upstart, an adventurer, a man who had no right to the throne; therefore he is shaken off the prophet’s hand as “the son of Remaliah.” Contempt of this kind is common in the Holy Scriptures: Saul is sometimes spoken of as “the son of Kish”; David himself was spoken of sometimes unrighteously and cruelly simply as “the son of Jesse”; and now Pekah is not even mentioned by name, some ancestor is brought up to lend him a moment’s respectability, and he is spat upon under his father’s name. God will have those in derision who set their shoulders against his throne for the purpose of overturning it. An awful expression is that “The Lord shall have them in derision”; he will say to them, Do your utmost: let me see your fine writhing; show me the trick of your white agony; what can you do against the Eternal? Then will he laugh, and they cannot answer; he will deride, and they shall be burned by the heat of his scorn.
Then there is a divine counterblast “It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass” ( Isa 7:7 ). That is the word upon which the Church relies. The Church does not expect to meet those who oppose it in the strength of her own genius, or because of the abundance and exactness of her own erudition; she hands the case over to God; she says, The heathen have raged, and the people have imagined a vain thing: send thou thy reply from the sanctuary; yea, answer them out of Zion. When we say, “The glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh see it together,” we must continue, and say, “for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.” We are living upon a divine assurance, standing upon a divine promise; if we are deceived, we have been deceived by the name of God; we have not yielded to some cunningly-devised fable; our humanity has been victimised by the false use of the only glorious Name. But until that has been proved, we abide in the covenant; we refer to the letter and to the testimony, and our proofs are a thousand strong to every enemy that assails Jerusalem.
Ahaz, however, was a mixed character. He has been convicted in history of being an idolater as well as a professor of the true religion. He was therefore the representative of double-mindedness, a halting between two opinions, that double-minded-ness which is unstable, and which cannot excel. Probably Isaiah, marking the workings of his countenance under the delivery of this communication, saw signs of fear, doubt, hesitancy: the king did not spring at the word with access of energy and with the confidence of inspiration; so the prophet, quick to detect all facial signs, blessed with the insight that follows the spirit in all its withdrawment, said instantly, “If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.” God works through human faith. The Saviour himself said again and again, “What wilt thou?” “Believest thou that I am able to do this?” Miracles are not thrown away upon unbelief, or are not worked for the purpose of gratifying curiosity; they are the answers to faith: if the age of miracles has ceased it is because the age of faith has vanished. Isaiah thus delivered his prophecy and acquitted his conscience. This is, indeed, all that men can sometimes do. The preacher must retire from his position with a cold heart, saying, My only solace is that I have delivered thy word; as for its music, it has been lost upon deaf ears; the dead have not heard it, and the living have been as dead men.
This is all generic, common to human history in some form or relation; now let us notice two or three remarkable expressions that probably occur nowhere else but in connection with this period of Biblical antiquity.
In Isa 8:14 there is one announced whose name is to be called “Immanuel.” The prophets made history by anticipating it; they projected themselves across the centuries and sunned themselves in the dawn of a new day. It would be altogether forcing the immediate prophecy beyond its meaning if we considered that Isaiah saw nothing but the day of Christ looming in the distant tuture. There have always been men in society who have represented the coming One shall we say, sub-Christs; Christs in type, symbol, shadow; peculiarly-minded men, partly of earth, mainly of heaven; mysterious men, who have had power of prayer, who have worsted angels in the night-time, and wrung from them victories expressed in new names and larger titles; singular, eccentric men, not to be enumerated with others or classified in plurals; solitary men. One of these Isaiah saw. It might have been his own son. But the larger meaning is only to be found in Christ. The article itself is definite; we are entitled to read not, “Behold, a virgin shall conceive,” but “Behold, the virgin shall conceive,” the Virgin Mother: the beginning of a new history; the second Adam; the larger Paradise never to be forfeited. All these ideas in some form or under some colour are in the passage, though its immediate meaning must not be unduly forced.
Then, according to Isa 7:18 , “the Lord shall hiss for the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt.” The hosts of Egypt were represented by the flies which all but darkened the air of that country at times, and the Lord should blow upon them make a kind of whistling noise in their ears. “… And for the bee that is in the land of Assyria” the innumerable bees that swarm in the forests and on the hills of Assyria: the Lord should whistle, or make a sibilant sound, as if calling the bees away to swarm elsewhere. He would not lift up his hand to smite: a hiss, a sibilance, a whisper behold, they have all fled! Commit thy way unto the Lord; let him treat your enemies: though an host should encamp against thee, in this be confident, that God is on thy side; that his word is, “No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper.” “When a man’s ways please the Lord, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.” Live in that confidence, and when Egypt and Assyria come as swarming flies and innumerable bees, God will make a sound in his heaven that will alarm them, or withdraw them, or cause them to die of fear.
More than this:
“In the same day shall the Lord shave with a rasor that is hired” ( Isa 7:20 ).
Ahaz thought by paying tribute to Assyria he was hiring an ally; the Lord said, You are not by your tribute engaging an ally, you are hiring a rasor, and that rasor shall shave you from head to foot, yea it shall not spare the beard; and to touch with a rasor the beard of the Oriental was to consummate all outrage, was to render reconciliation impossible. Have we not sometimes thought we were hiring allies when we have only been hiring a rasor? Can Israel have dealings with the uncongenial, the unfraternal, the spiritually alien, without suffering for the false contact, the vicious alliance, at some time or in some way? You thought you were buying an ally when you were only hiring a rasor by which you were to be rendered naked and made contemptible.
More
“It shall come to pass in that day, that a man shall nourish a young cow, and two sheep” ( Isa 7:21 ).
Two ewes and a heifer shall be the property of him who was once a flockmaster! He who had a thousand heifers, and ewes without number, shall have to number his property as “a young cow and two sheep.”
More! The irony grows:
“And it shall come to pass, for the abundance of milk that they shall give he shall eat butter: for butter and honey shall every one eat that is left in the land” ( Isa 7:22 ).
So does God make our poverty an irony. Our flocks shall be reduced, and yet so miserable shall be the general state of affairs that to have two ewes and one heifer will be to have plenty of milk and plenty of butter. How the Lord can change the face of society!
More still:
“And it shall come to pass in that day, that every place shall be, where there were a thousand vines at a thousand silverlings, it shall even be for briers and thorns” ( Isa 7:23 ).
The vines were so abundant that men had scarcely to be at the trouble of gathering the fruit which was grown; they had but to put out their hands to fill them; and the time shall come when a thousand vines shall be for a thousand silverlings, and the vineyard shall be knotted, and entangled, and debased by briers and thorns; the ground once so fruitful shall be taken possession of by the meanest growths, and they shall so entwist themselves into the ground and into one another that ploughing shall be rendered impossible, and the fruitful hill shall be as a heap of stones! “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” “I have seen the wicked in great power, and spreading himself like a green bay tree. Yet he passed away, and, lo, he was not; yea, I sought him, but he could not be found.” When thou, O Lord, dost arise to shake terribly the earth, what are our vines against thine anger? and as for our flocks, do they not fly before God’s thunder? Our only riches are spiritual; our only confidence is moral; if we are right with God, then we shall be right with nature, and our joy shall be full, because we have accepted the reconciliation which has been wrought out for us by the Son of God.
Still the promise lies in the distance:
“Moreover the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man’s pen concerning Maher-shalal-hash-baz” ( Isa 8:1 ).
Write it in no minute microscopical hand which only the learned can read, but take plenty of parchment, let the scroll be broad, and take up a workman’s pencil, broad at the point, and write, “Maher-shalal-hash-baz,” big enough that almost the blind can see it. God hath large print in some of his books. Verily, he can write a small hand too, which men only can see through the microscope of tears. Sometimes the Lord’s judgments are “abroad” in the earth, and sometimes they work with subtlety that cannot be valued by human criticism. What does Mahershalal-hash-baz mean? Speed-plunder, haste-spoil: the man shall arise who will do God’s judgments, and do them with earnestness, alacrity, precision, completeness. How the prophet lives in the future! There is always a Child to be born who will advance the kingdom of God. Do not believe that the ages have seen their greatest birth. Even Jesus Christ when he went away said: If I go away, I will send a Comforter, even the Paraclete, who shall abide with you for ever. The greatest births will be found by-and-by to be spiritual births new conceptions of God; new in the sense of being larger, juster, more pregnant with joy and promise. Christianity has to deal with the future. The Lord Jesus Christ made but few references to the past, but he did make some, and they were distinct and solid; but his eyes were set towards the coming Sun, the coming Kingdom, his own return, not as a man that could be seen, but as an inspiration and a sovereignty felt in every mind and heart, and owned by all who should come under its gracious and redeeming and sanctifying touch. But if we refuse we shall have to answer for it in judgment:
“Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly, and rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah’s son; now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, strong and many, even the king of Assyria, and all his glory: and he shall come up over all his channels and go over all his banks: and he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel” ( Isa 8:6-8 ).
The choice is with ourselves. If we refuse gracious ministries we must encounter judicial judgment; if we will not allow the goodness of God to lead us to repentance, we must accept the criticism of God in anger, and yet in holy justice; if we cannot be lured we shall be driven; if we will not fall upon the stone and be broken, the stone will fall upon us and grind us to powder. God first tries gentle ministries, kind words, and loving speeches, entreating, importuning gospels; but there will come a time when his Spirit will no longer strive with men then cometh the judgment; and then human speech had better halt, for it has no words worthy of that visitation.
Then comes the grand appeal:
“To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” ( Isa 8:20 ).
A very singular expression this. The reference is not to some written book, as is generally supposed; the passage is often quoted as an authority for resting everything upon Scripture; there is no doubt that the words may be used in that sense by express accommodation, but not by literal criticism. The appeal is to the law and to the testimony written in our own hearts by the finger of God: let conscience speak; let reason, unprejudiced and unperverted, utter her voice; let human consciousness be a divine witness. How this enlarges the scope of God’s claim upon mankind! Not only is there a Book written with pen and ink, which we delight to believe to be the work of inspiration, but there is a book written within the human heart, upon the human heart. Even the heathen are a law unto themselves. God hath not left himself without witness in any land. This is the appeal which the Christian minister must make to all people in all countries, namely, Let your hearts speak; let your innermost, uppermost reason utter its verdict; be solemn, be true to your own best instincts, and answer this appeal from the Book of God. The image is beautiful, yea, exquisite. The Book speaks broadly and lovingly; and having ceased it would seem to wait for human consciousness, as expressed in conscience, reason, judgment, experience, to give its verdict. Take the case of Jesus Christ. Some one asked him: “Master, which is the great commandment in the law?” And he answered him; and one in the crowd said, “Well, Master, thou hast said the truth; for to love God and to love your neighbour is the whole law:” that is the voice, so to say, of independent judgment, reason, even of moral instinct. So the appeal must be addressed to every man’s own innermost nature. Come, what say you? Are you right? or are you wrong? Can you defend yourselves completely, and defy God to prove you to be wicked? Or do your hearts condemn themselves? Do you put your hand upon your mouth, and lay your head upon your sobbing breast, and say, The law of the Lord is right; I am born in sin, and shapen in iniquity; in sin my mother conceived me; I am not righteous, no, not in one point: God be merciful to me, a sinner? That would be the right answer to the divine appeal. Blessed is he who gives it, and works it out in practical piety!
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
XXVII
THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST IN ISAIAH
The relation between the New Testament Christ and prophecy is that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. To him give all the prophets witness. All the scriptures, the law, the prophets, and the psalms, testify of him. And we are fools, and slow of heart to credit adequate testimony when we distrust any part of the inspired evidence.
Of the ancient prophets Isaiah was perhaps the most notable witness of the coming Messiah. An orderly combination of his many messianic utterances amounts to more than a mere sketch, indeed, rather to a series of almost life-sized portraits. As a striking background for these successive portraits the prophet discloses the world’s need of a Saviour, and across this horrible background of gloom the prophet sketches in startling strokes of light the image of a coming Redeemer.
In Isa 2:2-4 we have the first picture of him in Isaiah, that of the effect of his work, rather than of the Messiah himself. This is the establishment of the mountain of the Lord’s house on the top of the mountains, the coming of the nations to it and the resultant millennial glory.
In Isa 4:2-6 is another gleam from the messianic age in which the person of the Messiah comes more into view in the figure of a branch of Jehovah, beautiful and glorious. In sketching the effects of his work here the prophet adds a few strokes of millennial glory as a consummation of his ministry.
In Isa 7:14 he delineates him as a little child born of a virgin, whose coming is the light of the world. He is outlined on the canvas in lowest humanity and highest divinity, “God with us.” In this incarnation he is the seed of the woman and not of the man.
The prophet sees him as a child upon whom the government shall rest and whose name is “Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (Isa 9:6 ). This passage shows the divinity of Christ and the universal peace he is to bring to the world. In these names we have the divine wisdom, the divine power, the divine fatherhood, and the divine peace.
In Isa 11:1-9 the prophet sees the Messiah as a shoot out of the stock of Jesse, i.e., of lowly origin, but possessing the Holy Spirit without measure who equips him for his work, and his administration wrought with skill and justice, the result of which is the introduction of universal and perfect peace. Here the child is presented as a teacher. And such a teacher! On him rests the seven spirits of God. The spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge, and the fear of the Lord. He judges not according to appearances and reproves not according to rumors. With righteousness he judges the poor and reproves with equality in behalf of the meek. His words smite a guilty world like thunderbolts and his very breath slays iniquity. Righteousness and faithfulness are his girdle. He uplifts an infallible standard of morals.
In Isa 40:3-8 appears John the Baptist, whom Isaiah saw as a voice crying in the wilderness, preparing the way for the coming King.
In Isa 11:2 ; Isa 42:1 ; Isa 61:1-3 the prophet saw the Messiah as a worker in the power of the Spirit, in whom he was anointed at his baptism. This was the beginning of his ministry which was wrought through the power of the Holy Spirit. At no time in his ministry did our Lord claim that he wrought except in the power of the Holy Spirit who was given to him without measure.
In Isa 35:1-10 the Messiah is described as a miracle worker. In his presence the desert blossoms as a rose and springs burst out of dry ground. The banks of the Jordan rejoice. The lame man leaps like a hart, the dumb sing and the blind behold visions. The New Testament abounds in illustrations of fulfilment. These signs Christ presented to John the Baptist as his messianic credentials (Mat 11:1-4 ).
The passage (Isa 42:1-4 ) gives us a flashlight on the character of the Messiah. In the New Testament it is expressly applied to Christ whom the prophet sees as the meek and lowly Saviour, dealing gently with the blacksliding child of his grace. In Isa 22:22 we have him presented as bearing the key of the house of David, with full power to open and shut. This refers to his authority over all things in heaven and upon earth. By this authority he gave the keys of the kingdom to Peter one for the Jews and the other for the Gentiles who used one on the day of Pentecost and the other at the house of Cornelius, declaring in each case the terms of entrance into the kingdom of God. This authority of the Messiah is referred to again in Revelation:
And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as one dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying. Fear not: I am the first and the last, and the Living one; and I was dead, and behold I am alive for evermore and I have the keys of death and of Hades. Rev 7:17
And to the angel of the church in Philadelphis write: These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth and none shall shut, and shutteth and none openeth. Rev 3:7
In Isa 32:1-8 we have a great messianic passage portraying the work of Christ as a king ruling in righteousness, in whom men find a hiding place from the wind and the tempest. He is a stream in a dry place and the shadow of a great rock in a weary land.
