Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Isaiah 27:4
Fury [is] not in me: who would set the briers [and] thorns against me in battle? I would go through them, I would burn them together.
4. Fury is not in me ] Or, wrath have I none. These words naturally go with the first stanza, expressing, as they seem to do, Jehovah’s contentment with the condition of His vineyard.
who would set battle ] The phrase “Who will give?” is the well known Hebrew equivalent of the Latin utinam, “Would that!” Hence the R.V.: O that the briers and thorns were against me in battle!
briers and thorns ] (ch. Isa 5:6) must here mean heathen intruders. The next clause reads as in R.V.: I would march upon them. Cf. 2Sa 23:6 f.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Fury is not in me – That is, I am angry with it no more. He had punished his people by removing them to a distant land. But although he had corrected them for their faults, yet he had not laid aside the affection of a Father.
Who would set – Hebrew, Who would give me. The Septuagint renders this, Who would place me to keep the stubble in the field? Great perplexity has been felt in regard to the interpretation of this passage. Lowth translates it:
O that I had a fence of the thorn and the brier;
evidently showing that he was embarrassed with it, and could not make of it consistent sense. The whole sentence must refer either to the people of God, or to his enemies. If to his people, it would be an indication that they were like briers and thorns, and that if his fury should rage they would be consumed, and hence, he calls upon them Isa 27:5 to seize upon his strength, and to be at peace with him. If it refers to his enemies, then it expresses a wish that his enemies were in his possession; or a purpose to go against them, as fire among thorns, and to consume them if they should presume to array themselves against his vineyard. This latter I take to be the true sense of the passage. The phrase who would set me, or in Hebrew, who will give me, may be expressed by utinam, indicating strong desire; and may be thus paraphrased: I retain no anger against my people. I have indeed punished them; but my anger has ceased. I shall now defend them. If they are attacked by foes, I will guard them. When their foes approach, I desire, I earnestly wish, that they may be in my possession, that I may destroy them – as the fire rages through briers and thorns. It expresses a firm determination to defend his people and to destroy their enemies, unless Isa 27:5, which he would prefer, they should repent, and be at peace with him.
The briers and thorns – His enemies, and the enemies of his people (compare the notes at Isa 9:17; Isa 10:17). Perhaps the phrase is used here to denote enemies, because briers and thorns are so great enemies to a vineyard by impeding growth and fertility.
I would go through them – Or, rather, I would go against them in battle to destroy them.
I would burn them up together – As fire devours the thorns and briers; that is, I would completely destroy them.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Isa 27:4-5
Fury is not in Me.
–Of all the senses put upon this difficult verse there are only two which can be looked upon as natural or probable. The first may be paraphrased as follows:–It is not because I am cruel or revengeful that I thus afflict My people, but because she is a vineyard overrun with thorns or briars, on account of which I must pass through her and consume her (i.e., burn them out of her)
. The other is this: I am no longer angry with My people; oh, that their enemies (as thorns and briars) would array themselves against Me, that I might rush upon them and consume them. (J. A. Alexander.)
Liberty and discipline
I. A BLESSED ABSENCE IN THE NATURE OF GOD. Fury is not in Me. Fury seems to be uncontrolled and uncontrollable anger. A vessel in a storm, with its rudder gone or its screw broken, is passive in the power of winds and waves. A lion, who for hours has been disappointed of his prey, is passive under the dominion of his hunger. In both cases no influence, internal or external, is able to resist the onward course. And when a man is so in the hand of anger that no consideration from within or intercession from without can mollify him, when he is passive in its power, he is in a state of fury. But no such estate is possible to our God. His anger is always under control, and we have plentiful evidence that, in the height of His displeasure, He is accessible to intercession on behalf of His creatures. Nevertheless–
II. THIS BLESSED ABSENCE IN THE NATURE OF GOD IS COMPATIBLE WITH CONTENTION WITH THE UNREPENTING. Who would set the briars and thorns against Me in battle? etc. Imagine a father and son at variance, the father being in the right and the son in the wrong, There are two ways of reconciliation: either the son must comply with the conditions of the father, or the father must lower his standard to the level of the son. But what a wrong would the father do to himself, his family, and society if he were to adopt this course. He ought not, will not. If the son resolves to fight it out, reconciliation is impossible. This is the relative position of God and the ungodly man. God declares His conditions, Let the wicked forsake his way, etc. Consider what is involved in the conditions of the ungodly. Nothing less than the inversion of the whole moral law. God says, I am Jehovah, I change not. It is a blessed impossibility. But the unrepentant man ought, can, must! If not, the fire of goodness must be set against the briars of wickedness, a contest as hopeless, and of which the issue is as certain, as that of the devouring flame with briars and thorns.
III. THE ABSENCE OF FURY IN GOD LEADS HIM TO PREFER PARDON TO PUNISHMENT, AND TO PROVIDE MEANS FOR THE FORMER. Let him take hold of My strength, etc. Men, churches, and nations are lovers of peace in proportion as they are righteous (Psa 72:3). The preference of God for peace depends upon the very attribute of which the ungodly would rob Him–namely, His righteousness. What is Gods strength? How take hold of it? When a man falls overboard at sea, the appointed means of rescue is the life belt which is thrown to him. Seizing that, he takes hold of the strength of the vessel to save him. When the man slayer, fleeing from the avenger of blood, entered the city of refuge, he took hold of Gods appointed means of shelter. Gods strength is His pardoning prerogative, exercised to us through Christ, the arm, or strength, of the Lord. (H. Bushnell, D. D.)
Fury not in God
I. FURY IS NOT IN GOD. But how can this be? Is not fury one manifestation of His essential attributes–do we not repeatedly read of His fury–of Jerusalem being full of the fury of the Lord–of God casting the fury of His wrath upon the world–of Him rendering His anger upon His enemies with fury–of Him accomplishing his fury upon Zion–of Him causing His fury to rest on the bloody and devoted city? We are not, therefore, to think that fury is banished altogether from Gods administration. There are times and occasions when this fury is discharged upon the objects of it; and there must be other times and occasions when there is no fury in Him. Now, what is the occasion upon which He disclaims all fury in our text? He is inviting men to reconciliation; and He is assuring them that if they will only take hold of His strength they shall make peace with Him. Fury will be discharged on those who reject the invitation. But we cannot say that there is any exercise of fury in God at the time of giving the invitation. There is the most visible and direct contrary. This very process was all gone through at and before the destruction of Jerusalem. It rejected the warnings and invitations of the Saviour, and at length experienced His fury. But there was no fury at the time of His giving the invitations. The tone of our Saviours voice when He uttered, O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, was not the tone of a vindictive and irritated fury. There was compassion in it–a warning and pleading earnestness that they would mind the things which belong to their peace. Let us make the application to ourselves.
II. GOD IS NOT WANTING TO GLORIFY HIMSELF BY THE DEATH OF SINNERS. When God says, Who would set the thorns and the briars against Me in battle? I would go through them, I would burn them together, He speaks of the ease wherewith He could accomplish His wrath upon His enemies. They would perish before Him like the moth. Why set up, then, a contest so unequal as this? God is saying in the text that this is not what He is wanting. In the language of the next verse, He would rather that this enemy of His, not yet at peace with Him, and who may therefore be likened to a briar or a thorn, should take hold of His strength, that He may make peace with Him–and as the fruit of his so doing, He shall make peace with Him. Now tell me if this do not open up a most wonderful and a most inviting view of God? It is the real attitude in which He puts Himself forth to us in the gospel of His Son. What remains for you to do? God is willing to save you: are you willing to be saved?
III. THE INVITATION. Or let him take hold of My strength, that he may make peace with Me; and he shall make peace with Me. Or here is the same with rather. Rather than that what is spoken of in the fourth verse should fall upon you. We have not far to seek for what is meant by this strength, for Isaiah himself speaks (Isa 33:6) of the strength of salvation.
1. We read of a mighty strength that had to be put forth in the work of a sinners justification. Just in proportion to the weight and magnitude of the obstacle was the greatness of that strength which the Saviour put forth in the mighty work of moving it away. A way of redemption has been found out in the unsearchable riches of Divine wisdom, and Christ is called the wisdom of God. But the same Christ is also called the power of God.