In Isa 28:14-18 the Messiah is presented to w as a foundation stone in a threefold idea:
1. A tried foundation stone. This is the work of the master mason and indicates the preparation of the atone for its particular function.
2. An elect or precious foundation stone. This indicates that the stone was selected and appointed. It was not self-appointed but divinely appointed and is therefore safe.
3. A cornerstone, or sure foundation stone. Here it is a foundation of salvation, as presented in Mat 16:18 . It is Christ the Rock, and not Peter. See Paul’s foundation in 1 Corinthians:
According to the grace of God which was given unto me; as a wise masterbuilder I laid a foundation; and another buildeth thereon. But let each man take heed how he buildeth thereon. For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 1Co 3:10-11 .
In Isa 49:1-6 he is presented as a polished shaft, kept close in the quiver. The idea is that he is a mighty sword. In Revelation, Christ is presented to John as having a sharp, twoedged sword proceeding out of his mouth.
In Isa 50:2 ; Isa 52:9 f.; Isa 59:16-21 ; Isa 62:11 we have the idea of the salvation of Jehovah. The idea is that salvation originated with God and that man in his impotency could neither devise the plan of salvation nor aid in securing it. These passages are expressions of the pity with which God looks down on a lost world. The redemption, or salvation, here means both temporal and spiritual salvation salvation from enemies and salvation from sin.
In Isa 9:1 f. we have him presented as a great light to the people of Zebulun and Naphtali. In Isa 49:6 we have him presented as a light to the Gentiles and salvation to the end of the earth: “Yea, he saith, It is too light a thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.”
In Isa 8:14-15 Isaiah presents him as a stone of stumbling: “And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. And many shall stumble thereon, and fall, and be broken, and be snared, and be taken.”
The prophet’s vision of his maltreatment and rejection are found in Isa 50:4-9 ; Isa 52:13-53:12 . In this we have the vision of him giving his “back to the smiters, and his cheeks to them that plucked off the hair.” We see a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. His visage is so marred it startled all nations. He is a vicarious sacrifice. The chastisement of the peace of others is on him. The iniquity of others is put on him. It pleases the Father to bruise him until he has poured out his soul unto death as an offering for sin.
The teaching of Isaiah on the election of the Jews is his teaching concerning the “holy remnant,” a favorite expression of the prophet. See Isa 1:9 ; Isa 10:20-22 ; Isa 11:11 ; Isa 11:16 ; Isa 37:4 ; Isa 37:31-32 ; Isa 46:3 . This coincides with Paul’s teaching in Romans 9-11.
In Isa 32:15 we find Isaiah’s teaching on the pouring out of the Holy Spirit: “Until the Spirit be poured upon us from on high, and the wilderness become a fruitful field, and the fruitful field be esteemed as a forest,” and in Isa 44:3 : “For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and streams upon the dry ground; I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring.”
In Isa 11:10 he is said to be the ensign of the nations: “And it shall come to pass in that day, that the root of Jesse, that standeth for an ensign of the peoples unto him shall the nations seek; and his resting place shall be glorious.”
Isa 19:18-25 ; Isa 54:1-3 ; Isa 60:1-22 teach the enlargement of the church. The great invitation and promise are found in Isa 55 .
The Messiah in judgments is found in Isa 63:1-6 . Here we behold an avenger. He comes up out of Edom with dyed garments from Bozra. All his raiment is stained with the blood of his enemies whom he has trampled in his vengeance as grapes are crushed in the winevat and the restoration of the Jews is set forth in Isa 11:11-12 ; Isa 60:9-15 ; Isa 66:20 . Under the prophet’s graphic pencil or glowing brush we behold the establishment and growth of his kingdom unlike all other kingdoms, a kingdom within men, a kingdom whose principles are justice, righteousness, and equity and whose graces are faith, hope, love, and joy, an undying and ever-growing kingdom. Its prevalence is like the rising waters of Noah’s flood; “And the waters prevailed and increased mightily upon the earth. And the water prevailed mightily, mightily upon the earth; and all the high mountains, that are under the whole heavens, were covered.”
So this kingdom grows under the brush of the prophetic limner until its shores are illimitable. War ceases. Gannenta rolled in the blood of battle become fuel for fire. Conflagration is quenched. Famine outlawed. Pestilence banished. None are left to molest or make afraid. Peace flows like a river. The wolf dwells with the lamb. The leopard lies down with the kid. The calf and the young lion walk forth together and a little child is leading them. The cow and the bear feed in one pasture and their young ones are bedfellows. The sucking child safely plays over the hole of the asp, and weaned children put their hands in the adder’s den. In all the holy realms none hurt nor destroy, because the earth is as full of the knowledge of the Lord as the fathomless ocean is full of water. Rapturous vision! Sublime and ineffable consummation! Was it only a dream?
In many passages the prophet turns in the gleams from the millennial age, but one of the clearest and best on the millennium, which is in line with the preceding paragraph, Isa 11:6-9 : “And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together: and a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder’s den. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of Jehovah, as the waters cover the sea.”
The prophet’s vision of the destruction of death is given in Isa 25:8 : “He hath swallowed up death for ever; and the Lord Jehovah will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the reproach of his people will he take away from all the earth: for Jehovah hath spoken it,” and in Isa 26:19 : “Thy dead shall live; my dead bodies shall arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast forth the dead.”
The clearest outlines of the prophet’s vision of “Paradise Regained” are to be found in Isa 25:8 , and in two passages in chapter Isa 66 : Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, and be glad for her, all ye that love her: rejoice for joy with her, all ye that mourn over her; that ye may suck and be satisfied with the breasts of her consolations; that ye may milk out, and be delighted with the abundance of her glory. For thus saith Jehovah, Behold, I will extend peace to her like a river, and the glory of the nations like an overflowing stream: and ye shall suck thereof; ye shall be borne upon the side, and shall be dandled upon the knees, as one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you; and ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem. And ye shall see it, and your heart shall rejoice, and your bones shall flourish like the tender grass: and the hands of Jehovah shall be known toward his servants ; and he will have indignation against his enemies. Isa 66:10-14
For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make shall remain before me, saith Jehovah, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith Jehovah. Isa 66:22-23
QUESTIONS
1. What is the relation between the New Testament Christ and prophecy?
2. What can you say of Isaiah as a witness of the Messiah?
3. What can you say of Isaiah’s pictures of the Messiah and their background?
4. Following in the order of Christ’s manifestation, what is the first picture of him in Isaiah?
5. What is the second messianic glimpse in Isaiah?
6. What is Isaiah’s picture of the incarnation?
7. What is Isaiah’s picture of the divine child?
8. What is Isaiah’s vision of his descent, his relation to the Holy Spirit, his administration of justice, and the results of his reign?
9. What is Isaiah’s vision of the Messiah’s herald?
10. What is the prophet’s vision of his anointing?
11. What is the prophet’s vision of him as a miracle worker?
12. What is the prophet’s vision of the character of the Messiah?
13. What is the prophet’s vision of him as the key bearer?
14. What is the prophet’s vision of him as a king and a hiding place?
15. What is the prophet’s vision of the Messiah as a foundation stone?
16. What is the prophet’s vision of him as a polished shaft?
17. In what passages do we find the idea of the salvation of Jehovah, and what the significance of the idea?
18. What is Isaiah’s vision of the Messiah as a light?
19. Where does Isaiah present him as a stone of stumbling?
20. What is the prophet’s vision of his maltreatment and rejection?
21. What is the teaching of Isaiah on the election of the Jews?
22. Where do we find Isaiah’s teaching on the pouring out of the Holy Spirit?
23. Where is he said to be the ensign of the nations?
24. What passages teach the enlargement of the church?
25. Where is the great invitation and promise?
26. Where is the Messiah in judgment?
27. What passages show the restoration of the Jews?
28. What is the prophet’s vision of the Messiah’s kingdom?
29. What is the prophet’s vision of the millennium?
30. What is the prophet’s vision of the destruction of death?
31. What is the prophet’s vision of “Paradise Regained?”
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
XII
THE BOOK OF ISAIAH PART 4
Isa 7:1-10:14
In the outline the section, Isaiah 7-13, is called the book of Immanuel, because the name, “Immanuel,” occurs in it twice and it is largely messianic. There are four main divisions of this section preceded by a historical introduction, as follows: Historical introduction (Isa 7:1-2 )
I. Two interviews with Ahaz and their messages (Isa 7:3-25 )
II. Desolating judgments followed by salvation (Isa 8:1-9:7 III. Jehovah’s hand of judgments (Isa 9:8-10:4 IV. The debasement of the Assyrians and the salvation of true Israel (Isa 10:5-12:6
There are certain items of information in the historical introduction, as follows:
1. That the date of this section is the “days of Ahaz,” king of Judah.
2. That, during this reign, Rezin, king of Syria, and Pekah, king of Israel, attempted to take Jerusalem but failed.
3. That the confederacy between Syria and Ephraim caused great fear in Judah on the part of both the king and the people. By the command of Jehovah Isaiah, with his son, Shearjashub, went forth to meet Ahaz, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool, in the highway of the fuller’s field to quiet his fear respecting the confederacy of Rezin and Pekah, assuring him that their proposed capture of Jerusalem and enthronement of Tabeel, an Assyrian, should not come to pass because Damascus and Samaria had only human heads, while Jerusalem had a divine head who was able to and would destroy their confederacy within sixty-five years, which included the work of Tiglath-pileser III, Shalmaneser IV, Sargon, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon. The last named completed the destruction of the power of the ten tribes by placing heathen colonists in the cities of Samaria (2Ki 17:24 ; Eze 4:2 ). Then the prophet rested Ahaz’s case on his faith in Jehovah’s word and promise. This challenge of faith to Ahaz is beautifully expressed by the poet, thus: Happiest they of human race To whom our God has granted grace To read, to fear, to hope, to pray; To lift the latch and force the way.
It seems that Ahaz silently rejected Jehovah’s proposition of faith. So Jehovah, to give him another chance and to leave him without excuse, offers, through his prophet, to strengthen Ahaz’s faith by means of a sign, allowing him to name the sign to be given. But Ahaz made “a pious dodge” because of his contemplated alliance with Assyria, saying that he would not tempt Jehovah. Then the prophet upbraids the house of David for trying the patience of Jehovah and announces that Jehovah will give a sign anyway, which was the child to be born of a virgin, after which he goes on to show that the whole land shall be made desolate. Jehovah will summons the nations to devastate the land. Then he gives four pictures of its desolation as follows: (1) Flies and bees; (2) the hired razor; (3) one cow and two sheep; (4) briers and thorns.
Signs were of various kinds. They might be actual miracles performed to attest a divine commission (Exo 4:3-9 ), or judgments of God, significant of his power of justice (Exo 10:2 ), or memorials of something in the past (Exo 13:9 ; Exo 13:16 ), or pledges of something still future, such as are found in Jdg 6:36-40 ; 2Ki 20:8-11 et al. The sign here was a pledge of God’s promise to Ahaz of the destruction of Damascus, and Samaria and comes under the last named class. But as to its fulfilment there is much discussion, the most of which we may brush aside as altogether unprofitable. The radical critics contend that Isaiah expected a remarkable deliverer to arise in connection with the Assyrian war and deny that this refers at all to our Lord Jesus Christ. There seems to be no certain or common ground for mediating and conservative critics themselves. There are two main views held: (1) That a child was to be born in the days of Isaiah who was to be a type of the great Immanuel. They say that verses 15-16 favor this view. Now if the birth was to be natural, it seems to have a double sense, or else a very poor type. If there were a miraculous conception of a type of Christ in those days all records have been lost. At least, it is impossible to locate definitely the wonderful person who was to prefigure the real Immanuel. (2) That the reference is solely to the birth of Jesus Christ. But how could this be a sign unto Ahaz? Here we note the fact that this language respecting the sign is addressed to the “house of David” and therefore becomes a sign to the nation rather than to Ahaz alone. The time element of the prophecy hinges on the word, “before.” It is literally true that before this child grew to discern good and evil, the land of Damascus and the land of Israel had been laid waste. The text does not say how long before but the word, “before,” is used to express the order of events, rather than time immediately before. A good paraphrase of the prophecy would be, “O house of David, I will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel, but before the child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, Syria and Israel shall be forsaken and Jehovah will bring upon thee, and upon thy people, days unlike any that have come since Ephraim rebelled in the days of Jeroboam.” All this took place before the child was born who was to be the sign unto all people, the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the idea of Gen 3:15 : “The seed of the woman [not of the man] shall bruise the serpent’s head,” and forecasts the doctrine of the incarnation, a doctrine essential to the redemption of the world. Of one thing we may be assured, viz: Never was this prophecy fulfilled until Jesus Christ was born of the virgin Mary. Of him old Simeon said, “He shall be set for a sign which is spoken against.” So we can plant ourselves squarely on Mat 1:23 and say, “Here is the fulfilment of Isa 7:14 .”
The significance of “the fly,” “the bee,” “the razor,” “the cow and two sheep,” and “briers and thorns” is important. The fly is here used to designate the Egyptian army which was loosely organized, something like the looseness with which flies swarm. The bee refers to Assyria whose armies were much better and more compactly organized than the Egyptian army, something like the order with which bees work. The hired razor refers to the king of Assyria, who had been hired, as it were, by Samaria to help them, meaning that this was to be the power by which Jehovah was going to accomplish his work of destruction upon Samaria and Damascus. The “cow and two sheep” signifies the scanty supply of animals left in the land after this desolation which was so clearly foretold. The “briers and thorns” represent the deserted condition of the country, in which the lands that were once tilled and valuable, would then become overgrown with briers and thorns.
There are three subdivisions of the section, Isa 8:1-9:7 , as follows:
1. The twofold sign of the punishment about to fall upon Damascus and Samaria.
2. The invasion of Judah.
3. Jehovah’s light dispels the darkness.
The twofold sign was the sign of the great tablet and the child’s name, which was intended especially for the doubters and unbelievers in the nation, as the sign, in the preceding chapter, of Immanuel, “God with us,” was sufficient for the reassurance of the faithful. This was a sign that would be verified in two or three years and at once placed the king and people on probation, forcing them to raise the question, “Shall we continue to look to Assyria for help, or shall we trust the prophet’s word about Assyria, Rezin, and Pekah?” The writing on the tablet and the child’s name were identical, meaning “Plunder speedeth, spoil hasteth,” from which sign and the obligations involved in its verification there was no escape. It was fulfilled in three or four years when Pekah was assassinated and Rezin slain by the king of Assyria.
The prophet describes this invasion as the waters of the Euphrates coming first against Damascus and Samaria because they looked to Rezin and Pekah rather than to Jehovah’s resources for relief, and bursting through them, who had been the breakwater for Judah against this flood, it would sweep on into Judah and overflow it.