2. But there is also a strength put forth in the work of mans regeneration.
3. When you apply to a friend for some service, some relief from distress or difficulty, you may be said to lay hold of him; and when you place firm reliance both on his ability and willingness to do the service, you may well say that your hold is upon your friend–an expression which becomes all the more appropriate should he promise to do the needful good office, in which case your hold is not upon his power only, but upon his faithfulness. And it is even so with the promises of God in Christ Jesus–you have both a power and a promise to take hold of. (T. Chalmers, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 4. Fury is not in me – “I have no wall”] For chemah, anger, the Septuagint and Syriac read chomah, wall. An ancient MS. has cheimah. For bah, in her, two MSS. read bam, in them, plural. The vineyard wishes for a wall and a fence of thorns – human strength and protection, (as the Jews were too apt to apply to their powerful neighbours for assistance, and to trust to the shadow of Egypt:) JEHOVAH replies, that this would not avail her, nor defend her against his wrath. He counsels her, therefore, to betake herself to his protection. On which she entreats him to make peace with her.
From the above note it appears that the bishop reads, chomah, wall, for chemah, anger or fury, in accordance with the Syriac and Septuagint. The letter vau makes the only difference, which letter is frequently absent from many words where its place is supplied by the point cholem: it might have been so here formerly; and in process of time both vau and cholem might have been lost. The Syriac supports the learned bishop’s criticism, as the word [Syriac] shora is there used; which word in the plural is found, Heb 11:30: “By faith the walls of Jericho.” The bishop thinks the Septuagint is on his side: to me, it seems neither for nor against the criticism. The words in the Vatican copy are , I am a fortified city; which the Arabic follows: but instead of , the Codex Alexandrinus has , I am a STRONG city.
The word chomah, wall, is not found in any MS. in the collections of Kennicott and De Rossi, nor in any of my own MSS.
However, one of Dr. Kennicott’s MSS. has cheimah; but probably that which now appears to be a yod was formerly a vau, and now partially obliterated.
This song receives much light from being collated with that in chap. v.; and perhaps the bishop’s criticism will find its best support from such a collation. In Isa 5:5 of that chapter, God threatens to take away the wall of his vineyard: this was done; and here the vineyard complains, I have no wall, and wishes for any kind of defense rather than be thus naked. This is the only natural support of the above criticism.
“About Tripoli there are abundance of vineyards and gardens, inclosed, for the most part, with hedges, which chiefly consist of the rhamnus, paliurus, oxyacantha,” c. Rawolf, p. 21, 22. A fence of thorns is esteemed equal to a wall for strength, being commonly represented as impenetrable. See Mic 7:4 Ho 2:6.
Who would set the briers and thorns against me – “O that I had a fence of the thorn and brier”] Seven MSS., (two ancient,) and one edition, with the Syriac, Vulgate, and Aquila, read veshayith, with the conjunction vau prefixed: Who would set the briers and thorns. mi yitteneni shamir shayith, Who shall give me the brier and thorn, i.e., for a defense: but hear Kimchi: “Who (the vineyard) hath given me (Jehovah) the brier and the thorn instead of good grapes.”
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Fury, to wit, against my vineyard, or my people; which is easily understood both from the foregoing and following verses. I have been displeased with them, and have chastised them; but I am not implacable towards them, and resolved utterly to destroy them, as their enemies are, and would have me to be.
I would go through them, I would burn them together: this is added as a reason of the foregoing clause and assertion; which may be conceived either,
1. Thus, I rather desire to contend with briers and thorns, i.e. with the wicked enemies of my church, who are thus called, Isa 10:17; Eze 28:24; and if my wrath was now kindled against them, as it is against my people, I would be furious towards them, and never leave till I had utterly consumed them; but I will deal more indulgently with my people. Which exposition seems to receive some light and strength from Isa 27:6-8. Or,
2. Thus, For I consider the weakness of my people, that if I should let loose my fury upon them, they could no more stand before me than briers and thorns (to which Gods people, when they fall into sin, and provoke God, are not unfitly resembled) can stand before a devouring fire, and therefore they would in an instant be utterly destroyed; which I will not do. And this consideration of mans imbecility is elsewhere alleged as a reason of Gods indulgence, as Psa 103:13-16; Isa 57:16. But this I deliver with submission.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
4. Fury is not in methat is,I entertain no longer anger towards my vine.
who would set . . . inbattlethat is, would that I had the briers, c. (the wicked foeIsa 9:18; Isa 10:17;2Sa 23:6), before me! “Iwould go through,” or rather, “against them.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Fury [is] not in me,…. Against his vineyard he takes so much care of, his church and people, whom he has loved with an everlasting love; they are indeed deserving of his wrath, but he has not appointed them to it, but has appointed his Son to bear it for them, who has delivered them from wrath to come, and they being justified by his blood and righteousness, are saved from it; and though the Lord chastises them for their sins, yet not in wrath and sore displeasure; there is no wrath or fury in his heart towards them, nor any expressed in the dispensations of his providence:
who would set the briers [and] thorns against me in battle? either suggesting the weakness of his people, who, was he to deal with them as their sins and corruptions deserved, for which they may be compared to thorns and briers, they would be as unable to bear his wrath and fury as briers and thorns could to withstand a consuming fire; or rather intimating, that should such persons rise up in his vineyard, the church, as often do, comparable to briers and thorns for their unfruitfulness and unprofitableness, for the hurt and mischief they do, and the grief and trouble they give to the people of God, as hypocrites and false teachers, and all such as are of unsound principles, and bad lives and conversations, and which are very offensive to the Lord; and therefore, though there is no fury in him against his vineyard, the church, yet there is against those briers and thorns, wicked men, whom he accounts his enemies, and will fight against them in his wrath, and consume them in his fury; see 2Sa 23:6:
I would go through them: or, “step into it” p; the vineyard, where those briers or thorns are set and grow up; the meaning is, that he would step into the vineyard, and warily and cautiously tread there, lest he should hurt any of the vines, true believers, while he is plucking up and destroying the briers and thorns; or contending, in a warlike manner, with carnal and hypocritical professors:
I would burn them together; or, “I would burn” out of it q; that is, gather out of the vineyard the briers and thorns, and bind them up in bundles, as the tares in the parable, which signify the same as here, and burn them, or utterly destroy them; though the words may be rendered, “who will give, or set, me a brier and thorn in battle, that I should go against it, and burn it up together?”, or wholly r and the meaning is, who shall irritate or provoke me to be as a brier and thorn, to hurt, grieve, and distress my people, to cause me to go into them, and against them, in a military way, in wrath and fury to consume them? no one shall. This rendering and sense well agree with the first clause of the verse. Jerom renders it thus, “who will make me an adamant stone?” as the word “shamir” is rendered in Eze 3:9 Zec 7:12 and gives the sense, who will make me hard and cruel, so as to overcome my nature, my clemency, to go forth in a fierce and warlike manner, and walk upon my vineyard, which before I kept, and burn it, which I had hedged about?
p “gradiar in eam”; so some in Vatablus; “caute ingrediar eam”, Piscator. q “succendam ex ea”, Junius Tremellius “comburam [illos] ex ipsa”, Piscator. r So De Dieu; and some in Vatablus; and which is approved by Noldius, who renders it in like manner, to the same sense, Ebr. Concord. Part. p. 409. No. 1671.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
4. Fury is not in me. This verse contains excellent consolation; for it expresses the incredible warmth of love which the Lord bears towards his people, though they are of a wicked and rebellious disposition. God assumes, as we shall see, the character of a father who is grievously offended, and who, while he is offended at his son, still more pities him, and is naturally inclined to exercise compassion, because the warmth of his love rises above his anger. In short, he shews that he cannot hate his elect so as not to bear fatherly kindness towards them, even while he visits them with very severe punishments.