Then the prophet (Isa 8:9-10 ) invites the people of the East to make an uproar and to devise all means possible for the destruction of Judah, but it would all come to nought, for God was with his people. Immanuel was their hope and is our hope. As Paul says in Rom 8:31 , “If God is for us, who is against us?”
As shown in Isa 8:11-15 , their real danger was not in invading armies, but in unbelief. Jehovah was to be their dread. He would be their sanctuary, their refuge, if they only believed on him. If not, he became a stone of stumbling or a snare unto them. This thought is amplified in the New Testament in many places (see Luk 2:34 ; Rom 9:33 ; 1Pe 2:8 , et al). The meaning of Isa 8:16-18 , “Bind thou up the testimony, etc.,” is Jehovah’s order to Israel to write the prophecy and to tie it up in the roll for the generations of his people to follow. Isaiah then expresses his abiding confidence in his and his children’s mission in being signs in Israel, looking to him for his favor.
The warning and exhortation (Isa 8:19-22 ) were given them in view of their coming troublous times when they would be tempted to turn to other sources of information rather than God’s revelations, which would lead them into greater darkness and confusion. A case of its violation is that of King Saul. When God refused to hear him because of his sin, he sought the witch of Endor, which in the light of this passage illustrates the operations of modern spiritualists.
Across the horrible background of Isa 8 the prophet sketches, in startling strokes of light, the image of a coming Redeemer, who brought light, liberty, peace, and joy to his subjects. The New Testament in Mat 4:15-16 , tells us that the light, liberty, peace, and joy of the prophecy were fulfilled in the land of Zebulun and Naphtali when Jesus and his disciples came among the people dwelling around the Sea of Galilee and preached his gospel and healed their sick and delivered their demoniacs. That his gospel was light, a great light. All knowledge is light. Whatsoever maketh manifest is light. And this gospel brought the knowledge of salvation in the remission of their sins. It revealed their relations toward God. It revealed God himself in the face of Jesus Christ. It discovered their sins and brought contrition and repentance. It revealed a sin-cleansing and sin-pardoning Saviour. Its reception brought peace by justification and brought liberty by dispossession of Satan. And with light, liberty, and peace came joy unspeakable.
The central text of this passage is, “For unto us a child is born and unto us a son is given.” The “for” refers to the preceding context, which tells us that she who was under gloom shall have no more anguish. That the people who walk in darkness behold a great light. That the land of Zebulun and Naphtali on which divine contempt had been poured is now overflowed with blessings. That with light has come liberty, and with liberty peace, and with peace joy and the joy of harvest and of victory, for this child is born. The coming of this child is assigned as the reason or cause for all this light, this liberty, this peace, this joy. Marvelous child to be the author of such blessings. Humanity is unquestionably here. It is a child, born of an earthly mother. But mere humanity cannot account for such glorious and eternal results. A mere child could not bear up under the government of the world and establish a kingdom of whose increase there should be no end.
The names ascribed to our Lord in Isa 9:6 cannot be Alexander, Caesar, or Bonaparte. Their kingdoms were not of peace, light, joy, and liberty. Their kingdoms perished with themselves. But what is this child’s name? It staggers us to call it: His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace! If this be not divinity, words cannot express it. And if it be divinity as certainly as a “child born” expresses humanity, then well may his name be “Wonderful,” for he is God-man. Earth, indeed, furnished his mother, but heaven furnished the sire. And if doubt inquire, how can these things be, it must be literally true as revealed and fulfilled later: “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, therefore, also the Holy One who shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”
In particular these names give us the following ideas of him:
1. “Wonderful, Counsellor” indicates the matchless wisdom with which he taught and lived among men. In all that concerns the glory of Jehovah and the welfare of his people, we may rely implicitly on the purposes and plans of this Deliverer.
2. “Mighty God” means the living and true God and refers to his omnipotence in carrying out his plans and purposes. He is not only God, but he is Almighty God, at whose command were the powers of the universe, “head over all things unto the church,” making “all things work together for good to them that love God.”
3. “Everlasting Father” means “Father of eternity” and refers to his divinity, whose “goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.”
4. “Prince of Peace” refers to his mission in the nature of his kingdom. He is not only a mighty hero but his kingdom is a kingdom of peace.
The promise here concerning his kingdom is that it is to be an everlasting kingdom, administered in peace and righteousness (Isa 9:6 ).
The title of section Isa 9:8-10:4 is “Jehovah’s hand of judgment,” and is suggested from the fact that this section is divided into four paragraphs, or strophes, each one ending with the sad refrain, “For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still,” i.e., for further chastisement. The special themes of these four paragraphs, respectively, are as follows:
1.Isa 9:8-12 , The loss of wealth, followed by repeated invasion.
2.Isa 9:13-17 , The loss of rulers.
3.Isa 9:18-21 , The devouring fire of their own sinfulness.
4.Isa 10:1-4 , A woe unto perverters and their utter helplessness.
The loss of wealth is described in Isa 9:8-12 . The prophet introduces this section by saying that the Lord had sent word to Jacob and it had lighted up Israel, i.e., this message of destruction was mainly for Israel, who were standing stoutly in the face of God’s chastisements, by substituting one thing for another destroyed by Jehovah. The prophet assures them that God has not exhausted all his means and that he will use Syria and Philistia to complete the work of desolation.
Then the loss of their rulers is described in Isa 9:13-17 . The prophet introduces this strophe with a complaint that Jehovah’s chastisements had been ineffective in turning Samaria to himself. Then he goes on to show that Jehovah would cut off from Israel the head, i.e., the elder, and the tail, i.e., the lying prophet; that he would destroy all without mercy because they were all profane.
The devouring fire of their own sinfulness follows in Isa 9:18-21 . The prophet here likens wickedness unto a devouring fire, which devours briers and thorns, then breaks out in the forests and rolls up its column of smoke. A very impressive picture of the course and penalty of wickedness, as it goes on to full fruitage in its destruction of those who practice it, until without discrimination it devours alike the neighbor and the kinsman.
In Isa 10:1-4 the prophet brings a heavy charge against this class, that they rob the poor and needy, and devour widows’ houses, making them their prey. What a picture of perverted justice! Because of this awful corruption there will be no hope for them before the enemy in the day of Jehovah’s visitation and desolation. They shall bow down under the prisoners and fall under the slain. A graphic description of their humiliation is this, yet, “For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still.” A sad wail and a gloomy picture from which we joyfully turn to another section of the book, in which we have the enemies of Jehovah’s people brought low and the true Israel of God exalted. But this will follow in the next chapter.
QUESTIONS
1. What is the title of Isaiah 7-12 in the outline and why is it so called?
2. What is the outline of this division?
3. What is the items of information in the historical introduction?
4. Give an account of the first meeting with Ahaz and the message of the prophet in connection with it.
5. Give an account of the second meeting with Ahaz and the message of the prophet in connection with it.
6. What is the meaning of Jehovah’s sign to Ahaz and when was the prophecy of this sign fulfilled?
7. What is the significance of “the fly,” “the bee,” “the razor,” “the cow and two sheep,” and “briers and thorns”?
8. What are the three subdivisions of Isa 8:1-9:7 ?
9. What is the twofold sign of the punishment about to fall upon Damascus and Samaria and what the significance of it?
10. Describe the picture of the Assyrian invasion as given here by the prophet in Isa 8:5-8 .
11. What hope of defense against this invading power does the prophet hold out to Judah in Isa 8:9-10 ?
12. In what was their real danger as shown in Isa 8:11-15 ?
13. What was the meaning of Isa 8:16-18 , “Bind thou up the testimony, etc.”?
14. What is the special pertinency of the exhortation of’ Isaiah respecting familiar spirits in Isa 8:19-22 and what Old Testament example of the violation of its teaching?
15. What is the fulfilment and interpretation of the great messianic prophecy in Isa 9:1-7 ?
16. What are the names ascribed to our Lord in Isa 9:6 and what the significance of them in general and in particular?
17. What promise here concerning his kingdom?
18. What is the title of section Isa 9:8-10:4 and what suggests it?
19. What are the special themes of each of these four paragraphs?
20. How is the loss of wealth in Isa 9:8-12 described?
21. How is the loss of their rulers in Isa 9:13-17 described?
22. How is the devouring fire of their own sinfulness in Isa 9:18-21 described?
23. How is the woe against perverters of righteousness in Isa 10:1-4 here described?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
Isa 7:1 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, [that] Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it.
Ver. 1. And it came to pass. ] This is not a superfluous transition, as Augustine a maketh it, but importeth that the following discourse is no less to be regarded than the foregoing.
In the days of Ahaz.
The son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah.
King of Judah.
That Rezin the King of Syria.
And Pekah King of Israel.
Went up.
But could not prevail against it.
a In Pentat.
Isaiah Chapter 7
In the last chapter we saw the glory of Christ revealed, and the assurance of a holy seed after the judgement of the land and people. We have now a weighty sequel recounting facts which occurred, not in the year king Uzziah died, nor even in the days of his successor, but strange as it might seem, in those of Ahaz. “This is that king Ahaz,” who without faith in Jehovah sent to the kings of Assyria for help. Sacrilegious he and at last apostate, Jehovah brought Judah low because of Ahaz, of David’s line; for he made Judah naked, and transgressed sore against Jehovah. Even in the midst of his distress he trespassed yet more. Hence the occasion for a fresh outburst of prophetic light. It could not otherwise have been clearly gathered how the glory of Christ was actually to appear. Our chapter solves this question, and connects His incarnation (for indeed He is God, yea, Jehovah) with His rejection and His final and everlasting triumph (Isa 8 ; Isa 9:1-7 ). The first part alone comes before us now.
The occasion was the offensive and profane alliance of Rezin, king of Syria, with Pekah, Remaliah’s son and king of Israel, against Judah and Ahaz. “And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, [that] Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up to Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it. And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart shook, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the forest are shaken by the wind” (vv. 1, 2). There were they in great fear, where no fear was, and this, alas! in Jerusalem and David’s house; and no wonder, for the heir of David’s throne walked not like David his father, but in the ways of the kings of Israel or worse, and drew Judah with him into sore transgression against Jehovah. Panic-stricken, yet in no way driven by his distress to God, on the self-same spot where Rabshakeh uttered his blasphemies against Jehovah at a later day, “the aqueduct of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller’s field,” Ahaz is met by the prophet. “And Jehovah said to Isaiah, Go out now to meet Ahaz, thou and Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the aqueduct of the upper pool, on the highway of the fuller’s field. And thou shalt say unto him, Take heed and be quiet; fear not, and let not thy heart faint before these two ends (tails) of smoking firebrands, because of the fierce anger of Rezin and Syria, and of the son of Remaliah. Inasmuch as Syria hath taken evil counsel against thee, Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, saying, Let us go up against Judah, and harass it, and make a breach therein for us, and set up a king therein, the son of Tabeal” (vv 3-6)
How foolish, as well as base, is unbelief! It is joyous and confident when a labouring volcano is about to burst; it is filled with anguish, when God is going to deal with the evils it dreads. In this case, how could He behold in peace a compact between apostate Israel and heathen Syria? It was not merely that their enterprise, if successful, must vex Judah, but set aside David’s line. It was a blow at the Messiah, little as they might have thought of this; and the oath and honour of God were thus at stake. But “thus saith the Lord Jehovah, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass. For the head of Syria [is] Damascus, and the head of Damascus [is] Rezin; and within sixty-five years shall Ephraim be broken, so as to be not a people. And the head of Ephraim [is] Samaria, and the head of Samaria [is] Remaliah’s son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established” (vv. 7-9).
How blessed are the ways of God! The effort to destroy, which seemed so awful to its objects, especially as their conscience was bad, led at once to the revelation of the doom of the destroyers. The confederacy came to naught. The Syrian chief would not avail to shield more guilty Ephraim; for it was sentenced – yea, to be so broken as not to be a people, within sixty-five years; and so it fell out to the letter (2Ki 17 ). The chief of Ephraim’s capital is paraded before us like his ally in due form and title. Such would each remain, and no more. Who were they to dispute the counsels of God as to David’s royal line, let Ahaz be personally faithless and false as he was? God at least is God, and His word shall stand for ever, though surely unbelief shall not be established, whether in Ephraim or in Judah. God’s people, God’s king; how inexcusable, if such failed in faith!
One can understand why rationalists cavil at the sixty-five years, challenge its accuracy, and reason on its being no answer to the anxiety of Ahaz. It does prove how specific is prophecy, and this beyond the present moment; for it is the exact point when Ephraim, suffering repeated blows, was not only swept away but excluded from the land by Esarhaddon’s importation of foreigners. It opens the way for the great prediction still farther off. For this was only the prelude to the weightier announcement that follows. “And Jehovah spoke again unto Ahaz, saying, Ask for thee a sign from Jehovah thy God: ask it in the depth or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt Jehovah” (vv 10-12). Alas! how often the hypocrisy of unbelief thus essays to hide its contempt of Jehovah; and through presumption, which really despises the word of His grace, assumes the garb of superior reverence and humility. The prophet, however, sees through the cheat put forward by an evil heart of unbelief, and calls now on the house of David to hear, not alone his reproof, but what the Lord Himself was to give. Ahaz shrank from God even in His goodness. Flesh never trusts God. It is bent on its own will and instinctively avoids grace, which must assert and give effect to the will of God.
Ahaz did not like God to draw too near. God answered it by Immanuel – God with us. “And he said, Hear then, house of David. [Is it] a small matter for you to weary men, that ye weary also my God? Therefore will Jehovah Himself give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel. Curds and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil and to choose the good” (vv. 13-15) Was it not the most marvellous grace so to promise to such a man? Yet in truth grace condemns unbelief and all other sin as the law never did or could. Had Ahaz asked any sign within his range of earth and heaven, how immeasurably short of God’s! If man refuses to ask through unbelief, God fails not to give a sign for His own glory: the virgin’s Son, the woman’s Seed, Immanuel! What thoughts, feelings, and facts cluster here together! What grace and truth, God and man united in one person! The security of David’s royal line and rights, how much more than the predicted ruin of plotting Ephraim, in the presence of the sign, the truth of truths – God with us! Yet was it the assurance, if its grandeur betokened other and higher glories, that no conspiracy could prosper which struck at the Root and Offspring of David.
It is well known that the Jews have made desperate efforts to evade this luminous testimony to the Incarnation in their own prophet. First they exaggerate the difference between “almah” and “bethulah”. (confessedly the latter is the more common word for virgin, for the former occurs in not more than six passages beside the one before us. But it is certain that in Joe 1:8 “b’thulah” is employed for a young married woman, which is never the case with “almah”; see also Deu 22:19 . For the argument on Pro 30:19 , Pro 30:20 is quite invalid to prove it synonymous with an adulterous woman. In the present instance the context requires the sense of virgin with the utmost precision; for in a young married woman’s bearing a son there is no sign or wonder. It was from the first known that the Deliverer of man from the serpent-enemy of the race must be born of woman in some distinctive way; it was known that He must be also son of Abraham, in the line of Isaac and Jacob, of Judah and David. It is now narrowed to a virgin therefore, by necessary implication, of that royal house. The virgin should be pregnant and bear Him; a sign indeed! in one sense explained, in another enhanced, by the capital truth that He should be God – of divine nature as truly as the woman’s Seed. The virgin’s Son is Immanuel, the Lord Jehovah, Whose glory the prophet had seen in connection with the preservation of a holy seed, spite of their repeated desolations. Thus the person of the Messiah, and specifically the solution of the enigma of His divine being, yet in association with the family of David, is fully cleared up.