Scripture represents God to us in various ways. Sometimes it exhibits him as burning with indignation, and having a terrific aspect, and sometimes as shewing nothing but gentleness and mercy; and the reason of this diversity is, that we are not all capable of enjoying his goodness. Thus he is constrained to be perverse towards the perverse, and holy towards the holy, as David describes him. (Psa 18:25.) He shews himself to us what we suffer him to be, for by our rebelliousness we drive him to severity.
Yet here the Prophet does not speak of all indiscriminately, but only of the Church, whose transgressions he chastises, and whose iniquities he punishes, in such a manner as not to lay aside a father’s affection. This statement must therefore be limited to the Church, so as to denote the relation between God and his chosen people, to whom he cannot manifest himself otherwise than as a Father, while he burns with rage against the reprobate. Thus we see how great is the consolation that is here given; for if we know that God has called us, we may justly conclude that he is not angry with us, and that, having embraced us with a firm and enduring regard, it is impossible that he shall ever deprive us of it. It is indeed certain that at that time God hated many persons who belonged to that nation; but, with respect to their adoption, he declares that he loved them. Now, the more kindly and tenderly that God loved them, so much the more they who provoked his anger by their wickedness were without excuse. This circumstance is undoubtedly intended to aggravate their guilt, that their wickedness constrains him, in some measure, to change his disposition towards them; for, having formerly spoken of his gentleness, he suddenly exclaims, —
“
Who shall engage me in battle with the brier and thorn?” or, as some render it, “Who shall set me as a brier and thorn?” Yet it might not be amiss also to read, “Who shall bring against me a brier, that I may meet it as a thorn?” for there is no copulative conjunction between those two words. Yet I willingly adhere to the former opinion, that God wishes to have to deal with thistles or thorns, which he will quickly consume by the fire of his wrath. If any one choose rather to view it as a reproof of those doubts which often arise in us in consequence of unbelief, when we think that God is inflamed with wrath against us, as if he had said, “You are mistaken in comparing me to the brier and thorn,” that is, “You ascribe to me a harsh and cruel disposition,” let him enjoy his opinion, though I think that it is different from what the Prophet means. (193)
Others think that God assumes the character of a man who is provoking himself to rage; as if he had said, “I do not choose to be any longer so indulgent, or to exercise such forbearance as I have formerly manifested;” but this is so forced, that it does not need a lengthened refutation. It is true, indeed, that since God is gentle and merciful in his nature, and there is nothing that is more foreign to him than harshness or cruelty, he may be said to borrow a nature that does not belong to him. (194) But the interpretation which I have given will of itself be sufficient to refute others, namely, that God complains bitterly that he will as soon fight with thorns as with his vineyard, for when he considers that it is his inheritances he is compelled to spare it.
I will pass through them in a hostile manner, and utterly consume them. These words confirm my former exposition; for the burning relates to “briers and thorns,” and he declares that, if he had to deal with them, he would burn them all up, but that he acts more gently, because it is his vineyard. Hence we infer that, if God is not enraged against us, this must be attributed, not to any merits of men, but to his election, which is of free grace. By these words, מי יתנני, ( mi yittĕnēnī,) “Who shall give me?” he plainly shews that he has just cause for contending with us, and even for destroying us in a hostile manner, were he not restrained by compassion towards his Church; for we would be as thorns and briers, and would be like wicked men, if the Lord did not separate us from them, that we might not perish along with them. If the phrase במלחמה, ( bămmilhāmāh,) in battle, which we have translated “in a hostile manner,” be connected with the question, “Who shall set me?” it will not ill agree with the meaning. (195)
(193) Bogus footnote
(194) Bogus footnote
(195) Bogus footnote
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
A SOLEMN DISCLAIMER
Isa. 27:4-5. Fury is not in me, &c.