Hence the Septuagint (a version made before the dispute arose) very properly gives here (as in Gen 24:43 ) , whereas Aquila and Symmachus chose . But it is plain that even the latter cannot get rid of the truth intended in the context; and the wild interpretations of some Jews and all Rationalists prove how hard set they are to evade its truth. In Solomon’s Song (6: 8), where the Septuagint translates the Hebrew term as the strict meaning of virgins is certain; for it is distinguished from and , and, like our word “maidens,” can only be used as “virgins,” as Rashi seems to allow in his comment on chapter 1. 3. Nor can there well be a more glaring instance of an offensive prejudice than Gesenius’ abandonment of the evident source of the word in “alam”, to “hide,”* in order to justify a more vague origin from an Arabic source.
*Even Aquila confirms this, the only true derivation of the word, and its kindred form for the other sex, by giving in Gen 24:43 .
Again, the most recent Jewish version known to me, that of Isaac Leeser, renders the article by the demonstrative. This is illegitimate. The object clearly is to refer the person in question to a young person then present. Nevertheless Mr. Leeser is more candid in his rendering of “harah” than some of his brethren and their rationalistic followers; for he, like Rashi before him, correctly renders it “shall conceive,” not “is with child.” Probably the latter considered the prophet’s wife to be in question, and the child to be the same as Maher-shalal-hashbaz. Here the Rabbis are in conflict. Thus Kimchi held that the young woman could not be Isaiah’s wife (for she must then have been designated the prophetess, as in chap. 8: 3), and therefore conceived her to be the wife of Ahaz, and imagined for them an unknown son named Immanuel. Aben Ezra is at issue with both; for he held it to be a third son of the prophetess, and so rather approached Rashi; but with Kimchi he held the sign to be the child’s eating cream and honey as soon as born. No more words are needed to expose such views. Even Kimchi disposes of Isaiah and the prophetess by asking how then the land could be called Immanuel’s land.
*Gesenius, who thought so too, tried to escape the difficulty of “ho-almah”.
Manifestly the Jews do not agree, save in opposing the only interpretation which carries with it a clear and noble sense, yet to be the joy of repentant Israel. The notion that Hezekiah was the virgin’s son is wholly inadmissible; for as Ahaz reigned sixteen years, and he himself was twenty-five years of age when he began to reign, he must have been a boy at least eight years old before his father’s reign began; and hence no prediction of his birth could have been made by Isaiah to Ahaz already on the throne. There is not a hint in scripture of Ahaz taking another wife after his accession and the announcement; still less is there room for a personage so wonderful, to say the least, as the Immanuel to be born, Who should altogether eclipse Hezekiah and break off the yoke of the Assyrian from the neck of Israel, the glorious person to bring in the glorious state promised in Isa 9:6 , Isa 9:7 .
It is as plain as can be on the face of these chapters that Shear-jashub (= the remnant shall return) was already born, and was the prophet’s companion, as we see at the beginning of Isa 7 . Not less plain is it that Maher-shalal-hash-baz (= hasten prey, speed spoil, Isa 8 ) was to be born of the prophetess. Both distinctly set forth the great events of undying interest to Israel, the one pledging the return of the remnant, the other intimating the Assyrian attack and its consequences. Why trust the Assyrian who should spoil the holy land? Why dread the kings who were so soon to be swept away? But between the two comes a wholly different promise, the virgin’s Son, excluding in all fairness of exposition both the king and the prophet with their children. His name Immanuel (God with us) speaks incomparably better things; and it reappears after the prophet’s second son, and even after the horrors represented by his name, when devastation had done its worst. But woe to those who meddle with Thy land, O Immanuel! Israel, and Judah, and David’s house may too justly bring down the chastening, and “the king” in the land at the end be yet worse than the unworthy politician who then held the sceptre. The ruin may seem complete, deliverance hopeless; but Immanuel! that is, God is with us. Such is the general outline. Further details are yet to be given in their place. We shall see that the following chapters, both in the extent and nature of Israel’s distress and evil, the changed relation of God to His people, and above all the glorious interposition of Immanuel, go far beyond any present or proximate encouragement to Israel (though there was this of course), and look on to days still future and quite distinct from anything meanwhile accomplished by Christ for the Christian or the church.
Nothing can be more apposite than “the sign” Jehovah gave, little as the feeble and self-willed Ahaz might appreciate it. For the coalition of the king of Israel with him of Syria was to depose the house of David and set up Ben-Tabeal over Judah. Man would have counted it enough to promise that his son Hezekiah, and his son, and so on, should succeed; and this would have been much to comfort one who simply confided in a promise through a divinely sent prophet. But as howsoever many the promises of God, in Christ is the Yea, so through Him too is the Amen for glory to God by us. Hence for the Jew all is made to centre in the Messiah. Not merely shall a remnant return, but the Seed of promise, the virgin’s Son, be born. Put this birth as far off as you please from the time of Ahaz, only thereby do you render more conspicuous the voice of God in prophecy and the sure mercies of David. The righteous covenant of God would not fail to judge what an Ahaz and a Manasseh, a Jehoiakim, a Jehoiachin, and a Zedekiah would sow, spite of a faithful Hezekiah or a godly Josiah. But Immanuel was an indefectible assurance that no confederacy could put down David’s house finally. Messiah, Son of David, is the divine guarantee. The virgin must bear Him of that stock; the virgin’s Son must also be, in some true though mysterious way, God Himself. Immanuel ensures that God’s purpose of blessing shall stand and be established for ever.
It has been observed that the “son” Immanuel, in ver. 14 appears not to be “the youth” of ver. 16; which last refers rather to Shear-jashub, who for this reason seems to have accompanied the prophet. And it is pertinent to observe that the Hebrew here is neither “son” nor “child” strictly, but “the youth” or “lad”. “For before the youth knoweth to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land, because of whose two kings thou art alarmed, shall be forsaken (Cf. Isa 6:11 ). Jehovah will bring upon thee and upon thy father’s house days which have not come since the day when Ephraim turned away from Judah – the king of Assyria” (vv. 16, 17). Great as the disaster had been under Jeroboam, a greater was at hand, with triumph in the end. It will be noticed, accordingly, that here we have Isaiah turning from “the house of David,” “ye” and “you” to “thou” etc. that is Ahaz. Compare vers. 13, 14 with 16, 17. And it is certain that the prophet’s child Shear-jashub had the character of a “sign” (see Isa 8:18 ), though and of course very distinct from God’s great sign, the virgin’s Son. From verse 16 the king was to learn, that before the youth (who appears almost certainly to be Shear-jashub) arrived at years of discretion, the allied kings must disappear from the scene. And so they did: for three years more scarce passed when the kings of Israel and Syria fell before the treachery or might of their enemies.
It is only fair to add that some Christians, who fully see the Incarnation here, understand all the verses (14-16) to refer to Immanuel. Some even go so far as to accept the notion of certain Rabbis that the prophet in spirit beholds the virgin already pregnant, on the principle of prophecy anticipating the fact sometimes as though present. Others again, by the youth or lad of v. 16, understand any youngling, not one in particular. but whatever be the shade of difference in detail, the unique fact stands indelible in its majestic outline.
The difficulty urged as to “the land” which should be forsaken, whose two kings were an object of abhorrence or alarm to Ahaz, is imaginary. The land or ground “adamah” is not at all restricted to the sense of a single country. It is a word susceptible of considerable variety of meaning, as the context may require, from land or ground in the narrowest sense, to an entire country or several countries, or even to the superficial world at large the habitable earth. Thus in “all the families of the earth” its force is extended comprehensively; and here the two kings define it as the land, not of one only, but of them both. compare as to this Isa 8:4 , “For before the child [Maher-shalalhash-baz] shall have knowledge to cry, My father and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria.” See also 2Ki 15:29 , 2Ki 15:30 ; 2Ki 16:9 . The “two kings” would seem to be, therefore those of Syria and Samaria or Israel, and “the land,” that which pertained to each. The Messianic interpretation of ver. 14 rests on an irrefragable basis, whether or not it be continued to verses 15, 16, and the application of the two kings to those of Israel and Syria.
Should guilty Ahaz and Judah, then, go unpunished? In no wise, as the prophet proceeds to let him know. “And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] Jehovah will hiss for the fly that [is] in the uppermost part of the streams of Egypt, and for the bee that [is] in the land of Assyria; and they shall come and settle all of them in the desolate valleys, and in the holes of the rocks, and on all thorn-bushes, and on all the pastures” (vv. 18, 19). The faith of Hezekiah might stay the execution of Judah’s judgement, and the king of Assyria was rebuked for a season. But even Josiah, faithful as he was, suffered for his rash opposition to “the fly that is at the end of the streams of Egypt”; and “the bee that is in the land of Assyria” stung yet more fiercely at the summons of Jehovah. “In that day will Jehovah with a razor hired beyond the river, with the king of Assyria, shave the head and the hair of the feet, yea, it will also consume the beard. And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] a man shall nourish a young cow, and two sheep. And it shall come to pass for the abundance of milk [that] they shall give, he shall eat curds: for curds and honey shall every one eat [that is] left in the land. And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] every place where were a thousand vines at a thousand silverlings shall become briars and thorns. With arrows and with bow shall they come thither, because the whole land shall become briars and thorns. And all the hills that were hoed with the hoe, thither they will not come for fear of briars and thorns; but it shall be for the sending forth of oxen, and for the treading of sheep” (vv. 20-25). The character of Israel’s land should thus be wholly changed; and so complete is the desolation ensuing, that the owner of a young cow and two sheep would find the amplest range for his scanty flock in the wilderness that succeeded to the rich cornfields of Palestine, and himself be fed on the nourishment proper to wandering hordes, not on the food of cultivated land. What a picture! Yes, and the best of vineyards (compare Son 8:11 ) becomes a bed of briars and thorns; and men cannot pass unprotected by bows and arrows; and the carefully tended hills are turned into a place for oxen and lesser cattle. So dark as well as minute are the lines in which the sorrowful change in Juda is set before her king.
Thus the league Ahaz dreaded came to nothing; but the Assyrian on whom he leaned became the rod for the guilty king and people. God will be the refuge of His people, and turns the resource of unbelief into their scourge. Here the Assyrian pursues his sweeping ravages unchecked for a season. The figure of shaving as with a razor is expressive and obvious; but here it is carried out into striking details. It is not the head only that is thus stripped bare, but the least and lowest and scantiest parts of the body politic; as the beard represents that which in feelings then prevalent was most sensitive of dishonour. The closing verses set forth a vivid picture of the results of spoliation, where an agricultural people are reduced to a handful of stragglers living on pastoral produce that cost little or no labour. We must not confound a land flowing with milk and honey, the normal state of the land and people, and a man here or there keeping a young cow and two sheep, yet from that scanty stock finding such abundance of milk as to eat curds or butter. No corn, wine, or oil; no grapes or olives, figs or pomegranates; no exchange of harvest or stock produce for commodities amidst a numerous and thriving population; but thorns and briars where had been the richest vineyards, and one going thither with arrows and the bow; and what was once sedulously tilled consigned to cattle great or small.
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Isa 7:1-2
1Now it came about in the days of Ahaz, the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Aram and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up to Jerusalem to wage war against it, but could not conquer it. 2When it was reported to the house of David, saying, The Arameans have camped in Ephraim, his heart and the hearts of his people shook as the trees of the forest shake with the wind.
Isa 7:1 in the days of Ahaz Ahaz reigned from 735-715 B.C. according to John Bright; 736-728 B.C. according to E.J. Young, and 732/731 – 716/715 B.C. according to R.K. Harrison; see chart in appendix.The setting of this chapter is the invasion of Judah by both Syria and Israel because Judah would not participate in their military coalition against Assyria.
Pekah He was the usurper of the throne (i.e., dates of his reign, Bright, 737-732; Young, 736-730; NIV Study Bible, 752-732) of the Northern Ten Tribes. See Chart of Kings of the Divided Monarchy in Appendix Four, #3.
Isa 7:2 it was reported to the house of David This refers to a report given to the entire royal family or the report was made public at court.
NASBhave camped in
NKJVare deployed in
NRSVhad allied it with
TEVwere already in
NJBhas halted in
LXXhas conspired with
PESHITTAis confederate with
REBhad made an alliance with
The VERB (BDB 628, KB 679, Qal PERFECT) means rest. In this context it means establish a permanent camp in the midst of. This implies Syria was the stronger, dominate one of the political alliance.
Notice this same VERB is used in Isa 7:19 to describe a large invading army.
his heart and the hearts of his people This could refer to the royal family or the inhabitants of Jerusalem who had heard the report.
shook as the trees of the forest shake with the wind There is a repetition of the VERB totter, or stagger (BDB 631, KB 681, Qal IMPERATIVE and Qal INFINITIVE CONSTRUCT). Usually intensity is expressed by an IMPERFECT VERB and an INFINITIVE ABSOLUTE, but here it is the repetition of the VERB and INFINITIVE in a similar form.
Judah and her leadership were afraid. They did not have a trusting confidence in YHWH’s presence or promises!
it came to pass in the days of. See note on Gen 14:1.
Ahaz. For the history explaining this prophecy see 2Ki 15:37 – Isa 16:5.
Rezin. See 2Ki 16:5-9.
Pekah. His was the last prosperous reign in Israel. It began in the last year of Uzziah, king of Judah.
the son of Remaliah. Repeated for emphasis in verses: Isa 7:1, Isa 7:4, Isa 7:5, Isa 7:9.
A murderer 2Ki 16:25).
could not prevail against it. Compare 2Ki 16:5.
Chapter 7
Now Uzziah is dead and his grandson Ahaz is reigning.
It came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, the king of Judah, that Rezin was the king of Syria, and Pekah was the son of Remaliah, the king of Israel ( Isa 7:1 ),
So Pekah was ruling in Israel. He had assassinated the previous king. And Syria and Israel, the Northern Kingdom, had confederated together to attack Judah, the Southern Kingdom. And so they
came up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but they could not prevail against it. And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria has confederated with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of the people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind ( Isa 7:1-2 ).
In other words, they began to tremble because they said, “Oh, there’s a confederacy. Those two nations are coming against us, you know. What are we going to do?”
Then said the LORD unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shearjashub ( Isa 7:3 )
Now Shearjashub means a remnant shall return. That was the name of his son, Shearjashub. Quite a name for a boy, but he’s got one with a better name-Mahershalalhashbaz. That’s quite a tag to put on a kid, isn’t it? And meet them.
[at the conduit,] the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway that is the fuller’s field; And say unto him, Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither be faint-hearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin, and because of the son of Remaliah [or Pekah]. Because ( Isa 7:3-4 )
Don’t be afraid, don’t be fainthearted. Just be quiet before God.
Because Syria and Ephraim have taken evil counsel against thee, saying, Let us go up to Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal: Thus saith the Lord GOD, It shall not stand ( Isa 7:5-7 ),
Their confederacy isn’t going to stand.
neither shall it come to pass. For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin [who was the king]; and within sixty-five years Ephraim will be broken, that it be not a people ( Isa 7:7-8 ).
So the Northern Kingdom of Israel, of which Ephraim was the chief tribe, in sixty-five years they’re not going to exist any longer. And sure enough, within sixty-five years the Assyrians destroyed them.
The head of Ephraim is Samaria ( Isa 7:9 ),
That was the capital city of the Northern Kingdom.
and the head of Samaria is Remaliah’s son ( Isa 7:9 ).
Which was Pekah.
If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established ( Isa 7:9 ).
Now don’t be afraid, don’t be fainthearted, God’s going to take care of it. The confederacy that they’ve made against you isn’t going to stand. God’s going to break it.
Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying, Ask a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the LORD. And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that you abhor shall be forsaken of both of her kings ( Isa 7:10-16 ).
So these kings, Rezin and Pekah, are going to be wiped out.
Now herein is where the prophets wrote as they were inspired of the Holy Spirit, but did not understand the things that they were writing about, and how that he was writing of a local instance, but yet it had a prophetic aspect towards the future. And much of prophecy has a two-fold interpretation. They call it the near and the far. And this is true of much prophecy. In fact, it says that these men wrote of things that they did not understand. Earnestly they desired to know these things of which they wrote. But they really didn’t understand but they were writing, inspired of the Holy Spirit.
And in the near prophecy, a child was to be born. Or, before a child born at that period was old enough to know evil, to choose good, or the age of accountability, twelve, thirteen years old, or what he is saying, within twelve or thirteen years, both Pekah and Rezin are going to get wiped out. They’ll no longer be reigning over Syria and over Samaria within twelve or thirteen years.
But the prophecy in its long-term was a prophecy of the birth of Jesus Christ in that, “The Lord Himself shall give you a sign. Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” We know that that is a prophecy of Jesus Christ, because it is interpreted by the Holy Spirit in Matthew’s gospel, chapter 1, verse Isa 7:23 as a prophecy. When it speaks there of how Mary and Joseph were engaged; before they had had relations, Mary was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit, that it might be fulfilled according to the word of the prophet saying, “Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” So Matthew’s gospel, as Matthew writing by the Holy Spirit interprets this passage of scripture. He interprets it to be a prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ.
Now the Hebrew scholar Gesenius who has written a Hebrew lexicon and is recognized as one of the outstanding Hebrew scholars has suggested that the Hebrew word here translated virgin should be translated “a young maiden.” You know why he suggests that? Because he said he doesn’t believe in miracles and it will be a miracle for a virgin to have a child. And so that’s why he said, and that’s why he translates this young maiden. And of course, Revised Standard and a lot of the new translations pick up the unbelief of Gesenius and translate this, “a young maiden shall conceive.”
Well, what so much of a sign about that? That happens every day. It takes away the whole thrust of the scripture. But a virgin shall conceive. The Greek word that was translated by these seventy scholars who translated the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Old Testament 200 years before Christ, they chose to translate this Hebrew word with a Greek word that can only mean virgin. And that God intended virgin is obvious because of Mary. “Therefore, the Lord Himself shall give you a sign. Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” Which means, “God is with us.” Beautiful name. God is with us.
So that is the far interpretation of this prophecy. The near was that within twelve years a child born now within twelve years, by the time he’s age of accountability, knows good from evil, both these kings that have conspired against you will be wiped out, and that was true.
Now he does predict the impending invasion of Judah.
The LORD shall bring upon thee, and upon thy people, and upon thy father’s house ( Isa 7:17 ),
Remember he’s talking to Ahaz the king.
days that have not come, upon the day that Ephraim departed from Judah; even the king of Assyria. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the LORD shall hiss for the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt, and for the bee that is in the land of Assyria. And they shall come, and shall rest all of them in the desolate valleys, and in the holes of the rocks, and upon all thorns, and upon all bushes. In the same day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired, namely, those that are beyond the river, by the king of Assyria, the head, and the hair of the feet: and it shall also consume the beard ( Isa 7:17-20 ).
Now what God is talking about is that God is going to raise up another kingdom, and that is the kingdom of Assyria. And Assyria is going to invade and wipe out Syria. Assyria was over a little further north and east from Syria, and so sometimes people get confused with Syria and Assyria. Syria is going to be destroyed. Here they’re planning an invasion, but Syria will be destroyed by Assyria. And God is going to bring Egypt up in an invasion within the land.
And it shall come to pass in that day, that a man shall nourish a young cow and two sheep ( Isa 7:21 );
And he speaks of
the abundance of milk that they shall give ( Isa 7:22 ),
Actually, because there’s not very many people left around, the land, the tilled land is turned into briers and thorns.
And all of the hills will be digged with the mattock, and there shall not come thither the fear of briers and thorns: but it shall be for the sending forth of oxen, and for the treading of lesser cattle ( Isa 7:25 ). “
Isa 7:1-2. And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it. And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind.
They were tossed to and fro, bent, thrown down, as the trees of a forest in a tornado. They had already felt the power of these two confederate kings, and they were terribly afraid. David himself would have had confidence in God; but the house of David had gone far astray. Ahaz had cast off the fear of God, and he had therefore great fear of men.
Isa 7:3. Then said the LORD unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shear-jashub thy son,
Shear-jashub was but a child; and why Isaiah was to take his son with him does not appear, except that his name signifies, The remnant shall return, and it was part of the prophets message that the remnant, the people who had been carried away captive, should return.
Isa 7:3. At the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fullers field;
God knows the exact spot where his servants shall meet with the men to whom he sends them. There is a corner where the fullers field just juts upon the upper pool; there Isaiah will meet king Ahaz, and there he is to speak to him. Is there any spot just by the Elephant and Castle where God means to meet with some soul tonight? I pray that it may be so.
Isa 7:4. And say unto him,
The prophet is told the word he is to speak as well as the place where he is to deliver the message. Isaiah knew that he was soon to go and deal with men of hard, heart and deaf car. The other day we read the sixth chapter of this prophecy; and we noted the hard task that Isaiah had to perform. Now he is beginning his work with the man whom the Bible calls, That king Ahaz, as if it could not say anything bad enough of him, but had merely to mention his name, and everybody would know who was meant.
Isa 7:4. Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither be fainthearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah.
Their kingdoms were dying out. They were like burnt-out firebrands; they made a little smoke, but within a very short time there would be nothing left of them, and Ahaz need not be afraid of them.
Isa 7:5-9. Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah, have taken evil counsel against thee, saying, Let its go up against Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal: thus saith the Lord GOD, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass. For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people. And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliahs son.
God did not intend it to grow any bigger. These two little kingdoms of Syria and Ephraim were to keep as they were until they were destroyed.
Isa 7:9-12. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established. Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying, Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the LORD.
He put his refusal very prettily, as men often do when they want to say an evil thing. He refused to accept a sign from the Lord, under the idle pretense that it would be tempting God. We never tempt God when we do what he bids us. There is no presumption in obedience. It was an idle compliment, to conceal the impudence of his heart. The Lord invited him to acknowledge Jehovah as his God: Ask thee a sign of Jehovah thy God. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt Jehovah. He did not say, Jehovah, my God; and his silence meant dissent.
Isa 7:13. And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David;
Observe, the prophet does not say, Hear now, O Ahaz as if God would not deal with Ahaz on his own account, but only because he was of the house of David. The Lord remembered his covenant with David. God sometimes blesses men for the sake of their fathers. He might not hear a word that they had to say; but he remembers their fathers, and the amity and comity which there was between himself and their fathers.
Isa 7:13-14. Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also?
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, A wonderful sign this!
Isa 7:14-15. And shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
Whereupon a wise commentator says that, before children are able to learn, their parents should look upon the very feeding of them as a means of making them to know the difference between good and evil.
Isa 7:16. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
This was the sign-manual. Judah could not be destroyed, for our Lord was to spring out of Judah; and this was the sign that Judah must stand, because Immanuel must be born of that nation, and the time for this great event was fixed by the Lord. Until a child is some few years of age, he does not distinguish between good and evil; but in a shorter time than it would take a child to come to years of responsibility, God meant to cut off both those kings, and he did so. This was a very wonderful prophecy, and ought to have filled Ahaz with great delight, and with confidence in God; but it did nothing of the kind.
Now we are going to read more of the story of this king Ahaz.
This exposition consisted of readings from Isa 7:1-16, and 2Ch 28:1-16.
Isa 7:1-2
Isa 7:1-2
One glorious chapter after another successively appears in this marvelous prophecy; and not even the Holy Scriptures contain anything exceeding the wonder and beauty of Isaiah’s remarkable writings. The chapter before us details the prophecies that were delivered during the reign of Ahaz, the weak and unbelieving grandson of Uzziah. The occasion was apparently during the Syrian-Ephraimite war which developed somewhat early in Ahaz’ reign. The monarchs of those two countries, through fear of Assyria, wanted to form a coalition against the power of that rapidly developing nation; and they believed that Ahaz could not be depended upon as a panner; therefore, their scheme was to attack Judah, the Southern Israel, depose Ahaz, and force the enthronement of a king of their own choice in Jerusalem and thus end the Davidic dynasty altogether.
What made the situation even more frightening from the standpoint of Ahaz was the fact that both Syria and Ephraim had already defeated Ahaz in battles that had inflicted heavy losses, resulting in the great fear and trembling that fell upon Ahaz when he learned of the coalition against him. Isa 7:1-9 record the prophetic instructions given by God through Isaiah to Ahaz, whose unbelief caused him to reject the instructions. He favored, instead, his own scheme of forming an alliance with Assyria, which of course would be, at last, the total and complete ruin, not only of the Northern Israel, but of Judah also. Isa 7:10-17 record the fantastically wonderful prophecy of The Virgin who would conceive a child who would bear a significant name with the meaning of “God with us!” Isa 7:18-25 are a prophetic revelation of just what the “hired razor,” Assyria, would eventually do to the land and the people of Israel.
Isa 7:1-2
“And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel went up to Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it. And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart trembled, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the forest tremble with the wind.”
“Pekah the son of Remaliah …” Both here and in Isa 7:4-5; Isa 7:9, below, this mention of Pekah’s father suggests that he was thus designated “in contempt, Remaliah having been a man of no distinction (2Ki 15:25).
“His heart trembled, and the heart of his people …” Each of the hostile powers mentioned here had already defeated Ahaz (See 2Ch 28:5-6); and now both together were attacking Israel with the consequence that both Ahaz and his people were terrified. The date of this threatened disaster was placed at approximately 735 B.C. by Kidner.
Isa 7:1-2 THE CONFEDERACY: Rezin, King of Syria, and Pekah, King of Israel (Ephraim) in Samaria, had formed a coalition against Assyria. It is probable that they tried to get the Judean ruler to join with them against Assyria. Rezin and Pekah first attacked Judah when Jotham was still on the throne (2Ki 15:37) probably to coerce the Judean ruler to join their alliance against Assyria. In 2Ch 28:5 ff we learn that Ahaz was delivered into the hands of the Syrians who smote him and 120,000 men of Judah were slain. But Ahaz and his forces were suddenly released at Jericho and returned to Jerusalem. Then in 2Ki 16:5 we learn of a third attack of Rezin and Pekah upon Jerusalem. At this time Ahaz was prepared to become a satellite-state to Assyria in return for Assyrias protection against the northern coalition (Cf. 2Ki 16:7-9). It was, no doubt, just prior to Ahazs overture to the Assyrians that Isaiah met with Ahaz to deliver the Lords promise that the coalition of Rezin and Pekah would not be able to stand against Judah. Ahaz was beginning to be overcome with fear toward Syria and Israel. The coalition was determined to get rid of Ahaz and place a man on Judahs throne who would do their bidding.
Immediately following this new call of the prophet, we have the account of his encounter with Ahaz. Rezin of Syria and Pekah of Israel had entered into a confederacy against Judah, and a great fear possessed the people. The prophet declares to him that the counsel of these kings shall not prevail if he, that is, Ahaz, will be quiet and trust in God. A sign from Jehovah is offered, but he refuses to ask one. This refusal is an act of unbelief, which the prophet rebukes, and then declares that the sign shall be given, namely, that a child shall be born of a virgin.
This sign had an immediate application, but is the beginning in Isaiah’s prophesying of a thought which grows as he proceeds, until it is seen to be Messianic in intention. He ends his message to Ahaz by declaring that judgment will fall on Judah, and proceeds to describe the Assyrian invasion, with its terrible results to the people.
the Sign of Immanuel
Isa 7:1-17
A new cycle of prophecy begins here, covering the reign of Ahaz. The complete history which illustrates these chapters is given in 2Ch 28:5. The invasion of Judah by Syria and Samaria was permitted because a severe warning was needed to enforce Isaiahs remonstrances and appeals. See 2Ki 15:37. The Holy City, as Isaiah predicted, was not to be trodden by the invader, though it would pass through severe suffering and anxiety. This immunity, which neither Ahaz nor his people deserved, was secured by Isaiahs faith and prayer, pleading as he did, Gods ancient covenant.
This great prophecy of the coming Immanuel must have greatly encouraged that generation, as it has all succeeding ones. It inspired Psa 46:1-11. What greater comfort have we than that Jesus is the companion of our pilgrimage? See Mat 1:21-23. Though the corn-lands were desolate, the cattle on the mountain-pastures would yield butter and the wild bees honey; and this would supply the nations needs till the invader had withdrawn. Though God chastens us, He will not forget our daily bread.
EXPOSITORY NOTES ON
THE PROPHET ISAIAH
By
Harry A. Ironside, Litt.D.
Copyright @ 1952
edited for 3BSB by Baptist Bible Believer in the spirit of the Colportage ministry of a century ago
ISAIAH CHAPTER SEVEN
THE VIRGIN’S SON
“And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it. And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind. Then said the Lord unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shearjashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller’s field; and say unto him, Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither be fainthearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah. Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah, have taken evil counsel against thee, saying, Let us go up against Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal: thus saith the Lord God, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass. For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people. And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah’s son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established” (verses 1-9).
WE ARE now to consider a portion which has been the subject of endless controversy throughout the Christian centuries, but which the Holy Spirit makes clear to those who are ready to receive His testimony, because of the way in which this scripture is used in connection with the birth of our blessed Lord. During the reign of King Ahaz, the grandson of Uzziah, war broke out between Judah and Israel. Pekah, the son of Remaliah, who was king of Israel, entered into a confederacy with Rezin, king of Syria; and these together went up to besiege Jerusalem. Though the siege lasted for some time, they were unable to subjugate the holy city. When Ahaz learned of the confederacy against him, his heart and the heart of his people were moved with fear, for Ahaz had walked in the ways of the kings of Israel rather than in those of the house of David. He had, therefore, little or no reason to expect divine help against his foes. But GOD’s heart was toward the people of Judah, for the time had not yet come to deliver them up to their enemies.