The figurative language in Isa. 27:1 sets forth some powerful and terrible enemies of Israelcruel, crafty, and bloodthirsty oppressors. But, terrible as they were to Israel, they were no more than briers and thorns in the way of Israels God. He would march against them and go through them, just as soldiers on their march tread down and crush so frail a barrier as these would be against them. His own people the while should be the object of His special and necessary care (Isa. 27:2-3). And if they should so offend as to draw down His judgments upon them, still He would not deal with them as adversaries. He would be ready to make peace with them again on their humbling themselves before Him. The solemn disclaimer of our text should be borne in mind by us when we study
I. GODS THREATENINGS AGAINST THE WICKED. Many of these are very terrible, and a certain class of religionists would have us believe that these alarming texts of Holy Scripture are metaphors that mean nothing, and that we dishonour the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ if we associate His name with anything that savours of wrath, vengeance, and severity. But this is taking a meagre and one-sided view of the Divine character. In God there is not only love, but also holiness, which cannot look upon iniquity; justice, which will by no means clear the guilty; and truth, which forewarns and will not fail to punish the transgressors of law and order. Let us not mistake the character of such punishment. A furious man acts on the passionate impulse of the moment. He strikes blindly and without consideration; does many things which, when the excitement is over, he will be sorry for and try to undo. But nothing like this is there with God. His threatenings are not uttered in blind and inconsiderate wrath, but in awful calmness of judgment, and in vindication of His essential and eternal holiness; and thus, too, they will be executed. This it is that will make the judgment-day so awful, and that then will reduce the condemned to despair. The son who sees his fathers anger so stirred against him, that vain attempt were it to reason with him, vain to offer a word of explanation or excuse, does well to keep out of his fathers way, and hope for a better time to stand before him and ask to be forgiven. But no such hope is there, when the offender sees that his aggrieved parentnot furiously, but of very faithfulnessis about to administer a threatened punishment; ay, and that his heart is heavy, and his eye dim with tears, even while he punishes! And this, allowing for the inevitable weakness of any illustration of such a matter, may serve to convey the idea which I would impress upon you. The Father of mercies and God of all comfort will certainly execute His threatenings against impenitent transgressors. Not in passionate haste, not on sudden impulse of which He might afterwards repent, will the Lord make a way for His anger against sin.
II. THE DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. Not a few earnest men becloud and all but explain away this fundamental doctrine, because (they tell us) they cannot endure the thought of sin being punished in the person of the Sinless One. They do not like to hear of the Fathers wrath being averted and (as it is said) appeased by the death of His Son; of God looking out (as it were) for a victim, and fastening upon the One found guiltless as a substitute for the guilty mass! But this mistaken representation arises from attributing to God a passion which in men would be indignation and wrath. But what does our text say? Fury is not in Me. We may not think of our heavenly Father as an angry Being, furiously raging against those whom the devil has proved too strong for, and not to be appeased till He found a victim on which to wreak His vengeance! But no unwillingness on our part to hear it can alter that which is written (2Co. 5:21; 1Pe. 4:18; Isa. 53:5-6). If we study this great subject aright, we shall find in the Atonement the result of the co-working of the calmest (and therefore most inflexible) justice and the tenderest love.T. W. Peile, D.D.: Sermons, pp. 101112.
The text expresses the preference of God for forgiveness rather than for punishment, and the conditions of that forgiveness; but, at the same time, the utter overthrow of all who continue in opposition to His will. It suggests
I. A blessed absence in the nature of God. Fury is not in me. Fury seems to be uncontrolled and uncontrollable anger, such as that with which the storm seems to beat upon the dismasted, helmless vessel; such as that which inspires the hungry lion that has been for some hours disappointed of its prey. When a man is so under the influence of anger that no consideration from within or intercession from without can pacify him, he is in a state of fury. But no such state is possible to our God. His anger is always under control, He is always the Lord God, abundant in goodness and truth; and we have also plentiful evidence that, in the height of His displeasure, He is accessible to intercession on behalf of His creatures. See how the Son of God ends His woes against Scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites, with O Jerusalem, how often would I have gathered, &c. Recall the effect of Abrams pleading for Sodom, and that of Moses for unbelieving Israel (Numbers 14) The declaration of the text has been abundantly verified in all ages. Nevertheless,
II. This blessed absence in the nature of God is compatible with contention with the unrepenting. Who would set the briers, &c. Imagine a father and a son at variance, the father being in the right, and the son in the wrong. There are two ways of reconciliation: either the son must comply with the conditions of the father, or the father must lower his standard to the level of the son. But what a wrong would the father do himself, his family, and society, if he were to adopt this course! He ought not, will not. If the son resolves to fight it out, reconciliation is impossible. This is the relative position of God and the ungodly man. God says, I am Jehovah, I change not. It is a blessed impossibility. But the unrepentant man ought, can, must! If not, the fire of goodness must be set against the briers of wickedness, a contest as hopeless, and of which the issue is as certain, as that of the devouring flame with briers and thorns.