There had been quite a measure of return to the Lord during the days of Jotham, the father of Ahaz, and GOD heard the prayers of His almost distracted people and sent the prophet Isaiah to
meet Ahaz and give him a word of encouragement. Isaiah took with him his son Shear-jashub, whose name meant, “The remnant shall return.” All of Isaiah’s children seemed to have been named prophetically in order that they might be signs to the people of Judah.
The message that came to Ahaz was one of trust and comfort. He was exhorted to take heed and be quiet, to fear not nor be fainthearted, because of the two kings who had linked their forces against him. In the sight of GOD they were but as two smoking firebrands soon to be extinguished. Their own wickedness and ungodliness was such that the Lord was about to deal with them in judgment; and, therefore, would not permit them to overcome Judah or subdue Jerusalem. It was in vain that they took counsel together against Ahaz and his people, and sought to make a breach in the defenses of Jerusalem. The Lord GOD declared that their counsel should not stand nor come to pass, but that within a definite period of sixty-five years Ephraim’s power would be utterly broken; they would be no longer a people, and Syria would be unable to help them against the king of Assyria, who, in GOD’s own time, was to carry the northern kingdom into captivity.
“Moreover the Lord spake again unto Ahaz, saying, Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the Lord. And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings” (verses 10-16).
It was at this time that GOD gave, through Isaiah, a confirmation of the gospel message in the Garden of Eden. He had declared that the Seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head. The “Seed of the woman” is a most significant expression and refers to the Virgin Birth of the Messiah. All others born into the world are definitely of the seed of the man, but the great Deliverer was to come only through the woman.
Isaiah told Ahaz to ask for a sign from the Lord in order to confirm the Word the prophet had spoken. Ahaz refused to do this, and his words sound pious enough, “I will not ask, neither will I tempt the Lord.” Actually, these were the words that came from an unbelieving heart; he was afraid to ask for a sign lest it should not come to pass. Isaiah then declared that GOD Himself should give a sign and of such a character that men would believe it impossible to come to pass. “Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also?”
The pretended humility of Ahaz was hateful to GOD. He who is all-powerful might have given any sign that had been asked. Therefore, Isaiah went on to say, “The Lord Himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” Immanuel, as we know, being interpreted, “God with us.” The virgin’s Son was to be “God manifested in the flesh.” It is only unbelief that would try to nullify the force of this passage by reading in place of “virgin” a “young woman,” and attempting to make that young woman to be the wife of the prophet, and the son born to be his son through her.
It is perfectly true that the word rendered virgin might also be rendered maiden, but every maiden is presumably a virgin – if not, something is radically wrong – so that the prophecy here clearly and definitely declared that an unmarried virgin should become a mother and the child should be named GOD with us. This is not to say, as Rome does, that the virgin Mary is herself the mother of GOD. She became the mother of the humanity of our Lord JESUS CHRIST, but He who was thus born of her was GOD manifest in the flesh.
However, this sign was not to be fulfilled during the days of Ahaz nor yet for some time afterward, for the prophet immediately added, “Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.” Thus, before this child should come on the scene and grow up to years of maturity, not only the king of Israel but also the king of Judah would have ceased to reign, and the land would be left without a son of David sitting on the throne of Judah, or any representative sitting on the throne of Israel.
The expression “butter and honey shall he eat” is very striking, for it indicates the true humanity of the Child to be born of the virgin. In chapter nine we read of Him again and fuller details are given. While He was to be supernaturally conceived, He would have a real, physical body which would be nourished by proper food as in the case of others. Butter (curds) is the quintessence of animal food, and honey the quintessence of vegetable food.
With such as these, therefore, the holy Child was to be nourished that He might grow from infancy to manhood in a normal way. When we turn to the New Testament records we do not read of some remarkably precocious child whose early activities were different from those of other little ones. “He increased in wisdom and stature and in favor with God and man.” Feeding upon the food provided, He grew from childhood to youth and from youth to manhood.
In the so-called Apocryphal Gospels many curious and weird legends are connected with the boy JESUS. From the very first He is pictured as acting in a supernatural way, even at His very birth taking three steps forward to the amazement of those attending upon His mother, and when playing with other boys He would work strange miracles that amazed them, though, on the other hand, if they failed to appreciate Him He is said to have visited judgment upon them. But this is not the CHRIST of GOD, but rather a creature of man’s unholy imagination. As babe, growing child, youth, and man, our Lord’s humanity was exactly like that of others, apart from sin. He was made in all things like unto His brethren that He might properly represent us before GOD as our Kinsman-Redeemer.
“The LORD shall bring upon thee, and upon thy people, and upon thy father’s house, days that have not come, from the day that Ephraim departed from Judah; even the king of Assyria. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall hiss for the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt, and for the bee that is in the land of Assyria. And they shall come, and shall rest all of them in the desolate valleys, and in the holes of the rocks, and upon all thorns, and upon all bushes. In the same day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired, namely, by them beyond the river, by the king of Assyria, the head,
and the hair of the feet: and it shall also consume the beard. And it shall come to pass in that day, that a man shall nourish a young cow, and two sheep; and it shall come to pass, for the abundance of milk that they shall give he shall eat butter: for butter and honey shall every one eat that is left in the land. And it shall come to pass in that day, that every place shall be, where there were a thousand vines at a thousand silverlings, it shall even be for briers and thorns. With arrows and with bows shall men come thither; because all the land shall become briers and thorns. And on all hills that shall be digged with the mattock, there shall not come thither the fear of briers and thorns; but it shall be for the sending forth of oxen, and for the treading of lesser cattle” (verses 17-25).
Upon Ahaz and his people and his father’s house, GOD would bring distress and trouble through the coming into the land of the king of Assyria. In fact, Judah was to be the bone of contention between two great powers; Assyria on the east, and Egypt on the west. As they contemplated the increasing might of Assyria they turned desperately toward Egypt, hoping to find in that people an ally who would help to protect them from the eastern power; but they learned in the end that Egypt was a broken reed. Instead of becoming helpful she would herself turn against them.
As a result of the conflict that would ensue, the day was not far distant when famines and pestilence would sweep through the land. The great cities of Judah would fall; whereas, out of the country places those who remained would exist upon the produce of the soil, and even this in limited quantity, for thorns and briers would soon cover large districts where once had been flourishing industries, plantations, and vineyards. Nevertheless, GOD would still intervene to protect the poor of the flock and those who waited upon Him, so that in response to their toil the land would once more bear fruit instead of the thorns and briers, and oxen and sheep would again be raised in sufficient quantities to meet the needs of the people.
To some it might seem strange that the prophecy of the virgin’s Son, who was also, as we know elsewhere from Scripture, to come into the world as the Son of David, would be given in such an unexpected place, but we need to remember that GOD ever had CHRIST before Him and every king of Judah was the anointed of the Lord at that time. Our word “Messiah” simply means “the Anointed,” and therefore each of these kings was set by GOD to prefigure His own blessed Son, who was to come into the world in the fullness of time and be presented to the chosen nation as the anointed One in whom alone deliverance was to be found.
Many of these kings failed utterly to picture the Lord Himself. Their behavior shows that they were far removed in spirit from GOD’s thoughts for them. Ahaz had shown himself forgetful of the law of the Lord, and so in the hour of his distress he would not have the courage to count upon GOD or to expect help from Him. How natural then that under the circumstances GOD should speak of another king, a Son of David, who was to be born into the world supernaturally and in His own time would show who was the “blessed and only Potentate, King of kings and Lord of lords.”
~ end of chapter 7 ~
Isa 7:10-14
I. Isaiah is desired to offer Ahaz a sign either in the depth or the height. That the Jewish economy was in some sense an economy of signs we all admit. The Jewish prophet was to call the attention of his countrymen to these signs, to discover the signification of them. Our Lord laid down the whole doctrine upon this subject when the Pharisees sought a sign from Him. He had given them signs of healing, life-giving power proofs, that a present God was with them. But they wanted a sign from heaven, the token of some distant God in the sky. That, He said, was the craving of an adulterous or sense-bound generation; and He asked them whether there were not signs in the sky at morning and evening by which they determined whether there would be a fine or cloudy day on the morrow, and whether there were not signs of the times which were warning them of evils to come. The new world has been just as rich in these signs as the old. If we do not use these, we may have others; but it will be because we are an adulterous and sinful generation, and need the portents and presages of an approaching downfall.
II. Ahaz said, “I will not ask, neither will I tempt the Lord my God.” It was a hypocritical phrase; he did not fear to tempt the Lord his God; he did not believe Him. He feared lest the God of his fathers should do him some injury. “O house of David,” said Isaiah, “is it not enough for you to weary men, but will you weary my God also?” Do you think you can change His purposes because you are incredulous and heartless? No; the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: “A Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.”
III. From this time we may observe a continual recurrence of these two ideas,-frequently in direct conjunction, always following close upon each other,-the Assyrian invader, and the Immanuel, God with us. Isaiah speaks of himself and the children whom God has given him; all these were to be living signs, continual testimonies of an impending ruin and of a great Deliverer, of One to whom every Israelite might turn with his heart, and in whom he might find rest and salvation; but whose presence would stir up all the dark and evil and rebellious thoughts of those who would not yield themselves to Him.
F. D. Maurice, Prophets and Kings of the Old Testament, p. 235.
References: Isa 7:10-14.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. viii., p. 139. Isa 7:14.-Ibid., vol. iv., p. 89, and vol. ix., p. 336; Expositor, 1st series, vol. x., p. 331; J. E. Vaux, Sermon Notes, 1st series, p. 96; Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 360; Plain Sermons by Contributors to “Tracts for the Times,” vol. ix., p. 91. Isa 7:16.-E. H. Plumptre, Expositor, 2nd series, vol. ii., p. 239. Isa 8:6.-S. Cox, Ibid., 1st series, vol. vi., p. 353. Isa 8:7, Isa 8:8.-E. H. Plumptre, Ibid., 2nd series, vol. ii., p. 240.
CHAPTER 7
The Prophet before King Ahaz
1. The king in trouble (Isa 7:1-2) 2. Isaiah sent and his message (Isa 7:3-9) 3. A sign offered and refused (Isa 7:10-12) 4. The sign: The virgin birth (Isa 7:13-16) 5. The advent of the Assyrian (Isa 7:17-25)Study carefully the historic setting of this chapter and2 Chronicles 28:1-277. See lecture on Messianic Predictions. In verse 14 the virgin birth of Christ is announced. Much of the controversy is around the word virgin (almah), which the critics declare does not mean a virgin but a young married woman. However, they err. In Gen 24:43, Exo 2:8, Psa 68:25, Son 1:3, etc., the same word is used, and it means virgin in these and other passages. The Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Old Testament made some 300 years B.C., translates the Hebrew almah with pardenos, the Greek for virgin.Mat 1:23 confirms this Messianic prediction.
tenth
See “Remnant,” (See Scofield “Rom 11:5”).
return
(See Scofield “Isa 8:18”)
the days: 2Ki 16:1, 2Ch 28:1-6
Rezin: Isa 8:6, 2Ki 15:37, Psa 83:3-5
but could: Isa 7:4-9, Isa 8:9, Isa 8:10
Reciprocal: 1Ki 20:13 – Hast thou 2Ki 3:18 – he will 2Ki 15:27 – Pekah 2Ki 15:30 – in the twentieth 2Ki 16:5 – Rezin 2Ch 20:1 – the children of Moab 2Ch 28:5 – delivered him 2Ch 28:16 – did king Psa 48:4 – General Isa 8:7 – the king Isa 11:13 – the envy Eze 16:57 – reproach Amo 6:13 – Have Mat 1:9 – Achaz
JUDAHS ALLIANCE WITH ASSYRIA
Syria and Israel menaced Judah through Jothams reign but the situation has become acute now that Ahaz is on the throne (Isa 7:1-2).
THE PROMISED SIGN
The Lord, through Isaiah, counsels and encourages the king at a crisis (Isa 7:3-16). Notice where the prophet is to meet Ahaz (Isa 7:3): where he and his military engineers may be conferring as to the water supply during the expected siege. Notice who accompanies the prophet, and his name, which means a remnant shall return (margin). The name was doubtless known to the king and was intended to inspire hope; it pointed to Gods purpose of ultimate blessing for Judah. Notice the design of Syria and Israel to overthrow the throne of Judah and set up their choice in place of Ahaz (Isa 7:6). Ahaz unwillingness to ask a sign (Isa 7:12) was not piety but the opposite, since he intended to invite the aid of Assyria and cared nothing for Jehovah.
The virgin is not identified, but within the period when she would become a wife and mother and her offspring old enough to discriminate between good and evil, a few years at the most, Ahaz present enemies would be past the power to harm him.
Such is the immediate application, but the Holy Spirit had in mind a grander and fuller application, as we know from Mat 1:23. This gives occasion to speak of another principle in the interpretation of prophecy known as the law of double reference. That is, when the precise time of particular events is not revealed, the prophets sometimes speak of them as continuous, and sometimes blend two events in one. The latter is the case here, and the birth of this child of the virgin, who became married in Ahaz time, is a foreshadowing of the birth of Jesus Christ who was conceived by the Holy Ghost and born of the virgin Mary, who remained a virgin until after the birth of her firstborn Son.
COMING JUDGMENTS ON JUDAH (Isa 7:17 to Isa 8:8)
Ahaz rejection of God and his confidence in Assyria call forth a prophecy of punishment (Isa 7:17). Assyria will ultimately become Judahs enemy (Isa 7:18-20), and the land be desolate of population and laid waste (Isa 7:21-25).
After a parenthesis, in which similar catastrophes are spoken of in the case of Syria and Israel (Isa 8:1-7), Judah is again alluded to (Isa 8:8). When the king of Assyria is passing through Israel, and leading her people into captivity, he will sweep down into Judah also, and spare only Jerusalem, the capital of the nation. This prophecy was fulfilled in the story of Sennacherib and Hezekiah with which the book of Kings has familiarized us.
A FORECAST OF THE END OF THE AGE (Isa 8:9-22)
The law of double reference finds another illustration in the verses following. From the immediate judgments falling on Judah, the Holy Spirit leads out the prophet to speak of those to come at the end of the age.
Isa 8:9 is a picture of the Gentile nations federated under the man of sin, with whose character and work we have become partially acquainted. This federation will come to naught (Isa 8:10). The faithful remnant of Israel in that day are urged to make God their trust (Isa 8:11-18), while the nation as a whole will be walking in moral and spiritual darkness (Isa 8:19-22).
THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST (Isa 9:1-7)
This darkness and gloom will not continue forever (Isa 9:1-3 RV). The day is coming when the Gentile yoke will be removed from Israel under miraculous conditions foreshadowed by Gideons victory over the Midianites (Isa 9:4). It is the coming of the Messiah to reign that will effect this (Isa 9:6-7). Notice the law of double reference in these verses, where the first and second advents of Christ are referred to as continuous, or blended together in one. The last verse shows conclusively that the mind of the Holy Spirit is resting upon the millennial age.