Conclusion.The absence of fury in God leads Him to prefer pardon to punishment, and to provide means for the former. Let him take hold of my strength, &c. Men, churches, and nations are lovers of peace in proportion as they are righteous (Psa. 72:3). The preference of God for peace depends upon the very attribute of which the ungodly would rob Him, His righteousness. What is Gods strength? How take hold of it? When a man falls overboard at sea, the appointed means of rescue is the life-belt which is thrown to him. Seizing that, he lays hold of the strength of the vessel to save him. When the man-slayer, fleeing from the avenger of blood, entered the city of refuge, He took hold of Gods appointed means of shelter. Gods strength is His pardoning prerogative, exercised to us through Christ, the arm or strength of the Lord. See how Moses takes hold of it (Num. 14:19). And the prodigal (Luk. 15:21; Rom. 5:1).Horace Bushnell, D.D.
TAKING HOLD OF GODS STRENGTH
Isa. 27:5. Or let him take hold of My strength, &c. [1087]
[1087] Cheyne translates and comments: Or else. A truly evangelical belief that God is willing to be reconciled even to His enemies. Seize upon my fortressLet him take sanctuary in the Name of Jehovah (Pro. 18:10); in short, let him become a believing servant of Jehovah. Fortress, a symbolical name for a protecting deity, as Isa. 17:10, Psa. 52:7 (9). Kay: Or, Let a man lay hold of My strong refuge; let him flee to my altar of reconciliation (cf. 1Ki. 1:50).
I. IN WHAT GODS STRENGTH CONSISTS. First, we think of Almightiness, that irresistible power which created the world, &c. We are apt to forget those other and higher sources of strength which belong to God (1Ki. 19:12). Wisdom is strength (Ecc. 9:15-16). Truthfulness is strength. Justice is power. Mercy to the weak is often the manifestation of the highest strength. England has often put forth her power; her soldiers have crushed the most appalling rebellions; her guns have sunk the mightiest navies; but history will perhaps record it as the highest display of her power when, under a sense of justice, she withdrew her forces when she might have crushed her foes (as in the late Transvaal war, 1881). Now, this element of mercy, as manifest in the work of Christ, is Gods strength (Rom. 1:16; 1Co. 1:24). Gods fatherly love is the essence of His power (H. E. I., 3206). Christ is the expression of that love. Christ is Gods strength. And let him take hold of My strength.
II. HOW MAY MAN TAKE HOLD OF GODS STRENGTH?
(1.) By submission. (Rom. 6:13; Psa. 2:10). As nothing is so reasonable, so nothing is so wise as submission to God.
(2.) By prayer. Prayer is the hand of the child stretching out in the dark and anxious to feel itself under that fathers protecting power. Prayer takes hold of Gods strength.
(3.) By obedience (1Pe. 1:14). When Saul of Tarsus, after asking, Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do? went straightway and did Gods will, then there came to him a moral power mightier than he had ever wielded before.
(4.) By implicit trust in Gods mercy [1090]
[1090] I think I can convey the meaning of this passage so that every one may understand it, by what took place in my own family within these few days. One of my children committed a fault for which I thought it to be my duty to chastise him. I called him to me, explained to him the evil of what he had done, and told him how grieved I was that I must punish him for it. He heard me in silence, then rushed into my arms, and burst into tears. I could sooner have cut off my arm than have then struck him for his fault; he had taken hold of my strengthhe had made peace with me.Toller.