QUESTIONS
1. What nations are Judahs enemies at this time?
2. What was the design in Isaiahs being accompanied by his son?
3. Quote Mat 1:23.
4. State the law of double reference.
5. What is the interpretation of Isa 8:8?
6. To what period, presumably, does Isa 8:9 apply?
7. Explain Isa 9:4.
Isa 7:1. And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz Of whose idolatries and abominable wickedness the reader will find a particular account, 2Ch 28:1-4. Rezin and Pekah went up toward Jerusalem The confederacy of these two kings against the kingdom of Judah was formed in the time of Jotham; and perhaps the effects of it were felt in the latter part of his reign. See 2Ki 15:37. However, in the very beginning of the reign of Ahaz, they jointly invaded Judah with a powerful army, and threatened to destroy, or to dethrone the house of David. The king and royal family being in the utmost consternation on receiving advices of their designs, Isaiah is sent to them to support and comfort them in their present distress, by assuring them that God would make good his promises to David and his house. This makes the subject of this and the following chapter, and the beginning of the ninth. But could not prevail against it That is, against Jerusalem. But yet they carried away a multitude of captives out of Judea, slew a vast number of the people, and Rezin restored Elah to his own dominions. See notes on 2Ki 16:5, and on 2Ch 28:5-6.
Isa 7:1. In the days of Ahaz, the second or the third year of his reign. Chapters 5. and 6. are therefore out of place.
Isa 7:6. Let us go up against Judahand set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal. The rabbins make him to be a relative of the reigning family in Samaria. They gave away Davids throne before they had conquered it!
Isa 7:8. The head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin. But Jerusalem now had the Lord for her head.Within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken. Of the accomplishment of this prophecy, no doubt is entertained. The difficulty lies in the dates. Our old English annotations read, within six and five years; that is, within eleven years. But this liberty does not agree with the Hebrew mode of writing. Dr. Lightfoot dates the sixty five years from the twenty third of Uzziah, in which year, he thinks, Isaiah began to prophesy. The opinion more generally received is, that Isaiah speaks of the second and full deportation of the ten tribes. The first was by Shalmaneser, who took Samaria in the ninth year of Hoshea, 2Ki 18:8; and in the twenty fourth of Ahaz. The second and total carrying away was about sixty five years afterwards, when Ezarhaddon, whose captain took Manasseh when he cowardly fled to the thorns, and brought him to Babylon, which empire was probably then in league with the Assyrian. Thus Ephraim was broken, and denationalized.
Isa 7:9. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established. I speak to you by the Word of the Lord. I speak with the sign of my son in my hand. If ye will not believe, if ye fight with the allied kings in unbelief and despair, you will utterly be routed, and your country ruined.
Isa 7:14. Behold, a virgin shall conceive. Hebrews alma, halmah. The LXX, , a virgin. The Chaldaic and the targums of Onkelos and of Jonathan have virgin, or damsel that has not known a man. The same Hebrew word is given to Rebekah, Gen 24:43; when the virgin comes to draw water. So Psa 68:25. The virgins playing with timbrels, who followed David, playing before the ark.The name of the Son that the virgin should bear, Immanuel, God with us, is equally striking. The Holy Ghost, foreseeing what opposition would be made by unbelievers, has also described the kingdom of the virgins Son: Isa 8:8. The king of Assyria shall fill the breadth of thy land, oh Immanuel. The whole therefore of Davids land, overrun by the Assyrians, was the land of this Immanuel.
Now, as this text was a glorious pillar in favour of the divine and human geniture of Christ, it might easily be conceived that the Jews would do all in their power to set aside its force. Accordingly we find Justin Martyr, in his dialogues with Trypho the Jew, accusing them of falsifying both the Hebrew text and the Greek version, by translating alma, , a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, namely, the wife of king Ahaz! Truly a lost case. Why say behold? What is more common than for a young wife to have a child? We know not that Ahaz had any son, except king Hezekiah, who was already born; and of an unborn and unknown prince, why should all western Asia be called, Thy land, oh Immanuel? The Jew is completely bewildered here; he can find no such king, no such kingdom. This argument in strengthened by reference to Amo 2:7, where a young woman that had known a man is called .
Isa 7:15. Butter and honey shall he eat. The food of children in Judea was rich milk, sweetened with honey, as in most other nations. This designates the divine wisdom and knowledge which were in Christ, for he had meat to eat which the world knew nothing of.
Isa 7:16. Before the child shall know. Meaning now Shear-jashub, whom he then held by the hand; even before he shall know to refuse evil and choose good, the land shall be desolate, by whose two kings thou art distressed. Ahaz had hired Tiglath-Pileser, the Lords sharp razor, who invaded Damascus and slew Rezin, 2Ki 16:9; and previous to that time Hoshea had slain Pekah. 2Ki 15:30. By these means Ahaz obtained some repose, but he utterly impoverished his country, and taught the Assyrians the way to Egypt, and all western Asia.
In Dr. Blairs tables of chronology we read, that the last deportation of the ten tribes was by Esarhaddon, who carried away the remains of the ten tribes which had been left by Tiglath-Pileser, and who planted the country with new inhabitants. Ezr 4:2. This happened in the sixty fifth year from the second year of Ahaz, as is probable for the following reasons. In the Hebrew book, Seder lam, and the talmudists in David Kimchi, on Ezekiel 4., say that Manasseh was carried to Babylon by the captains of the king of Assyria in the twenty second year of his reign; that is, before Christ six hundred and seventy six years. 2Ch 33:11. Dr. Jubb.
Isa 7:17-25. The Lord shall bring upon thee the king of Assyria. The Messiahs birth being foretold, and the glory of the church secured in him, the casting away of Israel is next denounced, and in figures which paralyse the heart. As a prelude to the tragedy, the Lord would hiss for the fly of Egypt, Pharaoh Necho, who should dispose of Davids throne at pleasure. Next, the bee beyond the Euphrates should sting them. The king of Assyria, the hired razor, should shave the venerable and silver locks of Judah, figures of most humiliating and piercing grief. Or as Habakkuk understood our prophet, the invaders should devour the figtree, and consume the vine; and cut off all the flocks from the fields, and the herds from the stalls. The scattered families that should be left, would have the country to themselves; their one cow, and two sheep, should yield a plentiful supply, because of the paucity of men. Oh Zion, wherewith shalt thou be comforted!
REFLECTIONS.
The idolaters in Judah had surely shot out the tongue, and rejoiced for two years, before Judah was covered with a cloud, and left bleeding and weeping. But the help of men and nations in the day of trouble is in the Lord; yea, the wicked Ahaz was helped and saved because of the remnant which the Lord had left in the land. When good Uzziah died, the Lord discovered himself high enthroned in his sanctuary; and now when apostate Ephraim and the cruel Syrian leagued against his church, he sent Isaiah to predict the safety of his people, and the destruction of both their foes. Hence we see the never-ceasing care of providence over the church, and fresh grounds for reposing unlimited confidence in the Lord.
The circumstances of this prophecy, which Isaiah delivered to Ahaz, tend very much to the credit of revelation and the help of faith. He foretold the speedy destruction of the two misguided kings, and the total annihilation of Ephraim in a period which many of them should live to see. He limited the death of the two kings by the arrival of his son at an age to distinguish good from evil, by living on substantial food; for God will not expose too much the secrets of his counsel, by always fixing the exact dates, when he would make the fall of those men a sure omen of the fall of their kingdoms. How greatly infatuated are those who meddle with God and his people. He connected the singular emancipation of Judah, now greatly weakened by preseding wars, with the redemption of the world by the Messiah. Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, who shall redeem us from sin and Satan, death and hell. Mat 1:10. The birth of this Son should be a sign or miracle, like the sign of the prophet Jonah. He should be the womans seed, heavenly in his origin, and immaculate in his conception. He shall be as his name, Immanuel, God with us. God manifested in the flesh. The beloved Son of the Father. The Son, who is over all, God blessed for ever. The Son of God himself, sent into the world. Rom 8:3. The great God, and our Lord Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever.
How condescending is the Lord, to help the weakness of our faith. Behold he pledges himself by the death of Pekah and Rezin, and by the fall of Ephraim, that the Messiahs kingdom shall rise, and shall break in pieces all who shall dare to conspire against it. Here wavering Judah had a double sign, that they might believe the Lord, and be established. Yea, every vestige of the desolations of the ten tribes, and the fruits of their apostasy, announced the approach and everlasting glory of the Messiahs kingdom.
Isa 7:1-16. Isaiah Gives Ahaz the Encouraging Sign of Immanuel when he is Dismayed by the Alliance of Syria and Ephraim against him.For the historical circumstances see pp. 59, 70f. Apart from Isa 7:1, which is derived from 2Ki 16:5 and is out of chronological order, this section seems to have been written by an editor on the basis of Isaiahs autobiography (contrast the 1st person of the preceding chapter with the 3rd of this). The alarm, described in the picturesque metaphor of Isa 7:2, specially affected the house of David, since its position was menaced by the project of the allies to abolish the Davidic dynasty and install a creature of their own. The news which caused such dismay was that Syria had alighted on Ephraim (Isa 7:2, cf. mg.), i.e. it was on the march, and was already within striking distance of Jerusalem. Apparently the enemy was prevented from making an assault by news that Assyria was on the way to Philistia. While Ahaz attends to the water supply, in view of the siege, Isaiah is sent with a message of encouragement. His foes are but two fag-ends of firebrands, they only smoulder; their smoke may annoy, but they have lost all power for mischief, exhausted by strife with each other and Assyria and by civil war. Their project will fail, for Rezin is head of Syria and Pekah head of Ephraim. These are their Divinely appointed spheres, they have no control over Judah. But its security depends on its faith. Unbelief will bring ruin, i.e. at the hands of Assyria. The king seems to have expressed his doubt of the policy recommended, so Isaiah offers him a sign, deep in Sheol (mg.) or in the sky. He places the whole realm of the universe at his disposal for the purpose, and therefore confidently offers a miraculous sign. Ahaz has faith, he believes that the miracle can be wrought. But he has not the right kind of faith, he does not obediently trust in God for deliverance. Hence he refuses the sign, just because he does not doubt that it will be given, for then he will have to abandon his own cherished plan. He hypocritically declines under the pretext that he will not tempt God, as if it could be tempting Him to accept what He freely offered. Angered by his refusal, the prophet still does not change his attitude. Yahweh will Himself give a sign that the attack of the confederates will not succeed. Some now expectant mother will shortly bring forth a son to whom she will give the name Immanuel, thus by her faith that God is with His people shaming the kings unbelief. The child will be fed on curds and honey as soon as he has become old enough to distinguish between wholesome and harmful food (cf. Isa 8:4 for a similar time limit). Before he has reached this age Syria and Ephraim will be devastated.
Isa 7:3. Shear-jashub: the name means a remnant shall return (mg.). This is not a prophecy of disaster to the army of Judah, meaning that only a remnant is to come back from the war, but it embodies one of Isaiahs most important doctrines, that a remnant of the people should turn to God. It is a name both of judgment and promiseonly a remnant, but still a remnant. Since this son was old enough to accompany his father, he must have received the name some years before. The scene is that of the Rabshakehs speech to the people of Jerusalem (Isa 36:2). Its identification is uncertain.
Isa 7:6. Tabeel: an Aramaic name. Possibly as Pekah is designated Remaliahs son, the son of Tabeel may be Rezin.
Isa 7:8-9 a. The meaning may perhaps be, The head of Syria is after only Rezin, and the head of Samaria is but the upstart son of Remaliah, while Yahweh is the head of Jerusalem.
Isa 7:8 b is clearly a gloss, irrelevant to the situation, and indeed inconsistent with Isaiahs purpose, which was to assert almost immediate relief. It refers probably to events connected with the planting of foreign colonists in Samaria by Esarhaddon or Asshurbanipal (Ezr 4:2; Ezr 4:10).
Isa 7:14-16. Space will not permit of any thorough discussion; for a fuller treatment the editor may refer to his article Immanuel in DCG. He is now inclined to give Isa 7:15 a favourable interpretation, and treat it as part of the original prophecy. The following points may be emphasized: (a) The character of the sign is not altered by the kings unbelief; it is significant of deliverance, not of disaster (cf. Isa 8:1-4). (b) A sign may be miraculous, or it may not. Here it is probably not miraculous. For (c) the rendering virgin is unjustifiable; for this bethulah would have been used; the word employed here, almah, means a young woman of marriageable age, without any suggestion that she is not married. (d) The sign is to be fulfilled in the near future, since it is given for a pressing emergency. It has therefore no reference to the birth of Jesus more than seven hundred years later. (e) Isaiah has no particular woman in view. Any young woman who shortly gives birth to a son may call him Immanuel, and by this expression of faith that God is with His people will rebuke the kings unbelief. (f) Her faith will be vindicated by the desolation of the enemys land. (g) The sign accordingly consists not in the birth of the child, nor in his character, position, or destiny, nor yet in his conception by a virgin. He has in himself no significance. The sign consists in the name he bears, and in that name as expressive of his mothers faith (cf. Isa 8:18). (h) The name Immanuel means God is with us, not God with us; there is no reference in it to an Incarnation of God. (i) If Isa 7:15 implies the desolation of the land, it is out of harmony with the rest of the passage, and must be struck out. But the prediction that curds and honey will be Immanuels diet may quite well be interpreted as implying plenty rather than privation.
7:1 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, [that] Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, {a} went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it.
(a) That is, the second time: for in the first battle Ahaz was overcome.
The command to trust God 7:1-9
This introductory segment provides the basic information about the historical situation that Judah faced, plus God’s command concerning that situation. Would King Ahaz face his threat from God’s perspective or from man’s? Would he trust in Yahweh or in soldiers? Would he exercise faith or resort to works?
1. Signs of God’s presence 7:1-9:7
A unifying theme in this subsection is children. The children were understandably a major concern of the Israelites, threatened as they were with invasion. However, the children also embodied qualities that the adult Israelites needed to adopt to survive, such as innocence, trust, and acknowledged weakness (cf. Mat 18:1-7). Indeed, a child promised in this passage, who turned out to be Jesus, would eventually save them. As Jesus appealed for an attitude of childlikeness in His hearers, so did Isaiah.
King Ahaz, the grandson of King Uzziah (Isa 6:1), reigned in Judah from 735-715 B.C. altogether. Early in his reign King Rezin of Syria (Aram) and King Pekah of Israel allied against him (see 2Ki 15:37; 2Ki 16:5; 2Ki 16:10-18; 2Ch 28:22-24). The fact that Isaiah referred to Pekah as the "son of Remaliah," rather than as the "king of Israel," may indicate disdain for him, since to call someone "the son of" someone was a way of denigrating him. Rezin and Pekah attacked Jerusalem to force Ahaz to ally with them against Assyria, which was growing stronger farther to the northeast, and threatening to annihilate them all (2Ki 15:37). [Note: See the map of the ancient Near East in Isaiah’s times at the end of these notes.] God protected Jerusalem, and this dual enemy could not force Judah into a treaty. This verse summarizes the attack, and the following verses give more details about it. Another less probable view is that Isa 7:1 refers to Assyria’s first attack against Jerusalem (2Ch 28:5-8), and the following verses to its second invasion (2Ch 28:17-18).
CHAPTER V
THE WORLD IN ISAIAHS DAY AND ISRAELS GOD
735-730 B.C.