III. THE RESULT OF THUS TAKING HOLD OF GODS STRENGTH. The result is that Divine strength is infused into our minds. We become strong in the Lord, and in the power of His might Trust is the medium through which Gods power is transmitted to mans weakness (Heb. 6:19). We can only really know those whom we love and trust (Dan. 11:32). The most invincible and lasting institution in the world is the Church of Christ, because composed of those who are partakers of the Divine nature, and whom God has made strong.William Parkes, F.R.G.S.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(4) Fury is not in me.Better, There is no wrath in me. Who will set briars and thorns before me? With war will I go forth against them; I will burn them up together. The reversal of the sentence is continued. Wrath against this vineyard has passed away from Jehovah. Should briars and thorns (symbols of the enemies of His people, as in Isa. 9:18; Isa. 10:17; 2Sa. 23:6-7; Eze. 2:6) spring up, he will do battle against them, and consume them utterly.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Isa 27:4 Fury [is] not in me: who would set the briers [and] thorns against me in battle? I would go through them, I would burn them together.
Ver. 4. Fury is not in me. ] Whatever you may think of me, because of my many dreadful menaces, and your heavy calamities, Non est in me sed in vobis culpa istarum calamitatum, the fault is not in me but in yourselves; do you but mend, and all shall be soon well between us. It is but displeased love that maketh me chide or strike my dear children, lop my vines, Ut bonus vinitor vires luxuriantes falce Tatar et purgat; , ; Joh 15:2 leaves and luxuriances must be taken off, or it will be worse. Better the vine should bleed than die; better be preserved in brine, than perish in honey. But assure yourselves, I am not implacable; as your sins have put thunderbolts into my hands, so by sound repentance you may soon disarm me.
Who would set the briers and thorns.
I would burn them together.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fury. Hebrew. chemah = heat, wrath, displeasure.
not in Me: i.e. not now. There was in the other song (Isa 5:5-7): but now, “in that day”, all wrath will have gone.
briers and thorns: i.e. the internal enemies of the vineyard (as the wild beasts are the external enemies). These are now the objects of His wrath, not His vineyard.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fury: Isa 12:1, Isa 26:20, Isa 26:21, Isa 54:6-10, Psa 85:3, Psa 103:9, Eze 16:63, Nah 1:3-7, 2Pe 2:9
who would: Isa 9:18, Isa 10:17, 2Sa 23:6, Mal 4:3, Mat 3:12, Heb 6:8
go through: or, march against
Reciprocal: Lev 26:28 – in fury Deu 9:3 – a consuming fire 2Sa 23:7 – and they shall 2Ki 10:4 – how then shall Job 15:25 – he stretcheth Job 23:6 – plead Job 34:15 – General Psa 118:12 – quenched Pro 11:21 – the seed Isa 1:31 – as tow Isa 33:12 – thorns Eze 13:5 – to stand Hos 11:9 – not execute Amo 7:4 – called Nah 1:6 – can stand Nah 1:10 – they shall Act 12:20 – but
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Isa 27:4-5. Fury is not in me Namely, against my vineyard or my people; I have been displeased with them, and have chastized them, but I am not implacable toward them, and resolved utterly to destroy them, as their enemies are. Who would set the briers and thorns against me, &c. Yet if any hypocrite in the church, false professor, or wilful sinner, shall offer to contend with me, he shall feel the effects of my fury. Or, more largely, thus: Though fury doth not belong to me, and vengeance be called my strange work, (Isa 28:21,) yet if the briers and thorns, that is, the wicked and incorrigible, bid defiance to me, they will find I shall soon destroy and consume them like fire. Or let him take hold of my strength, &c. Rather, let such a one return to me, and make his peace with me, by unfeigned repentance and living faith, and he shall make peace with me For I am always ready to receive returning sinners, and to pardon the truly penitent, who have recourse to me for mercy and salvation.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
27:4 Fury {d} [is] not in me: who would set the briers [and] thorns against me in battle? I would go through them, I would burn them together.
(d) Therefore he will destroy the kingdom of Satan, because he loves his Church for his own mercies sake, and cannot be angry with it, but wishes that he may pour his anger on the wicked infidels, whom he means by briers and thorns.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
He would not be angry with Israel in that future day (cf. Rom 3:21-26; Rom 5:8-11), as He had been in the past. If enemies tried to damage His vineyard, He would destroy them (cf. Isa 5:6).