UP to this point we have been acquainted with Isaiah as a prophet of general principles, preaching to his countrymen the elements of righteousness and judgment, and tracing the main lines of fate along which their evil conduct was rapidly forcing them. We are now to observe him applying these principles to the executive politics of the time, and following Judahs conduct to the issues he had predicted for it in the world outside herself. Hitherto he has been concerned with the inner morals of Jewish society; he is now to engage himself with the effect of these on the fortunes of the Jewish State. In his seventh chapter Isaiah begins that career of practical statesmanship, which not only made him “the greatest political power in Israel since David,” but placed him, far above his importance to his own people, upon a position of influence over all ages. To this eminence Isaiah was raised, as we shall see, by two things. First, there was the occasion of his times, for he lived at a juncture at which the vision of the World, as distinguished from the Nation, opened to his peoples eyes. Second, he had the faith which enabled him to realise the government of the World by the One God, whom he has already beheld exalted and sovereign within the Nation. In the Nation we have seen Isaiah led to emphasise very absolutely the righteousness of God; applying this to the whole World, he is now to speak as the prophet of what we call Providence. He has seen Jehovah ruling in righteousness in Judah; he is now to take possession of the nations of the World in Jehovahs name. But we mistake Isaiah if we think it is any abstract doctrine of providence which he is about to inculcate. For him Gods providence has in the meantime but one end: the preservation of a remnant of the holy people. Afterwards we shall find him expecting besides, the conversion of the whole World to faith in Israels God.
The World in Isaiahs day was practically Western Asia. History had not long dawned upon Europe; over Western Asia it was still noon. Draw a line from the Caspian to the mouth of the Persian Gulf; between that line and another crossing the Levant to the west of Cyprus, and continuing along the Libyan border of Egypt, lay the highest forms of religion and civilisation which our race had by that period achieved. This was the world on which Isaiah looked out from Jerusalem, the furthest borders of which he has described in his prophecies, and in the political history of which he illustrated his great principles. How was it composed?
There were, first of all, at either end of it, northeast and southwest, the two great empires of Assyria and Egypt, in many respects wonderful counterparts of each other. No one will understand the history of Palestine who has not grasped its geographical position relative to these similar empires. Syria, shut up between the Mediterranean sea and the Arabian desert, has its outlets north and south into two great river-plains, each of them ending in a delta. Territories of that kind exert a double force on the world with which they are connected, now drawing across their boundaries the hungry races of neighbouring highlands and deserts, and again sending them forth, compact and resistless armies. This double action summarises the histories of both Egypt and Assyria from the earliest times to the period which we are now treating, and was the cause of the constant circulation, by which, as the Bible bears witness, the life of Syria was stirred from the Tower of Babel downwards. Mesopotamia and the Nile valley drew races as beggars to their rich pasture grounds, only to send them forth in subsequent centuries as conquerors. The century of Isaiah fell in a period of forward movement. Assyria and Egypt were afraid to leave each other in peace; and the wealth of Phoenicia, grown large enough to excite their cupidity, lay between them. In each of these empires, however, there was something to hamper this aggressive impulse. Neither Assyria nor Egypt was a homogeneous State. The valleys of the Euphrates and the Nile were each of them the home of two nations. Beside Assyria lay Babylonia, once Assyrias mistress, and now of all the Assyrian provinces by far the hardest to hold in subjection, although it lay the nearest to home. In Isaiahs time, when an Assyrian monarch is unable to come into Palestine, Babylon is generally the reason; and it is by intriguing with Babylon that a king of Judah attempts to keep Assyria away from his own neighbourhood. But Babylon only delayed the Assyrian conquest. In Egypt, on the other hand, power was more equally balanced between the hardier people up the Nile and the wealthier people down the Nile-between the Ethiopians and the Egyptians proper. It was the repeated and undecisive contests between these two during the whole of Isaiahs day, which kept Egypt from being an effective force in the politics of Western Asia. In Isaiahs day no Egyptian army advanced more than a few leagues beyond its own frontier.
Next in this world of Western Asia come the Phoenicians. We may say that they connected Egypt and Assyria, for although Phoenicia proper meant only the hundred and fifty miles of coast between Carmel and the bay of Antioch, the Phoenicians had large colonies on the delta of the Nile and trading posts upon the Euphrates. They were gathered into independent but more or less confederate cities, the chief of them Tyre and Sidon; which, while they attempted the offensive only in trade, were by their wealth and maritime advantages capable of offering at once a stronger attraction and a more stubborn resistance to the Assyrian arms than any other power of the time. Between Phoenicia proper and the mouths of the Nile, the coast was held by groups of Philistine cities, whose nearness to Egypt rather than their own strength was the source of a frequent audacity against Assyria, and the reason why they appear in the history of this period oftener than any other state as the object of Assyrian campaigns.
Behind Phoenicia and the Philistines lay a number of inland territories: the sister-States of Judah and Northern Israel, with their cousins Edom, Moab, and Aram or Syria. Of which Judah and Israel together were about the size of Wales; Edom a mountain range the size and shape of Cornwall; Moab, on its north, a broken tableland, about a Devonshire; and Aram, or Syria, a territory round Damascus, of uncertain size, but considerable enough to have resisted Assyria for a hundred and twenty years. Beyond Aram, again, to the north, lay the smaller state of Hamath, in the mouth of the pass between the Lebanons, with nothing from it to the Euphrates. And then, hovering upon the east of these settled states, were a variety of more or less nomadic tribes, whose refuges were the vast deserts of which so large a part of Western Asia consists.
Here was a world, with some of its constituents wedged pretty firmly by mutual pressure, but in the main broken and restless-a political surface that was always changing. The whole was subject to the movements of the two empires at its extremes. One of them could not move without sending a thrill through to the borders of the other. The approximate distances were these:-from Egypts border to Jerusalem, about One hundred miles; from Jerusalem to Samaria, forty-five; from Samaria to Damascus, one hundred and fifteen; from Damascus to Hamath, one hundred and thirty; and from Hamath to the Euphrates, one hundred; in all from the border of Egypt to the border of Assyria four hundred and ninety English statute miles. The main line of war and traffic, coming up from Egypt, kept the coast to the plain of Esdraelon, which it crossed towards Damascus, travelling by the north of the sea of Galilee, the way of the sea. Northern Israel was bound to fall an early prey to armies, whose easiest path thus traversed her richest provinces. Judah, on the other hand, occupied a position so elevated and apart, that it was likely to be the last that either Assyria or Egypt would achieve in their subjugation of the States between them.
Thus, then, Western Asia spread itself out in Isaiahs day. Let us take one more rapid glance across it. Assyria to the north, powerful and on the offensive, but hampered by Babylon; Egypt on the south, weakened and in reserve; all the cities and states between turning their faces desperately northwards, but each with an ear bent back for the promises of the laggard southern power, and occasionally supported by its subsidies; Hamath, their advanced guard at the mouth of the pass between the Lebanons, looking out towards the Euphrates; Tyre and Sidon attractive to the Assyrian king, whose policy is ultimately commercial, by their wealth, both they and the Philistine cities obstructing his path by the coast to his great rival of Egypt; Israel bulwarked against Assyria by Hamath and Damascus, but in danger, as soon as they fall, of seeing her richest provinces overrun; Judah unlikely in the general restlessness to retain her hold upon Edom, but within her own borders tolerably secure, neither lying in the Assyrians path to Egypt, nor wealthy enough to attract him out of it; safe, therefore, in the neutrality which Isaiah ceaselessly urges her to preserve, and in danger of suction into the whirlpool of the approach of the two empires only through the foolish desire of her rulers to secure an utterly unnecessary alliance with the one or the other of them.
For a hundred and twenty years before the advent of Isaiah, the annals of the Assyrian kings record periodical campaigns against the cities of “the land of the west,” but these isolated incursions were followed by no permanent results. In 745, however, five years before King Uzziah died, a soldier ascended the throne of Assyria, under the title of Tiglath-pileser II, who was determined to achieve the conquest of the whole world and its organisation as his empire. Where his armies came, it was not simply to chastise or demand tribute, but to annex countries, carry away their populations, and exploit their resources. It was no longer kings who were threatened; peoples found themselves in danger of extinction. This terrible purpose of the Assyrian was pursued with vast means and the utmost ferocity. He has been called the Roman of the East, and up to a certain degree we may imagine his policy by remembering all that is familiar to us of its execution by Rome: its relentlessness, impetus, and mysterious action from one centre; the discipline, the speed, the strange appearance, of his armies. But there was an Oriental savagery about Assyria, from which Rome was free. The Assyrian kings moved in the power of their brutish and stormy gods-gods that were in the shape of bulls and had the wings as of the tempest. The annals of these kings, in which they describe their campaigns, are full of talk about trampling down their enemies; about showering tempests of clubs upon them, and raining a deluge of arrows; about overwhelming them, and sweeping them off the face of the land, and strewing them like chaff on the sea; about chariots with scythes, and wheels clogged with blood; about great baskets stuffed with the salted heads of their foes. It is a mixture of the Roman and Red Indian.
Picture the effect of the onward movement of such a force upon the imaginations and policies of those little states that clustered round Judah and Israel. Settling their own immemorial feuds, they sought alliance with one another against this common foe. Tribes, that for centuries had stained their borders with one anothers blood, came together in unions, the only reason for which was that their common fear had grown stronger than their mutual hate. Now and then a king would be found unwilling to enter such an alliance or eager to withdraw from it, in the hope of securing by his exceptional conduct the favour of the Assyrian, whom he sought further to ingratiate by voluntary tribute. The shifting attitudes of the petty kings towards Assyria bewilder the reader of the Assyrian annals. The foes of one year are the tributaries of the next; the state that has called for help this campaign, appears as the rebel of that. In 742, Uzziah of Judah is cursed by Tiglath-pileser as an arch-enemy; Samaria and Damascus are recorded as faithful tributaries. Seven years later Ahaz of Judah offers tribute to the Assyrian king, and Damascus and Samaria are invaded by the Assyrian armies. What a world it was, and what politics! A world of petty clans, with no idea of a common humanity, and with no motive for union except fear; politics without a noble thought or long purpose in them, the politics of peoples at bay-the last flicker of dying nationalities, -“stumps of smoking firebrands,” as Isaiah described two of them.
When we turn to the little we know of the religions of these tribes, we find nothing to arrest their restlessness or broaden their thoughts. These nations had their religions, and called on their gods, but their gods were made in their own image, their religion was the reflex of their life. Each of them employed, rather than worshipped, its deity. No nation believed in its god except as one among many, with his sovereignty limited to its own territory, and his ability to help it conditioned by the power of the other gods, against whose peoples he was fighting. There was no belief in “Providence,” no idea of unity or of progress in history, no place in these religions for the great world-force that was advancing upon their peoples.
From this condemnation we cannot except the people of Jehovah. It is undeniable that the mass of them occupied at this time pretty much the same low religious level as their neighbours. We have already seen (chapter 1) their mean estimate of what God required from themselves; with that corresponded their view of His position towards the world. To the majority of the Israelites their God was but one out of many, with His own battles to fight and have fought for Him, a Patron sometimes to be ashamed of, and by no means a Saviour in whom to place an absolute trust. When Ahaz is beaten by Syria, he says: “Because the gods of the kings of Syria helped them, therefore will I sacrifice to them, that they may help me”. {2Ch 28:23} Religion to Ahaz was only another kind of diplomacy. He was not a fanatic, but a diplomat, who made his son to pass through the fire to Moloch, and burnt incense in the high places and on the hills, and under every green tree. He was more a political than a religious eclectic, who brought back the pattern of the Damascus altar to Jerusalem. The Temple, in which Isaiah saw the Lord high and lifted up, became under Ahaz, and by the help of the priesthood, the shelter of various idols; in every corner of Jerusalem altars were erected to other gods. This religious hospitality was the outcome neither of imagination nor of liberal thought; it was prompted only by political fear. Ahaz has been mistaken in the same way as Charles I was-for a bigot, and one who subjected the welfare of his kingdom to a superstitious regard for religion. But beneath the cloak of religious scrupulousness and false reverence, {Isa 7:12} there was in Ahaz the same selfish fear for the safety of his crown and his dynasty, as those who best knew the English monarch tell us was the real cause of his ceaseless intrigue and stupid obstinacy.
Now that we have surveyed this world, its politics and its religion, we can estimate, the strength and originality of the Hebrew prophets. Where others saw the conflicts of nations, aided by deities as doubtfully matched as themselves, they perceived all things working together by the will of one supreme God and serving His ends of righteousness. It would be wrong to say, that before the eighth century the Hebrew conception of God had been simply that of a national deity, for this would be to ignore the remarkable emphasis placed by the Hebrews from very early times upon Jehovahs righteousness. But till the eighth century the horizon of the Hebrew mind had been the border of their territory; the historical theatre on which it saw God working was the national life. Now, however, the Hebrews were drawn into the world; they felt movements of which their own history was but an eddy; they saw the advance of forces against which their own armies, though inspired by Jehovah, had no chance of material success. The perspective was entirely changed; their native land took to most of them the aspect of a petty and worthless province, their God the rank of a mere provincial deity; they refused the waters of Shiloah, that go softly, and rejoiced in the glory of the king of Assyria, the king of the great River and the hosts that moved with the strength of its floods. It was at this moment that the prophets of Israel performed their supreme religious service. While Ahaz and the mass of the people illustrated the impotence of the popular religion, by admitting to an equal place in the national temple the gods of their victorious foes, the prophets boldly took possession of the whole world in the name of Jehovah of hosts, and exalted Him to the throne of the supreme Providence. Now they could do this only by emphasising and developing the element of righteousness in the old conception of Him. This attribute of Jehovah took absolute possession of the prophets; and in the strength of its inspiration they were enabled, at a time when it would have been the sheerest folly to promise Israel victory against a foe like Assyria, to asseverate that even that supreme world-power was in the hand of Jehovah, and that He must be trusted to lead up all the movements of which the Assyrians were the main force to the ends He had so plainly revealed to His chosen Israel. Even before Isaiahs time such principles had been proclaimed by Amos and Hosea, but it was Isaiah who both gave to them their loftiest expression, and applied them with the utmost detail and persistence to the practical politics of Judah. We have seen him, in the preliminary stages of his ministry under Uzziah and Jotham, reaching most exalted convictions of the righteousness of Jehovah, as contrasted with the peoples view of their Gods “nationalism.” But we are now to follow him boldly applying this faith-won within the life of Judah, won, as he tells us, by the personal inspiration of Judahs God-to the problems and movements of the whole world as they bear upon Israels fate. The God, who is supreme in Judah through righteousness, cannot but be supreme everywhere else, for there is nothing in the world higher than righteousness. Isaiahs faith in a Divine Providence is a close corollary to his faith in Jehovahs righteousness; and of one part of that Providence he had already received conviction-“A remnant shall remain.” Ahaz may crowd Jerusalem with foreign altars and idols, so as to be able to say: “We have with us, on our side, Moloch and Chemosh and Rimmon and the gods of Damascus and Assyria.” Isaiah, in the face of this folly, lifts up his simple gospel: “Immanu-El. We have with us, in our own Jehovah of hosts, El, the one supreme God, Ruler of heaven and earth.”
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary