Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Isaiah 37:36
Then the angel of the LORD went forth, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred and fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they [were] all dead corpses.
36. The miraculous destruction of Sennacherib’s host. It is certainly remarkable that none of Isaiah’s prophecies delivered at the time predict this appalling disaster, the clearest anticipation of it being in ch. Isa 17:12-14, an oracle delivered some time before. At the same time some such occurrence is needed to account for Sennacherib’s precipitate retreat before Tirhakah. A confirmation of the main fact is also found in the Egyptian tradition, according to which Sennacherib had already reached Pelusium in Egypt, when in a single night his army was rendered helpless by a plague of field-mice which gnawed the bows of the soldiers and the thongs of their shields (Herodotus, ii. 141). Since the mouse was among the Egyptians a symbol of pestilence we may infer that the basis of truth in the legend was a deadly epidemic in the Assyrian camp; and this is the form of calamity which is naturally suggested by the terms of the biblical narrative. The scene of the disaster is not indicated in the O.T. record, and there is no obstacle to the supposition that it took place, as in the Egyptian legend, in the plague-haunted marshes of Pelusium. The silence of Sennacherib about his misfortune is quite intelligible.
the angel of the Lord ] is associated with the plague in 2Sa 24:15-16.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Then the angel of the Lord went forth – This verse contains the record of one of the most remarkable events which have occurred in history. Many attempts have been made to explain the occurrence which is here recorded, and to trace the agencies or means which God employed. It may be observed that the use of the word angel here does not determine the manner in which it was done. So far as the word is concerned, it might have been accomplished either by the power of an invisible messenger of God – a spiritual being commissioned for this purpose; or it might have been by some second causes under the direction of an angel – as the pestilence, or a storm and tempest; or it might have been by some agents sent by God whatever they were – the storm, the pestilence, or the simoom, to which the name angel might have been applied. The word angel ( mal’ak) from la’ak to send) means properly one sent, a messenger, from a private person Job 1:14; from a king 1Sa 16:19; 1Sa 19:11, 1Sa 19:14, 1Sa 19:20. Then it means a messenger of God, and is applied:
(1) to an angel (Exo 23:20; 2Sa 14:16; et al.);
(2) to a prophet Hag 1:13; Mal 3:1;
(3) to a priest Ecc 5:5; Mal 2:7.
The word may be applied to any messenger sent from God, whoever or whatever that may be. Thus, in Psa 104:4, the winds are said to be his angels, or messengers:
Who maketh the winds ( ruachoth) his angels ( male‘akayv);
The flaming fire his ministers.
The general sense of the word is that of ambassador, messenger, one sent to bear a message, to execute a commission, or to perform any work or service. It is known that the Jews were in the habit of tracing all events to the agency of invisible beings sent forth by God to accomplish his purposes in this world. There is nothing in this opinion that is contrary to reason; for there is no more improbability in the existence of a good angel than there is in the existence of a good man, or in the existence of an evil spirit than there is in the existence of a bad man. And there is no more improbability in the supposition that God employs invisible and heavenly messengers to accomplish his purposes, than there is that he employs man. Whatever, therefore, were the means used in the destruction of the Assyrian army, there is no improbability in the opinion that they were under the direction of a celestial agent sent forth to accomplish the purpose. The chief suppositions which have been made of the means of that destruction are the following:
1. It has been supposed that it was by the direct agency of an angel, without any second causes. But this supposition has not been generally adopted. It is contrary to the usual modes in which God directs the affairs of the world. His purposes are usually accomplished by some second causes, and in accordance with the usual course of events. Calvin supposes that it was accomplished by the direct agency of one or more angels sent forth for the purpose.
2. Some have supposed that it was accomplished by Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, who is supposed to have pursned Sennacherib, and to have overthrown his army in a single night near Jerusalem. But it is sufficient to say in reply to this, that there is not the slightest historical evidence to support it; and had this been the mode, it would have been so recorded, and time fact would have been stated.
3. It has been attributed by some, among whom is Prideaux (Connection, vol. i. p. 143) and John E. Faber (the notes at Harmers Obs., i. 65), to the hot pestilential wind which often prevails in the East, and which is often represented as suddenly destroying travelers, and indeed whole caravans. This wind, called sam, simum, samiel, or simoom, has been usually supposed to be poisonous, and almost instantly destructive to life. It has been described by Mr. Bruce, by Sir R. K. Porter, by Niebuhr, and by others. Prof. Robinson has examined at length the supposition that the Assyrian army was destroyed by this wind, and has stated the results of the investigations of recent travelers. The conclusion to which he comes is, that the former accounts of the effects of this wind have been greatly exaggerated, and that the destruction of the army of the Assyrians cannot be attributed to any such cause. See the article winds, in his edition of Calmets Dictionary. Burckhardt says of this wind, whose effects have been regarded as so poisonous and destructive, I am perfectly convinced that all the stories which travelers, or the inhabitants of the towns of Egypt and Syria, relate of the simoom of the desert are greatly exaggerated, and I never could hear of a single well-authenticated instance of its having proved mortal to either man or beast. Similar testimony has been given by other modern travelers; though it is to be remarked that the testimony is rather of a negative character, and does not entirely destroy the possibility of the supposition that this so often described pestilential wind may in some instances prove fatal. It is not, however, referred to in the Scripture account of the destruction of Sennacherib; and whatever may be true of it in the deserts of Arabia or Nubia, there is no evidence whatever that such poisonous effects are ever experienced in Palestine.
4. It has been attributed to a storm of hail, accompanied with thunder and lightning. This is the opinion of Vitringa, and seems to accord with the descriptions which are given in the prophecy of the destruction of the army in Isa 29:6; Isa 30:30. To this opinion, as the most probable, I have been disposed to incline, for although these passages may be regarded as figurative, yet the more natural interpretation is to regard them as descriptive of the event. We know that such a tempest might be easily produced by God, and that violent tornadoes are not unfrequent in the East. One of the plagues of Egypt consisted in such a tremendous storm of hail accompanied with thunder, when the fire ran along the ground, so that there was hail, and fire mingled with the hail, and so that the hail smote throughout all the land of Egypt all that was in the field, both man and beast Exo 9:22-25. This description, in its terror, its suddenness, and its ruinous effects, accords more nearly with the account of the destruction of Sennacherib than any other which has been made. See the notes at Isa 30:30, for a remarkable description of the officer of a storm of hail.
5. It has been supposed by many that it was accomplished by the pestilence. This is the account which Josephus gives (Ant. x. 1. 5), and is the supposition which has been adopted by Rosenmuller, Doderlin, Michaelis, Hensler, and many others. But there are two objections to this supposition. One is, that it does not well accord with the descritption of the prophet Isa 29:6; Isa 30:30; and the other, and more material one is, that the plague does not accomplish its work so suddenly. This was done in a single night; whereas, though the plague appears suddenly, and has been known to destroy whole armies, yet there is no recorded instance in which it has been so destructive in a few hours as in this case. It may be added, also, that the plague does not often leave an army in the manner described here. One hundred and eighty five thousand were suddenly slain. The survivors, if there were any, as we have reason to suppose Isa 37:37, fled, and returned to Nineveh. There is no mention made of any who lingered, and who remained sick among the slain.
Nor is there any apprehension mentioned, as having existed among the Jews of going into the camp, and stripping the dead, and bearing the spoils of the army into the city. Had the army been destroyed by the plague, such is the fear of the contagion in countries where it prevails, that nothing would have induced them to endanger the city by the possibility of introducing the dreaded disease. The account leads us to suppose that the inhabitants of Jerusalem immediately sallied forth and stripped the dead, and bore the spoils of the army into the city (see the notes at Isa 33:4, Isa 33:24). On the whole, therefore, the most probable supposition seems to be, that, if any secondary causes were employed, it was the agency of a violent tempest – a tempest of mingled hail and fire, which suddenly descended upon the mighty army. Whatever was the agent, however, it was the hand of God that directed it. It was a most fearful exhibition of his power and justice; and it furnishes a most awful threatening to proud and haughty blasphemers and revilers, and a strong ground of assurance to the righteous that God will defend them in times of peril.
It may be added, that Herodotus has given an account which was undoubtedly derived from some rumour of the entire destruction of the Assyrian army. He says (ii. 141) that when Sennacherib was in Egypt and engaged in the siege of Pelusium, an Egyptian priest prayed to God, and God heard his prayer, and sent a judgment upon him. For, says he, a multitude of mice gnawed to pieces in one night both the bows and the rest of the armor of the Assyrians, and that it was on that account that the king, when he had no bows left, drew off his army from Pelusium. This is probably a corruption of the history which we have here. At all events, the account in Herodotus does not conflict with the main statement of Isaiah, but is rather a confirmation of that statement, that the army of Sennacherib met with sudden discomfiture.
And when they arose – At the time of rising in the morning; when the surviving part of the army arose, or when the Jews arose, and looked toward the camp of the Assyrians.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Isa 37:36
Then the angel of the Lord went forth
The destruction of Sennacheribs army
The narrative does not say here (but see Isa 30:30-31) what secondary means, if any, were used.it does not exclude the use of secondary means. As Dean Plumptre remarks, a modern historian would dwell on the details of the pestilence. To Isaiah, who had learnt to see in the winds the messengers of God Psa 104:4), it was nothing else than the angel of the Lord. (Expository Times.)
A parallel in English history
In English history there is a striking parallel to the events of this period of Jewish history. Edward VI., under the guardianship of Cranmer, had established a pure form of religious worship in England. On his death, Queen Mary upset everything, and drove into retirement those who escaped the fires of Smithfield for their allegiance to the Protestant faith. With Elizabeth a new era dawned, and the religious life of the country displayed itself in great enthusiasm, resulting in the overthrow of the Armada. The reign of Ahaz was like unto that of Mary; with the accession of Hezekiah begins a reign like unto that of Elizabeth, having in its course the magnificent defeat of Sennacheribs hosts by the arm of the Lord. (B. Blake, B. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 36. Then the angel] Before “the angel,” the other copy, 2Kg 19:35, adds “it came to pass the same night, that”…
The Prophet Hosea, Ho 1:7, has given a plain prediction of the miraculous deliverance of the kingdom of Judah: –
“And to the house of Judah I will be tenderly merciful:
And I will save them by JEHOVAH their God.
And I will not save them by the bow;
Nor by sword, nor by battle;
By horses, nor by horsemen.” – L.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
36. Some attribute thedestruction to the agency of the plague (see on Isa33:24), which may have caused Hezekiah’s sickness, narratedimmediately after; but Isa 33:1;Isa 33:4, proves that the Jewsspoiled the corpses, which they would not have dared to do, had therebeen on them infection of a plague. The secondary agency seems, fromIsa 29:6; Isa 30:30,to have been a storm of hail, thunder, and lightning (compare Ex9:22-25). The simoon belongs rather to Africa and Arabia thanPalestine, and ordinarily could not produce such a destructiveeffect. Some few of the army, as 2Ch32:21 seems to imply, survived and accompanied Sennacherib home.HERODOTUS (2.141) gives anaccount confirming Scripture in so far as the sudden discomfiture ofthe Assyrian army is concerned. The Egyptian priests told him thatSennacherib was forced to retreat from Pelusium owing to a multitudeof field mice, sent by one of their gods, having gnawed theAssyrians’ bow-strings and shield-straps. Compare thelanguage (Isa 37:33), “Heshall not shoot an arrow there, nor come before it withshields,” which the Egyptians corrupted into theirversion of the story. Sennacherib was as the time with a part of hisarmy, not at Jerusalem, but on the Egyptian frontier, southwest ofPalestine. The sudden destruction of the host near Jerusalem, aconsiderable part of his whole army, as well as the advance of theEthiopian Tirhakah, induced him to retreat, which the Egyptiansaccounted for in a way honoring to their own gods. The mouse was theEgyptian emblem of destruction. The Greek Apollo was calledSminthian, from a Cretan word for “a mouse,” as atutelary god of agriculture, he was represented with one foot upon amouse, since field mice hurt corn. The Assyrian inscriptions, ofcourse, suppress their own defeat, but nowhere boast of having takenJerusalem; and the only reason to be given for Sennacherib nothaving, amidst his many subsequent expeditions recorded in themonuments, returned to Judah, is the terrible calamity he hadsustained there, which convinced him that Hezekiah was under thedivine protection. RAWLINSONsays, In Sennacherib’s account of his wars with Hezekiah, inscribedwith cuneiform characters in the hall of the palace of Koyunjik,built by him (a hundred forty feet long by a hundred twenty broad),wherein even the Jewish physiognomy of the captives is portrayed,there occurs a remarkable passage; after his mentioning his takingtwo hundred thousand captive Jews, he adds, “Then I prayed untoGod”; the only instance of an inscription wherein the name ofGOD occurs without aheathen adjunct. The forty-sixth Psalm probably commemorates Judah’sdeliverance. It occurred in one “night,” according to 2Ki19:35, with which Isaiah’s words, “when they arose earlyin the morning,” &c., are in undesigned coincidence.
they . . . they“theJews . . . the Assyrians.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Then the angel of the Lord went forth,…. From heaven, at the command of the Lord, being one of his ministering spirits, sent forth by him, as for the protection of his people, so for the destruction of their enemies; this was the same night, either in which the Assyrian army sat down before Jerusalem, as say the Jews x; or, however the same night in which the message was sent to Hezekiah; see
2Ki 19:35:
and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred and fourscore and five thousand men: a prodigious slaughter indeed! which shows the power and strength of an angel. Josephus y says they were smitten with a pestilential disease; but other Jewish writers say it was by fire from heaven, which took away their lives, but did not consume their bodies, nor burn their clothes; but, be that as it will, destroyed they were:
and when they arose early in the morning: those of the army that survived; Sennacherib, and his servants about him; or Hezekiah, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, that were besieged:
behold, they were all dead corpses; the whole army, excepting a few; this may well be expressed with a note of admiration, “behold!” for a very wonderful thing it was.
x T. Bab. Sanhedrin: fol. 95. 1. y Antiqu. l. 10. c. 1. sect. 5.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
To this culminating prophecy there is now appended an account of the catastrophe itself. “Then (K. And it came to pass that night, that) the angel of Jehovah went forth and smote ( vayyakkeh , K. vayyakh ) in the camp of Asshur a hundred and eighty-five thousand; and when men rose up in the morning, behold, they were all lifeless corpses. Then Sennacherib king of Asshur decamped, and went forth and returned, and settled down in Nineveh. And it cam to pass, as he was worshipping in the temple of Misroch, his god, Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons (L. chethib omits ‘his sons’) smote him with the sword; and when they escaped to the land of Ararat, Esarhaddon ascended the throne in his stead.” The first pair of histories closes here with a short account of the result of the Assyrian drama, in which Isaiah’s prophecies were most gloriously fulfilled: not only the prophecies immediately preceding, but all the prophecies of the Assyrian era since the time of Ahaz, which pointed to the destruction of the Assyrian forces (e.g., Isa 10:33-34), and to the flight and death of the king of Assyrian (Isa 31:9; Isa 30:33). If we look still further forward to the second pair of histories (chapters 38-39), we see from Isa 38:6 that it is only by anticipation that the account of these closing events is finished here; for the third history carries us back to the period before the final catastrophe. We may account in some measure for the haste and brevity of this closing historical fragment, from the prophet’s evident wish to finish up the history of the Assyrian complications, and the prophecy bearing upon it. But if we look back, there is a gap between Isa 37:36 and the event narrated here. For, according to Isa 37:30, there was to be an entire year of trouble between the prophecy and the fulfilment, during which the cultivation of the land would be suspended. What took place during that year? There can be no doubt that Sennacherib was engaged with Egypt; for (1.) when he made his second attempt to get Jerusalem into his power, he had received intelligence of the advance of Tirhakah, and therefore had withdrawn the centre of his army from Lachish, and encamped before Libnah (Isa 37:8-9); (2.) according to Josephus ( Ant. x. 1, 4), there was a passage of Berosus, which has been lost, in which he stated that Sennacherib “made an expedition against all Asia and Egypt;” (3.) Herodotus relates (ii. 141) that, after Anysis the blind, who lost his throne for fifty years in consequence of an invasion of Egypt by the Ethiopians under Sabakoa, but who recovered it again, Sethon the priest of Hephaestus ascended the throne. The priestly caste was so oppressed by him, that when Sanacharibos, the king of the Arabians and Assyrians, led a great army against Egypt, they refused to perform their priestly functions. but the priest-king went into the temple to pray, and his God promised to help him. He experienced the fulfilment of this prophecy before Pelusium, where the invasion was to take place, and where he awaited the foe with such as continued true to him. “Immediately after the arrival of Sanacharibos, an army of field-mice swarmed throughout the camp of the foe, and devoured their quivers, bows, and shield-straps, so that when morning came on they had to flee without arms, and lost many men in consequence. This is the origin of the stone of Sethon in the temple of Hephaestus (at Memphis), which is standing there still, with a mouse in one hand, and with this inscription: Whosoever looks at me, let him fear the gods!” This (possibly the Zet whose name occurs in the lists at the close of the twenty-third dynasty, and therefore in the wrong place) is to be regarded as one of the Saitic princes of the twenty-sixth dynasty, who seem to have ruled in Lower Egypt contemporaneously with the Ethiopians
(Note: A seal of Pharaoh Sabakon has been found among the ruins of the palace of Kuyunjik. The colossal image of Tarakos is found among the bas-reliefs of Mediet-Habu. He is holding firmly a number of Asiatic prisoners by the hair of their head, and threatening them with a club. There are several other stately monuments in imitation of the Egyptian style in the ruins of Nepata, the northern capital of the Meriotic state, which belong to him (Lepsius, Denkmler, p. 10 of the programme).)
(as, in fact, is stated in a passage of the Armenian Eusebius, Aethiopas et Saitas regnasse aiunt eodem tempore ), until they succeeded at length in ridding themselves of the hateful supremacy. Herodotus evidently depended in this instance upon the hearsay of Lower Egypt, which transferred the central point of the Assyrian history to their own native princely house. The question, whether the disarming of the Assyrian army in front of Pelusium merely rested upon a legendary interpretation of the mouse in Sethon’s hand,
(Note: This Sethos monument has not yet been discovered (Brugsch, Reiseberichte, p. 79). The temple of Phta was on the south side of Memphis; the site is marked by the ruins at Mitrahenni.)
which may possibly have been originally intended as a symbol of destruction; or whether it was really founded upon an actual occurrence which was exaggerated in the legend,
(Note: The inhabitants of Troas worshipped mice, “because they gnawed the strings of the enemies’ bows” (see Wesseling on Il. i. 39).)
may be left undecided.
But it is a real insult to Isaiah, when Thenius and G. Rawlinson place the scene of Isa 37:36 at Pelusium, and thus give the preference to Herodotus. Has not Isaiah up to this point constantly prophesied that the power of Asshur was to be broken in the holy mountain land of Jehovah (Isa 14:25), that the Lebanon forest of the Assyrian army would break to pieces before Jerusalem (Isa 10:32-34), and that there the Assyrian camp would become the booty of the inhabitants of the city, and that without a conflict? And is not the catastrophe that would befal Assyria described in Isa 18:1-7 as an act of Jehovah, which would determine the Ethiopians to do homage to God who was enthroned upon Zion? We need neither cite 2Ch 32:21 nor Psa 76:1-12 (lxx ), according to which the weapons of Asshur break to pieces upon Jerusalem; Isaiah’s prophecies are quite sufficient to prove, that to force this Pelusiac disaster
(Note: G. Rawlinson, Monarchies, ii. 445.)
into Isa 37:36 is a most thoughtless concession to Herodotus. The final catastrophe occurred before Jerusalem, and the account in Herodotus gives us no certain information even as to the issue of the Egyptian campaign, which took place in the intervening year. Such a gap as the one which occurs before Isa 37:36 is not without analogy in the historical writings of the Bible; see, for example, Num 20:1, where an abrupt leap is made over the thirty-seven years of the wanderings in the desert. The abruptness is not affected by the addition of the clause in the book of Kings, “It came to pass that night.” For, in the face of the “sign” mentioned in Isa 37:30, this cannot mean “in that very night” (viz., the night following the answer given by Isaiah); but (unless it is a careless interpolation) it must refer to Isa 37:33, Isa 37:34, and mean illa nocte , viz., the night in which the Assyrian had encamped before Jerusalem. The account before us reads just like that of the slaying of the first-born in Egypt (Exo 12:12; Exo 11:4). The plague of Egypt is marked as a pestilence by the use of the word nagaph in connection with hikkah in Exo 12:23, Exo 12:13 (compare Amo 4:10, where it seems to be alluded to under the name ); and in the case before us also we cannot think of anything else than a divine judgment of this kind, which even to the present day defies all attempts at an aetiological solution, and which is described in 2 Sam as effected through the medium of angels, just as it is here. Moreover, the concise brevity of the narrative leaves it quite open to assume, as Hensler and others do, that the ravages of the pestilence in the Assyrian army, which carried off thousands in the night (Psa 91:6), even to the number of 185,000, may have continued for a considerable time.
(Note: The pestilence in Mailand in 1629 carried off, according to Tadino, 160,000 men; that in Vienna, in 1679, 122,849; that in Moscow, at the end of the last century, according to Martens, 670,000; but this was during the whole time that the ravages of the pestilence lasted.)
The main thing is the fact that the prophecy in Isa 31:8 was actually fulfilled. According to Josephus ( Ant. x. 1, 5), when Sennacherib returned from his unsuccessful Egyptian expedition, he found the detachment of his army, which he had left behind in Palestine, in front of Jerusalem, where a pestilential disease sent by God was making great havoc among the soldiers, and that on the very first night of the siege. The three verses, “he broke up, and went away, and returned home,” depict the hurried character of the retreat, like “ abiit excessit evasit erupit ” (Cic. ii. Catil. init.). The form of the sentence in Isa 37:38 places Sennacherib’s act of worship and the murderous act of his sons side by side, as though they had occurred simultaneously. The connection would be somewhat different if the reading had been (cf., Ewald, 341, a).
Nisroch apparently signifies the eagle-like, or hawk-like (from nisr , nesher ), possibly like “Arioch from ‘ar . (The lxx transcribe it , A. , (K. , where B. has ), and explorers of the monuments imagined at one time that they had discovered this god as Asarak;
(Note: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, xii. 2, pp. 426-7.)
but they have more recently retracted this, although there really is a hawk-headed figure among the images of the Assyrian deities or genii.
(Note: Rawlinson, Monarchies, ii. 265.)
The name has nothing to do with that of the supreme Assyrian deity, Asur, Asshur. A better derivation of Nisroch would be from , , ; and this is confirmed by Oppert, who has discovered among the inscriptions in the harem of Khorsabad a prayer of Sargon to Nisroch, who appears there, like the Hymen of Greece, as the patron of marriage, and therefore as a “uniter.”
(Note: Expdition Scientifique en Mesopotamie, t. ii. p. 339.)
The name ‘Adrammelekh (a god in 2Ki 17:31) signifies, as we now known, gloriosus ( ‘addr ) est rex ;” and Sharetser (for which we should expect to find Saretser), dominator tuebitur . The Armenian form of the latter name (in Moses Chroen. i. 23), San-asar (by the side of Adramel, who is also called Arcamozan), probably yields the original sense of “ Lunus (the moon-god Sin) tuebitur .” Polyhistorus (in Euseb. chron. arm. p. 19), on the authority of Berosus, mentions only the former, Ardumuzan, as the murderer, and gives eighteen years as the length of Sennacherib’s reign. The murder did not take place immediately after his return, as Josephus says ( Ant. x. 1, 5; cf., Tobit i. 21-25, Vulg.); and the expression used by Isaiah, he “dwelt (settled down) in Nineveh,” suggests the idea of a considerable interval. This interval embraced the suppression of the rebellion in Babylon, where Sennacherib made his son Asordan king, and the campaign in Cilicia (both from Polyhistorus),
(Note: Vid., Richter, Berosi quae supersunt (1825), p. 62; Mller, Fragmenta Hist. Gr. ii. 504.)
and also, according to the monuments, wars both by sea and land with Susiana, which supported the Babylonian thirst for independence. The Asordan of Polyhistorus is Esar-haddon (also written without the makkeph , Esarhaddon), which is generally supposed to be the Assyrian form of , Assur fratrem dedit . It is so difficult to make the chronology tally here, that Oppert, on Isa 36:1, proposes to alter the fourteenth year into the twenty-ninth, and Rawlinson would alter it into the twenty-seventh.
(Note: Sargonides, p. 10, and Monarchies, ii. 434.)
They both of them assign to king Sargon a reign of seventeen (eighteen) years, and to Sennacherib (in opposition to Polyhistorus) a reign of twenty-three (twenty-four) years; and they both agree in giving 680 as the year of Sennacherib’s death. This brings us down below the first decade of Manasseh’s reign, and would require a different author from Isaiah for Isa 37:37, Isa 37:38. But the accounts given by Polyhistorus, Abydenus, and the astronomical canon, however we may reconcile them among themselves, do not extend the reign of Sennacherib beyond 693.
(Note: See Duncker, Gesch. des Alterthums. i. pp. 708-9.)
It is true that even then Isaiah would have been at least about ninety years old. But the tradition which represents him as dying a martyr’s death in the reign of Manasseh, does really assign him a most unusual old age. Nevertheless, Isa 37:37, Isa 37:38 may possibly have been added by a later hand. The two parricides fled to the “land of Ararat,” i.e., to Central Armenia. The Armenian history describes them as the founders of the tribes of the Sassunians and Arzerunians. From the princely house of the latter, among whom the name of Sennacherib was a very common one, sprang Leo the Armenian, whom Genesios describes as of Assyrio-Armenian blood. If this were the case, there would be no less than ten Byzantine emperors who were descendants of Sennacherib, and consequently it would not be till a very late period that the prophecy of Nahum was fulfilled.
(Note: Duncker, on the contrary (p. 709), speaks of the parricides as falling very shortly afterwards by their brother’s hand, and overlooks the Armenian tradition (cf., Rawlinson, Monarchies, ii. 465), which transfers the flight of the two, who were to have been sacrificed, as is reported by their own father, to the year of the world 4494, i.e., b.c. 705 (see the historical survey of Prince Hubbof in the Miscellaneous Translations, vol. ii. 1834). The Armenian historian Thomas (at the end of the ninth century) expressly states that he himself had sprung from the Arzerunians, and therefore from Sennacherib; and for this reason his historical work is chiefly devoted to Assyrian affairs (see Aucher on Euseb. chron. i. p. xv.).)
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Vs. 36-38: DIVINE VENGEANCE AND THE DEATH OF SENNACHERIB
1. As the Assyrian host slept “the angel of the LORD” himself (an expression that almost always refers to an Old Testament appearance of the Christ) smote their camp, leaving 185,000 corpses, (vs. 36; Isa 10:12; Isa 10:33-34).
2. Sennacherib was deeply enough impressed by this overthrow that he returned to Nineveh, (vs. 37; Jon 1:2; Jon 3:3).
3. Some 20 years later, as he worshipped in the temple of Nisroch, his god, he was slain by two of his own sons, who went into exile, (vs. 38).
4. Another of his sons, Esarhaddon, ascended the throne that was vacated by Sennacherib, and reigned in his stead, (vs. 39; comp. Ezr 4:1-5).
5. Lord Byron’s immortal poem, “The Destruction of Sennacherib”, is an inspiring portrayal of Jehovah’s dealing with the proud Assyrian:
The Assyrian came down like the wolf of the fold, And his cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold; And the sheen of their spears was like stars on the sea, When the blue wave rolls nightly on deep Galilee.
Like the leaves of the forest when summer is green,
That host with their banners at sunset were seen:
Like the leaves of the forest when autumn hath blown,
That host on the morrow laid withered and strown.’
For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast, And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed; And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill, And their hearts but once heaved, and forever grew still.
And there lay the steed with his nostril all wide, But through it there rolled not the breath of his pride: And the foam of his gasping lay white on the turf, And cold as the spray of the rock-beating surf.
And there lay the rider distorted and pale, With the dew on his brow and the rust on his mail; And the tents were all silent, the banners alone, The lances unlifted, the trumpet unblown.
And the widows of Ashur are loud in their wail, And the idols were broke in the temple of Baal; And the might of the Gentile, unsmote by the sword, Hath melted like snow in the glance of the Lord!
So, Jerusalem was spared; but the rest of the land of Judah was ravaged. Hezekiah’s bid for freedom (which Isaiah warned against –Isa 28:14-29; Isa 30:1-5) had brought indescribable and immeasurable suffering. Judah was still not free, but was to remain a vassal of Assyria for years to come.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
36. And the angel of Jehovah went out. The Prophet now relates what happened to the Assyrian, that we may not think that the Lord spoke in vain. He shews, therefore, that his prediction was proved by the event, that it might clearly appear that God had sent him, and that he had not uttered anything rashly. Yet we ought not to limit so remarkable a work of God to a single prediction; but the authority of the Prophet was sustained, and his calling sanctioned, as to the whole course of his doctrine. He has related a singular and wellknown event which had recently happened, in order to prove, by means of it, to the end of the world, that God had spoken by his mouth.
Where that slaughter was carried into effect by the angel is not very evident. The opinion generally entertained is, that it happened at the siege of Jerusalem; but it is also possible that it may have happened during the march of Sennacherib’s army; that is, while he was coming to besiege the city. I leave that matter uncertain, because it is of little importance. From the context, certainly, we may clearly learn that the tyrant did not approach so near as to be able to throw a dare into the city.
We must indeed reject that invention by which Satan, through profane historians, has attempted to obscure this extraordinary judgment of God, that, in consequence of a part of the army having been destroyed by a plague during the war in Egypt, Sennacherib returned into his own dominions. So great a number of persons dying in one night cannot be attributed to a plague; and the father of lies, with his wonted cunning, has turned aside into Egypt the blessing which God bestowed on his Church. The event itself cries aloud that Jerusalem was miraculously rescued, as it were, out of the midst of destruction; especially since Isaiah had already delivered that message by which God testified, in a manner which could not be mistaken, that God would bestow this deliverance on the Jews and not on the Egyptians.
And slew in the camp ofthe Assyrians. That no one may ascribe the miracle to natural causes, it is expressly added, that so great a multitude was slain by the hand of the angel. Nor is it a new thing for the Lord to make use of the ministractions of angels to promote the safety of believers, for whose advantage he appointed all the armies of heaven; and it tends greatly to confirm our faith when we learn that an infinite number of guardians keep watch over us. (Psa 91:11.) The Lord alone, indeed, is of himself able, and undoubtedly he alone preserves us; for the angels may be regarded as his hand, and on that account they are called “principalities and powers.” (Rom 8:38; Eph 1:21.) But it contributes much to aid our weakness that he hath appointed heavenly messengers to be our defenders and guardians. Yet all the praise is due to God alone, of whom the angels are only instruments; and therefore we must beware of falling into the superstition of the Papists, who, by their absurd worship of angels, ascribe to them that power which belongs to God; an error with which we know that some very learned men in all ages have been chargeable. Whether it was done by the hand of one angel or of many angels, we cannot absolutely ascertain, nor is it a matter of great importance; for the Lord can do it as easily by one angel as by a thousand, and does not make use of their agency as if he needed the assistance of others, but. rather, as we have formerly said, in order to support our weakness. Yet it is more probable, and agrees better with the words of the Prophet, that a single angel was commissioned to execute this judgment, as in the ancient redemption an angel passed through the whole of Egypt to slay the firstborn. (Exo 12:29.) Although God sometimes executes his vengeance by means of evil angels, yet he chose one of his willing servants, that by means of him he might provide for the safety of the Church.
A hundred and eighty-five thousand. That the army was so vast need not make us wonder, as ignorant people do, who reckon it to be incredible and fabulous when they are told that so great a multitude went into the field of battle, because we are accustomed to carry on war with much smaller troops. But that the case was very different with eastern nations, is fully testified by historians and by wellknown transactions of the present day. Nor ought we to be astonished at the vast forces which they led into battle, for they are much more capable of enduring heat, and toil, and hunger, and are satisfied with a much smaller portion of food, and do not care about those luxuries by which our soldiers in the present day are corrupted.
As to the way and manner of the slaughter, this passage gives no definite statement. The Jews conjecture that the soldiers were struck by thunder, but they do so without any authority or probable evidence; for, being bold in contriving fables, they unwarrantably affirm as certain whatever comes into their mind, as if it were supported by some history.
Behold, they were all dead corpses. That the slaughter was not done so openly as the Jews allege is very evident from this narrative, which states that they were lying dead. Now, if they had been struck by a thunderbolt, every person must have known it, and it would not have been omitted by the Prophet. This might serve to refute the conjecture of the Jews, but I choose rather to leave the matter doubtful. It is enough that the Lord, having determined to save Jerusalem from the hand of the Assyrian, cut off his army by a sudden death, without any agency of man.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
5. THE PHENOMENON
TEXT: Isa. 37:36-38
36
And the angel of Jehovah went forth, and smote in the camps of the Assyrians a hundred and fourscore and five thousand; and when men arose early in the morning, behold, these were all dead bodies.
37
So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh.
38
And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword; and they escaped into the land of Ararat. And Esar-haddon his son reigned in his stead.
QUERIES
a.
How did the angel of the Lord kill so many?
b.
Why did Sennacheribs sons kill him?
PARAPHRASE
That night the angel of the Lord went out to the camp of the Assyrian army and killed 185,000 warriors. When those who were still alive awakened in the morning they beheld the terrible sight of all the dead bodies strewn throughout their camp. Then Sennacherib, king of Assyria, set out to leave and he went immediately, returning to his own country, Nineveh. A number of years later, while he was worshipping in the temple of Nisroch his god, his sons Adrammelech and Sharezer assassinated him with their swords. They escaped into the land of Ararat, and Esar-haddon, another of Sennacheribs sons became king.
COMMENTS
Isa. 37:36-37 DEPARTURE: This epilogue is an historical record of the fulfillment of all of Isaiahs prophecies of the failure of the Assyrian empire to destroy the covenant people of God. The only possible way God could carry out His promise to deliver Jerusalem and Palestine from the Assyrian was by supernatural intervention (either directly or indirectly through providence). It is a matter of record (see also 2Ki. 19:35-37, and 2Ch. 32:20-23), that God intervened supernaturally and directly. An angel (Heb. maleak) of Jehovah (Heb. Yahweh) went into the Assyrian army camp and killed 185,000 soldiers. The account in 2 Kings 19 records that the slaying took place the same night Sennacheribs message of arrogant blasphemy was delivered to Hezekiah. How would the angel of the Lord perform such a herculean task? This event reminds the Bible student of the destroying angel of Exo. 12:12-23 and 2Sa. 24:1-16. The ministry of angels is spectacular and comprehensive in the Biblical record (see our special study, The Mystery and Ministry of Angels, commentary on Daniel, College Press, p. 387404.) One angel had the power to restrain Persia and Greece (cf. Dan. 10:15-21). One angel has the power to harm a third of the earth (Revelation 8, 9). God is able to make His angels wind and fire (Heb. 1:7), and sends them forth as ministering spirits to serve for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation (Heb. 1:14). Angels do not necessarily have to take human form to do Gods service. They may serve in any form, wind, fire, disease, pestilence, war, famine, or whatever suits Gods purposes. We simply do not know how the angel of the Lord smote 185,000 men in one night. The Hebrew verb yaceh generally means to smite with a disease. America suffered approximately 50,000 war deaths in the more than two years of war in Korea. There were over 55,000 American soldiers slain in the over ten years of war in Viet Nam. With all mans modern technology and massive destructive powers 185,000 dead in a single night still seems a staggering number.
The annals of King Sennacherib make no mention of a disaster to his troops in Palestine. However, there is an interesting tradition preserved by Herodotus (II, 141) which relates that Sennacherib, king of the Assyrians and the Arabians, led a great army against Egypt. This military move seems to have been subsequent to the subjugation of Philistia and Judea, and to have been a final stroke to secure one of the ultimate objects of his expeditionthe conquest of Egypt. The tradition states that the Egyptian army was made up of traders, artisans, and merchants, and that in great fear they encamped at Pelusium, within range of the enemy (Assyrians). The Assyrians camp was completely overrun by an army of field mice, which gnawed apart all of their leather trappings, such as bowstrings, quivers, and shield-straps. On the next morning with only fragments of weapons, the Assyrian troops were routed, put to flight, and many of them slain. This tradition probably has some basis in fact and is an echo of some calamity to the Assyrian army. Some have suggested the mice may have carried bubonic plague, which is both swift and deadly in its working. When Sennacherib and the remainder of his army awoke in the morning the scene must have stunned them. Death on such a massive, sudden scale would cause first, dumbfoundedness, then fear, then, perhaps, chaos. The Hebrew language is forcefuland behold! all of them, corpses, dead ones! What else could Sennacherib conclude but that a Power greater than he and his army had visited during the night. This great catastrophe had happened so unexpectedly, so silently, so suddenly. No one had awakened during the night when it was happening. This was no place for Sennacherib. He would not dare go boasting to Hezekiah now. He had never before suffered such an inglorious defeat. So he left Judea. His departure is stated in the Hebrew language in short, rapid terms, And he set out, and he went, and he returned to Nineveh.
Although Sennacherib subjugated the entire eastern coastline of the Mediterranean Sea, carried off a vast amount of booty, and levied tribute on the conquered cities and provinces, there is no hint in his records during the remaining 20 years of his reign that he ever again visited this territory. Nor does the Babylonian chronicler of this period mention any such campaign. It seems that some specter haunted his memory and chilled his ambition regarding the final conquest of Egypt.
Isa. 37:38 DEATH: Sennacherib lived another 20 years after he left Judea. Then one day as he was worshipping in the temple of his god, Nisroch (which Edward J. Young thinks is an intentional corruption of Marduk), he is slain by two of his sons who apparently are attempting an insurrection. Sennacheribs son, Esar-haddon, in an inscription found by archaeologists at the Dog River near Beirut, Lebanon, tells of this event (see our comments, Isaiah, Vol. I, pg. 189190). Hezekiah worshipped his God and Jehovah delivered him from his enemies. Sennacherib worshipped his god and found not deliverance but assassination. The two assassins did not gain the throne. They had to flee for their own lives to the land of Ararat (modern Armenia). Esar-haddon, another son of Sennacherib, succeeded to the throne of Assyria, eventually restored the city of Babylon, conquered Egypt, imported foreigners into Samaria, forced Manasseh (Hezekiahs son) to pay heavy tribute to help build Esar-haddons palace in Nineveh, and extended the Assyrian empire to its greatest power. In a second Egyptian campaign, Esar-haddon died and his son, the famous Assurbanipal, the one who built the great library from which archaeologists get most of their Assyrian artifacts, succeeded him.
QUIZ
1.
Where else in the Bible does God use angels to kill people?
2.
What form may angels take to do their work of killing?
3.
What tradition from antiquity may be a parallel to the Biblical account of the slaughter of the Assyrian army?
4.
How did Sennacherib come to his end?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(36) Then the angel of the Lord.The words do not excluderather, as interpreted by 1Ch. 21:14, they implythe action of some form of epidemic disease, dysentery or the plague, such as has not seldom turned the fortunes of a campaign, spreading, it may be, for some days, and then, aggravated by atmospheric conditions, such as the thunderstorm implied in Isa. 29:6; Isa. 30:27-30, culminating in one night of horror. History, as written from the modern stand-point, would dwell on the details of the pestilence. To Isaiah, who had learnt to see in the winds the messengers of God (Psa. 104:4), it was nothing else than the angel of the Lord. So he would have said of the wreck of the Armada, Afflavit Deus et dissipantur inimici or of Napoleons retreat from Moscow, He sendeth forth his ice like morsels: who is able to abide his frost (Psa. 147:17). The Assyrian records, as might be expected, make no mention of the catastrophe, but a singular parallel is presented by the account which Herodotus gives (ii. 141), on the authority of the Egyptian priests, of the destruction of Sennacheribs army when he invaded Egypt, then under the rule of Sethon, a priest of Ptha or Hephstos. The priest-king prayed to his gods, and the Assyrian army, then encamped before Pelusium, were attacked by myriads of field-mice, who gnawed the straps of quivers, bows, and shields, and so made all their weapons useless, and led to their taking flight. Therefore, the historian adds, there stood a statue of Sethon in the Temple of Hephaestos at Memphis, with a mouse in one hand and with the inscription, Whosoever looks at me let him fear the gods. Some writers (e.g., Ewald and Canon Rawlinson) have been led by this to the conclusion that the pestilence fell on Sennacheribs army at Pelusium, and not at Jerusalem. It may be questioned, however, whether, even admitting that the narrative in its present form may be later than the exile, the probabilities are not in favour of the Biblical record, compiled as it was by writers who had documents and inherited traditions, rather than of the travellers tales which the vergers of Egyptian temples told to the good Herodotus.
In the camp of the Assyrians.Josephus (Bell. Jud., v. 7, 2) names a site in the outskirts of Jerusalem which in his time still bore this name. The narrative of Isaiah leaves room for a considerable interval between his prophecy and the dread work of the destroyer (2Ki. 19:35). In that night does not necessarily imply immediate sequence, the demonstrative adjective being used, like the Latin iste, or ille, for that memorable night.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Yahweh Reveals His Omnipotence And His Promise Is Fulfilled ( Isa 37:36-38 ).
Having made His ‘boasts’ Yahweh now fulfils them, so much so that within one night the army of Assyria is decimated, and not by a human hand.
Isa 37:36
‘And the angel of Yahweh went out and smote in the camp of the Assyrians one hundred and eighty five thousand, and when men arose in the morning they were all dead corpses.’
In response to Yahweh’s words the vast army of Assyria was decimated by the Angel of Yahweh, that is, by Yahweh Himself acting through His ‘angel’, His ‘other self’. Compare here 2Sa 24:15-17 where a similarly described occurrence was through pestilence. The comparison might suggest that this also was through pestilence. Whether this took place outside Jerusalem or whether it was in the main camp at Libnah, or even in both, we are not told.
Interestingly enough Herodotus speaks of large numbers of vermin being connected with the camp of Assyria around this time when he speaks of ‘a multitude of field mice which by night devoured all the quivers and bows of the enemy, and all the straps by which they held their shields — next morning they commenced their flight and great numbers fell as they had no arms with which to defend themselves.’ This reflects a plague of vermin which resulted in disaster. Knowing nothing about Bubonic plague the source probably sought some rational explanation of the decimation of the army, for the rats who spread the plague would also eat the edible parts of any armour.
‘One hundred and eighty five thousand’ might signify one hundred and eighty five military units, for eleph could mean ‘a military unit, a captain’. It is unlikely that anyone would count the number of dead in such a situation, while the loss of a certain number of military units would certainly be noted.
We know little about the Assyrian encounter with the Egyptian army. Sennacherib’s account, while claiming victory, is very guarded and his description of the after effects limited to the capture during the battle of certain Egyptian and Ethiopian charioteers and nobles. Had it been a resounding victory he would undoubtedly have said much more. If in fact the Egyptian army came on them after the plague had done its work (as Herodotus words possibly suggests), and after the rumour of Isa 37:6 had reached them, and they were in the process of withdrawal, we can appreciate what a mixed up affair it must have been. We might gather from the description that the battle was a stalemate, and sufficient to hasten the Assyrian withdrawal and ensure their non-return for some time.
Isa 37:37
‘So Sennacherib, king of Assyria, departed, and went, and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh.’
The overall result of his loss of men was that Sennacherib returned to Nineveh with his army. Note the fourfold verbs ‘departed, and went, and returned, and dwelt’, indicating something doubly witnessed and therefore certain. Hezekiah and Jerusalem were able to return to normal life.
Isa 37:38
‘And it came about that as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer, his sons, smote him with the sword, and they escaped into the land of Ararat. And Esarhaddon his son reigned instead of him.’
Finally we learn of the assassination of Sennacherib, as God had declared (Isa 37:7). This took place through members of his own family. Of course he would have many sons with many different loyalties (always the problem of having too many wives) and attempts at the throne would explain such an assassination. Alternately they may have been gaining revenge for some injury done to them or their families. These were not his actual heirs who in fact would seek to track down the murderers and kill them.
So these three verses are a summary indicating the fulfilment of what God had said He would do and more (Isa 37:7). They glorify Yahweh. On His own He had smitten and defeated the Assyrian army, on His own he had caused Sennacherib to leave His land and return to Nineveh, and on His own He had arranged the assassination of him there. To the author it is irrelevant when these things happened. What mattered was that they did happen. In point of fact the assassination took place twenty years later (unless with some we see two invasions by Assyria, the one ending in the treaty that was made (2Ki 18:14-16), and the other a later act of rebellion. Assyrian records are not intact for this period).
‘Ararat.’ That is Urartu as found in Assyrian inscriptions. It was in the neighbourhood of Lake Van in Armenia and was at this time enjoying a brief revival of strength after its battering by the Cimmerians. The sons clearly saw it as a safe refuge from the wrath of Esarhaddon, Sennacherib’s heir.
The house of Nisroch may possibly be the Temple of Nusku at Nineveh. (This assumes a waw changed to a resh – Nswk becomes Nsrk – whether deliberate or accidental. Although waw and resh are very similar in Hebrew, it is quite possible that the change was deliberate. Such changes were frequently made, sometimes in order to indicate contempt, and at others in order to bring out a specific idea. Note how Arad is also changed to Adra, and Nergal is dropped altogether. It is in order to demonstrate that these deities are unimportant and that their names do not matter). The names Adrammelech and Sharezer probably signify Arad-Melek and Nergal-shar-usur. (Arad and Nergal were two Assyrian deities). On the other hand a western Semitic name is a possibility for one of his sons and would not be unlikely, for Sennacherib was married to, among others, Naqi’a-Zakutu, a woman of western Semitic origin. Shar-usur means ‘he has protected the king’ and we would expect it to be preceded by the name of a god. The late Greek writer Abydenus refers to them as Adramelus and Nergilus.
The Babylonian Chronicle confirms this by telling us that ‘his son killed Sennacherib, king of Assyria, during a rebellion.’ The Nineveh Prism of Esarhaddon says, ‘my brothers raved and did everything that was not good against both gods and men and plotted evil, even drawing the sword within Nineveh against divine authority. They butted against each other like young goats in order to exercise the kingship.’ The Rassam cylinder of Ashurbanipal says ‘I smashed the rest of the people alive by the very figures of the protective deities between which they had smashed Sennacherib, my own grandfather.’
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Isa 37:36. Then the angel of the Lord went forth, and smote Sennacherib, flushed with his victories, and breathing destruction against the kingdom of Judah, which had withdrawn its allegiance from him, in his opprobrious message to Hezekiah and his subjects, not only inveighed against them, but blasphemously reviled even their God, bringing down the great God of Israel to the contemptible level of the gods of the nations; putting him to open defiance, and charging him with impotence to his face. This then was the time for the Lord to vindicate his honour, to assert his supremacy and power, and to make both parties sensible, that he was “glorious in might, equally able to help and to cast down, to save and to destroy.” Accordingly, this blasphemous tyrant had scarcely advanced to the holy city, before his forces were instantly broken, as appears from the verse before us. This tremendous act forced him to retreat with shame and confusion, and made it visible to all the nations, especially to the Jews, that JEHOVAH was a God “mighty in strength, and excellent in power:” that he was truly, what he styled himself, “The Lord of Hosts;” and that there was no other God that could deliver after this sort. Josephus asserts, that this destruction was occasioned by a pestilential disease: Antiq. lib. x. c. 2. But his authority, says Vitringa, in matters of this kind, is of no great weight. It is my opinion, continues he, that in a dreadful tempest, raised by this destroying angel, these men were killed by lightning; their bodies being burnt within, while their outward garments were untouched. See ch. Isa 10:16 Isa 29:6 Isa 30:30 and Psa 76:8 which, probably, was composed upon this occasion. We have in prophane history accounts of remarkable destructions by lightning. See Diodor. lib 11. Justin, lib. xxiv. c. 8. and Pausan. Enaticis, lib. i. p. 5.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
6. THE DELIVERANCE.
Isa 37:36-38
36Then the angel of the Lord went forth, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred and fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses. 37So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh. 38And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword; and they escaped into the land of 45Armenia: and Esar-haddon his son reigned in his stead.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1. Then the angelin his stead.
Isa 37:36-38. In 2Ki 19:35 it is said: And it came to pass that night that the angel, etc. If these additional words were supplied by some later copyist or glossarist, it is incomprehensible how they do not appear in both texts. For whoever made the addition must have wished to be credited. But in order to credibility both documents must agree in this respect. Or if it be assumed that these words were originally in the Isaiah text, but were omitted by some one who could not harmonize them with the view of Isa 37:29; then the question arises: why did not the same one omit the words at 2 Kings 19.? We must therefore hold that the words in 2 Kings 19 are genuine, and that the Author of our text omitted them, as he has done much beside, because they appeared to him superfluous or obscure. Of course, on a first view, this datum may appear strange. The events narrated in Isa 37:9-35 are unmarked by any data to indicate the time they required. Thus it may appear that they followed in quick succession, and that there is left no room for the battle between Sennacherib and Tirhaka, if the 185,000 were destroyed the night following Isaiahs response. Yet that battle must have occurred between the announcement of Tirhakas approach (Isa 37:9) and the destruction of the 185,000.
According to the inscriptions on the hexagon cylinder (Schrader, p. 171) and on the Kujundschick bulls (ibid. p. 184), the battle of Altaku took place even before the payment of tribute by Hezekiah. But Schrader is undoubtedly correct in remarking (p. 190): he (Sennacherib) purposely displaces the chronological order and concludes with the statement of the rich tribute, as if this stamped its seal on the whole, whereas we know from the Bible that this tribute was paid while the great king was encamped at Lacish, and before the battle of Altaku (2Ki 18:14). The Assyrian documents, therefore, cannot prevent us from placing the battle in the period between Isa 37:9-36. But it could not have been attended with decisive results. For had Sennacherib sustained a decisive defeat, he must have retreated, and the destruction of the 185,000 would not have been necessary. On the contrary, had he conquered, then the Egyptians must have retreated, of which we have no trace. Moreover the Assyrian account of the battle sounds pretty modest. For though it speaks of a defeat of the Egyptians, and of the capture of the charioteer and sons of the Egyptian king, and of the charioteer of the king of Meroe, yet there is wanting that further statement of the number of prisoners taken, the chariots captured, etc., statements that otherwise never fail to be made. Schrader also concludes from this that it must have been a Pyrrhus victory, if a victory at all. According to Isa 31:8, Assyria was even not to fall by the sword of man. The Lord had reserved him for Himself.
If the battle of Altaku occurred as we have said, then it follows that the events narrated, Isa 37:9-36, cannot have occurred in such very rapid succession. In that night, 2Ki 19:35, therefore does not refer to a point of time immediately near the total events previously narrated. It seems to me to relate only to the day in which Isaiah gave his response. When Sennacherib heard of the approach of Tirhaka (Isa 37:9) he did not necessarily send off at once his message to Hezekiah. He had likely more important matters on hand. It sufficed for his object if he sent his messengers two or three days later. Then the messengers would require several days to reach Jerusalem. If, then, on the same day [of its receipt] Hezekiah spread the letter of the Assyrian before the Lord, still it is not at all to be assumed that the response immediately followed. That could not follow sooner than the Lord commissioned the Prophet. But the Lord postponed His response to the moment when the fulfilment could follow on the heels of the promise. It is apparent that, after days of anxious waiting, the facts of the comforting assurance and of the unspeakably glorious help, coming blow on blow, must have had a quite overpowering effect. It is, after all, but the Lords wise and usual way, in order to exercise men in faith and patience, to let them wait for His answer, that, when they have stood the trial, He may then let His help burst in on them mightily, to their greater joy (comp. Psa 22:3; Pro 13:12; Jer 42:7; 1Sa 14:37; 1Sa 14:41 sq., etc.).
The mention of the angel of the Lord calls to mind the destruction of the first-born in Egypt (Exo 12:12 sqq.), and the plague in Jerusalem (2Sa 24:15 sqq.). In these three places the angel is said to smite (Exo 12:12 sq.; 2Sa 24:17 or Exo 12:13; Exo 12:23; 2Sa 24:21; 2Sa 24:25). He is therefore designated as destruction (Exo 12:13; Exo 12:23; 2Sa 24:21; 2Sa 24:25). But in 2Sa 24:15 the destruction wrought by the angel is expressly called , pest, which word is employed by Amo 4:10, probably with reference to that destruction of the first-born. Thus, then, in our passage a pest is to be understood as the sword with which the angel smote the host of Assyria; to the rejection of other explanations, such as a tempest, a defeat by the enemy, or forsooth poisoning (comp. Winer, R. W. B., Art. Hezekiah). Even that plague in Davids time carried off in a short space (probably in less than a day, according as one understands 2Sa 24:15) 70,000 men in Palestine. Other examples of great pest-catastrophes in ancient and modern times, none of which however equal what is told here, see in Gesen. and Delitzsch. What is told here receives indirect confirmation from Herod. (II. 141), who narrates that Sanacharibos, king of the Arabians and Assyrians was compelled to retreat before king Sethos at Pelusium, because swarms of field mice had gnawed away the leather work of the Assyrian arms. As a monument of this victory there stands in the temple of Hephaestos [Vulcan], whose priest Sethos was, a stone statue of this king with a mouse on his hand, and the superscription . This superscription Herodotus accounts for, by narrating that this king in his necessity before the battle prayed to his god, and received the assurance of divine help. If this be perhaps a trace that the overthrow of Sennacherib was recognized as evidently a demonstration of divine help, so, too, the mouse is probably a reminiscence of the rescuing plague. For the hieoroglyphics employ the mouse as the symbol of wasting and dsestruction; so that the narrative of Herodotus contains probably only the signification of the mouse supporting statue ascribed to it by those of later times. This combination was first made by J. D. Michaelis, who has been followed by Gesen. [?], Hitzig, Thenius [Barnes, J. A. Alex., per contra see Baehr, 2 Kings 19]. Comp. Leyrer in Herz., R.-Encycl. XI. p. 411.
Though the plague is a natural agent, still the great number carried off in one night is something wonderful. It appears inadmissible to me to assume with Hensler and others (Delitzsch, too,) a longer prevalence of the plague. The deliverance of Israel was not to come about by the sword of Egypt, nor by a natural event of a common sort. Both Israel and the heathen must recognize the finger of God, that every one may fear Him and trust in Him alone. Comp. Isa 10:24 sqq.; Isa 14:24-27; Isa 17:12-14; Isa 29:1-8; Isa 30:7-15 sqq., 30 sqq.; Isa 31:1-9; Isa 33:1-4; Isa 33:10 sqq., 22 sqq. The subject of is the surviving Assyrians, as those who actually in the morning came upon the corpses. In is evidently to be made prominent the notion of inability to act, especially to fight. The strong warriors of Sennacherib were become motionless, harmless corpses. The , as has often been remarked, recalls Cicerosabiit, evasit, excessit, erupit. The three verbs depict the haste of the retreat. In and dwelt at Nineveh the verb has manifestly the meaning of remaining, comp. Gen 21:16; Gen 22:5; Gen 24:55; Exo 24:14, etc. In fact, after this overthrow, Sennacherib reigned still twenty years, and undertook five more campaigns. But these were all directed toward the north or south of Nineveh. He came no more to the west (Schrader, l. c. p. 205). What is narrated, therefore, in Isa 37:38, did not occur till twenty years after this.
According to Oppert (Exped. scient. en Mesop. II. p. 339) means binder, joiner, and as the prayers that have been found addressed to him have for their subject chiefly the blessing of marriage, the conclusion seems justified that Nisroch corresponded to Hymen of the Greeks and Romans. Schrader assents to this view, only that, according to him, the root sarak in Assyrian means to vouchsafe, to dispense, rather than to bind, so that would more properly be the good, the gracious or the dispenser. An inscription of Asurbanipal, the son and successor of Esar-haddon, in which he narrates his mounting the throne in the month Iyyar, calls this month the month of Nisroch, the lord of humanity (Schrader, p. 208). In the list of gods found in the library of Asurbanipal (comp. on Isa 46:1, and Schrader in the Stud. and Krit., 1874, II. p. 336 sq.), the name of Nisroch is not found. While Sennacherib worshipped in the house of his god, his two sons slew him. An awful deed: parricide and sacrilege at the same moment, each aggravating the other. Such was the end of the haughty Sennacherib who had dared to blaspheme the God of Israel. He, who had boasted that no god nor people could resist him, must fall before the swords of his sons. He that regarded himself unconquerable by the help of his idols, must suffer death in the temple and in the presence of his idol. [How different the experience of Hezekiah in the temple of Jehovah, and the fate of Sennacherib in the temple of his idol!Tr.]. Hendewerk cites, as parallel instances of monarchs murdered while at prayer, the cases of Caliph Omar, and the emperor Leo V. No mention has been discovered thus far, in the Assyrian inscriptions of the murder of Sennacherib, whereas they do inform us of the murder of his father Sargon. Polyhystor, among profane historians, relates (in Euseb.Armen. Chron. ed. Mai, p. 19) the murder of Sennacherib. But he only names Ardumusanus, i.e., Adrammelech as the murderer. Abydenus, on the other hand (ibid. p. 25) makes Nergilus the son of Sennacherib succeed the latter. This one was murdered by his brother Adramelus, and the latter in turn by his brother Axerdis. Here Adramelus is evidently = Adrammelech, Axerdis = Esarhaddon. Nergilus, however, according to Schraders sagacious conjecture, = Sarezer. For Sarezer in Assyrian is Sar-usur, i.e., protect the king. But to this Imperative is prefixed the name of the god that protects, so that the complete name may sound, sometimes Bil–sar–usur, sometimes, Asur–sar–usur, sometimes Nirgal–sar–usur, etc. But the name may also be used in an abbreviated form, viz.: with the omission of the name of the god: so that thus this Sarezer when the name in full was spoken, may have been Nirgal–sar–usur.Abydenus then may have preserved the first half of this name, while the Bible preserved the latter half (Schrader, p. 206) Adrammelech occurs as the name of a god 2Ki 17:31. The word in Assyrian is Adar-malik, i.e. Adar is prince. (Schrader, p. 168).
According to Armenian tradition, the two sons of Sennacherib were to have been offered in sacrifice by their father (see Delitzschin loc.). According to the book of Tobit (Isa 1:18 sqq.), Sennacherib wreaked his vengeance for the overthrow he suffered on the captives of the Ten Tribes. On the other hand he was a hated person by the Jews, whence also they held his murderers in high honor. Later Rabbins were of the opinion that these became Jews, and in the middle ages their tombs were pointed out in Galilee (comp. Ewald, Hist. d. V. Isr. III. p. 690, Anm.). Our text says the parricides escaped to the land of Ararat, i.e., Central Armenia The Assyrian for Ararat is Ur–ar–ti. The word often occurs in the lists of government as the designation of Armenia (comp. Schrader, p. 10, 324, lines 3740, 42, 44; p. 329, lines 31, 39). According to Armenian historians, the posterity of those two sons of the king long existed in the two princely races of the Sassunians, and Arzerunians. From the latter descended the Byzantine Emperor Leo the Armenian, from whom in turn a long row of Byzantine rulers were descended. Not less than ten Byzantine Emperors, if such were the case, may be regarded as the posterity of Sennacherib: so that thus the prophecy of Nah 1:14 received its fulfilment only very late. Delitzsch, in loc.; Ritter, Erdkunde, X. p. 585 sq. Esar-haddon in Assyrian is Asur-ah-iddin, i.e., Asur gives a brother (Schrader, p. 208). According to the canon of regents (ibid. p. 320), Esarhaddon ascended the throne in the year 681 b. c. Ewald places the date of Isaiahs entrance on his office under Uzziah in the year 757, his death under Manasseh in the year 695 (Gesch. d. V. Isr. III. p. 844, 846). Delitzsch, following Duncker sets the beginning of Esar-haddons reign in the year 693, and admits that in this case Isaiah must have been almost ninety years old. Now in as much as, according to the very certain data of the Assyrian documents, Isaiah, if he lived when Esar-haddons reign began, must have become almost 100 years old, one must recognize at least in Isa 37:37 sq., an addition by a later hand, which also Delitzsch admits. [The reader that desires to inform himself more particularly on these questions of chronology, and to see a defence of Isaiahs data, is hereby referred to BirksComm. on Isa., Appendix III., The Assyrian Reigns in Isaiah. The same article will serve as an introduction to the English literature on the subject.Tr.].
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. On Isa 36:4 sqq. Haec proprie est Satanae lingua et sunt non Rabsacis sed ipsissimi Diaboli verba, quibus non muros urbis, sed medullam Ezechiae, hoc est, tenerrimam ejus fidem oppugnat.Luther. In this address the chief-butler, Satan performs in the way he uses when he would bring about our apostacy. 1) He urges that we are divested of all human support, Isa 36:5; Isaiah 2) We are deprived of divine support, Isa 36:7; Isaiah 3) God is angry with us because we have greatly provoked Him by our sins, Isa 36:7; Isaiah 4) He decks out the splendor, and power of the wicked, Isa 36:8-9; Isaiah 5) He appeals to Gods word, and knows how to turn and twist it to his uses. Such poisonous arrows were used by Satan against Christ in the desert, and may be compared with this light (Mat 4:2 sqq.). One needs to arm himself against Satans attack by Gods word, and to resort to constant watching and prayer.Cramer.
The Assyrian urges four particulars by which he would destroy Hezekiahs confidence, in two of which he was right and in two wrong. He was right in representing that Hezekiah could rely neither on Egypt, nor on his own power. In this respect he was a messenger of God and announcer of divine truth. For everywhere the word of God preaches the same (Isa 30:1-3; Isa 31:1-3; Jer 17:5; Psa 118:8-9; Psa 146:3, etc.). But it is a merited chastisement if rude and hostile preachers must preach to us what we were unwilling to believe at the mild and friendly voice of God. But in two particulars the Assyrian was wrong, and therein lay Hezekiahs strength. For just on this account the Lord is for him and against the Assyrian. These two things are, that the Assyrian asserts that Hezekiah cannot put his trust in the Lord, but rather he, the Assyrian is counseled by the Lord against Hezekiah. That, however, was a lie, and because of this lie, the corresponding truth makes all the deeper impression on Hezekiah, and reminds him how assuredly he may build on the Lord and importune Him. And when the enemy dares to say, that he is commissioned by the Lord to destroy the Holy Land, just that must bring to lively remembrance in the Israelite, that the Lord, who cannot lie, calls the land of Israel His land (Joel 4:2; Jer 2:7; Jer 16:18, etc.), and the people of Israel His people (Exo 3:7; Exo 3:10; Exo 5:1, etc.).
2. On Isa 36:12. [In regard to the indelicacy of this passage we may observe: 1) The Masorets in the Hebrew text have so printed the words used, that in reading it the offensiveness would be considerably avoided. 2) The customs, habits and modes of expression of people in different nations and times, differ. What appears indelicate at one time or in one country, may not only be tolerated, but common in another. 3) Isaiah is not at all responsible for the indelicacy of the language here. He is simply an historian. 4) It was of importance to give the true character of the attack which was made on Jerusalem. The coming of Sennacherib was attended with pride, insolence and blasphemy; and it was important to state the true character of the transaction, and to record just what was said and done. Let him who used the language, and not him who recorded it bear the blame.Barnes in loc.].
3. On Isa 36:18 sqq. Observandum hic, quod apud gentes olim viguerit adeo, ut quaevis etiam urbs peculiarem habuerit Deum tutelarem. Cujus ethnicismi exemplum vivum et spirans adhuc habemus apud pontificios, quibus non inscite objici potest illud Jeremiae: Quot civitates tibi, tot etiam Dei (Jer 2:28).Foerster.
4. On Isa 36:21. Answer not a fool according to his folly (Pro 26:4), much less the blasphemer, lest the flame of his wickedness be blown into the greater rage (Sir 8:3). Did not Christ the Lord answer His enemies, not always with words, but also with silence (Mat 26:62; Mat 27:14, etc.)? One must not cast pearls before swine (Mat 7:6). After Foerster and Cramer.
5. On Isa 36:21. Est aureus textus, qui docet nos, ne cum Satana disputemus. Quando enim videt, quod sumus ejus spectatores et auditores, tum captat occasionem majoris fortitudinis et gravius premit. Petrus dicit, eum circuire et quaerere, quem devoret. Nullum facit insidiarum finem. Tutissimum autem est non respondere, sed contemnere eum.Luther.
6. [On Isa 37:1-7. Rabshakeh intended to frighten Hezekiah from the Lord, but it proves that he frightens him to the Lord. The wind, instead of forcing the travelers coat from him, makes him wrap it the closer about him. The more Rabshakeh reproaches God, the more Hezekiah studies to honor Him. On Isa 37:3. When we are most at a plunge we should be most earnest in prayer. When pains are most strong, let prayers be most lively. Prayer is the midwife of mercy, that helps to bring it forth.M. Henry, in loc.]
7. On Isa 37:2 sqq. Hezekiah here gives a good example. He shows all princes, rulers and peoples what one ought to do when there is a great and common distress, and tribulation. One ought with sackcloth, i. e., with penitent humility, to bring prayers, and intercessions to the Lord that He would look on and help.
8. On Isa 37:6 sq. God takes to Himself all the evil done to His people. For as when one does a great kindness to the saints, God appropriates it to Himself, so, too, when one torments the saints, it is an injury done to God, and He treats sin no other way than as if done to Himself. He that torments them torments Him (Isa 64:9). Therefore the saints pray: Arise, O God, plead thine own cause: remember how the foolish man reproacheth thee daily (Psa 74:22).Cramer.
9. On Isa 37:7. God raises up against His enemies other enemies, and thus prepares rest for His own people. Example: the Philistines against Saul who pursued David, 1Sa 23:27.Cramer.
10. On Isa 37:14. Vitringa here cites the following from Bonfin Rerum Hungar. Dec. III. Lib. VI. p. 464, ad annum Isaiah 1444: Amorathes, cum suos laborare cerneret et ab Vladislao rege non sine magna caede fugari, depromtum e sinu codicem initi sanctissime foederis explicat intentis in coelum oculis. Haec sunt, inquit ingeminans, Jesu Christe, foedera, quae Christiani tui mecum percussere. Per numen tuum sanctum jurarunt, datamque sub nomine tuo fidem violarunt, perfide suum Deum abnegarunt. Nunc Christe, si Deus es (ut ajunt et nos hallucinamur), tuas measque hic injurias, te quaeso, ulciscere et his, qui sanctum tuum nomen nondum agnovere, violatae fidei poenas ostende. Vix haec dixerat . cum proelium, quod anceps ac dubium diu fuerat, inclinare coepit, etc.
[The desire of Hezekiah was not primarily his own personal safety, or the safety of his kingdom. It was that Jehovah might vindicate His great and holy name from reproach, and that the world might know that He was the only true God. We have here a beautiful model of the object which we should have in view when we come before God. This motive of prayer is one that is with great frequency presented in the Bible. Comp. Isa 42:8; Isa 43:10; Isa 43:13; Isa 43:25; Deu 32:39; Psa 83:18; Psa 46:10; Neh 9:6; Dan 9:18-19. Perhaps there could have been furnished no more striking proof that Jehovah was the true God, than would be by the defeat of Sennacherib. The time had come when the great Jehovah could strike a blow which would be felt on all nations, and carry the terror of His name, and the report of His power throughout the earth. Perhaps this was one of the main motives of the destruction of that mighty army.Barnes, on Isa 37:2].
11. On Isa 37:15. Fides Ezechiae verba confirmata magis ac magis crescit. Ante non ausus est orare, jam orat et confutat blasphemias omnes Assyrii. Adeo magna vis verbi est, ut longe alius per verbum, quod Jesajas ei nunciari jussit, factus sit.Luther.
12. On Isa 37:17. [It is bad to talk proudly and profanely, but it is worse to write so, for this argues more deliberation and design, and what is written spreads further and lasts longer, and does the more mischief. Atheism and irreligion, written, will certainly be reckoned for another day.M. Henry].
13. On Isa 37:21 sqq. [Those who receive messages of terror from men with patience, and send messages of faith to God by prayer, may expect messages of grace and peace from God for their comfort, even when they are most cast down. Isaiah sent a long answer to Hezekiahs prayer in Gods name, sent it in writing (for it was too long to be sent by word of mouth), and sent it by way of return to his prayer, relation being thereunto had: Whereas thou hast prayed to me, know, for thy comfort, that thy prayer is heard. Isaiah might have referred him to the prophecies he had delivered (particularly to that of chap. 10), and bid him pick out an answer from thence. The correspondence between earth and heaven is never let fall on Gods side.M. Henry.].
14. On Isa 37:31 sqq. This is a promise of great extent. For it applies not only to those that then remained, and were spared the impending destruction and captivity by the Assyrians, but to all subsequent times, when they should enjoy a deliverance; as after the Babylonish captivity, and after the persecutions of Antiochus. Yea, it applies even to New Testament times from the first to the last, since therein, in the order of conversion to Christ, the Jews will take root and bring forth fruit, and thus in the Jews (as also in the converted Gentiles) will appear in a spiritual and corporal sense, what God at that time did to their fields in the three following years.Starke.
15. On Isa 38:1. Isaiah, although of a noble race and condition, does not for that regard it disgraceful, but rather an honor, to be a pastor and visitor of the sick, I would say, a prophet, teacher and comforter of the sick. God save the mark! How has the world become so different in our day, especially in our evangelical church Let a family be a little noble, and it is regarded as a reproach and injury to have a clergyman among its relations and friends, not to speak of a son studying theology and becoming a servant of the church. I speak not of all; I know that some have a better mind; yet such is the common course. Jeroboams maxim must rather obtain, who made priests of the lowest of the people (1Ki 12:31). For thus the parsons may be firmly held in rein (sub ferula) and in political submission. It is not at all good where the clergy have a say, says an old state-rule of our Politicorum. Feuerlein, pastor in Nuremberg, in his Novissimorum primum, 1694, p. 553. The same quotes Spener: Is it not so, that among the Roman Catholics the greatest lords are not ashamed to stand in the spiritual office, and that many of them even discharge the spiritual functions? Among the Reformed, too, persons born of the noblest families are not ashamed of the office of preacher. But, it seems, we Lutherans are the only ones that hold the service of the gospel so low, that, where from a noble or otherwise prominent family an ingenium has an inclination to theological study, almost every one seeks to hinder him, or, indeed, afterwards is ashamed of his friendship, as if it were something much too base for such people, by which more harm comes to our church than one might suppose. That is to be ashamed of the gospel.
16. On Isa 38:1. [We see here the boldness and fidelity of a man of God. Isaiah was not afraid to go in freely and tell even a monarch that he must die. The subsequent part of the narrative would lead us to suppose that, until this announcement, Hezekiah did not regard himself as in immediate danger. It is evident here, that the physician of Hezekiah had not informed him of itperhaps from the apprehension that his disease would be aggravated by the agitation of his mind on the subject. The duty was, therefore, left, as it is often, to the minister of religiona duty which even many ministers are slow to perform, and which many physicians are reluctant to have performed.
No danger is to be apprehended commonly from announcing to those who are sick their true condition. Physicians and friends often err in this. There is no species of cruelty greater than to suffer a friend to lie on a dying bed under a delusion. There is no sin more aggravated than that of designedly deceiving a dying man, and flattering him with the hope of recovery, when there is a moral certainty that he will not and cannot recover. And there is evidently no danger to be apprehended from communicating to the sick their true condition. It should be done tenderly and with affection; but it should be done faithfully. I have had many opportunities of witnessing the effect of apprising the sick of their situation, and of the moral certainty that they must die. And I cannot now recall an instance in which the announcement has had any unhappy effect on the disease. Often, on the contrary, the effect is to calm the mind, and to lead the dying to look up to God, and peacefully to repose on Him. And the effect of that is always salutary. Barnes in loc.]
17. On Isa 38:2. It is an old opinion, found even in the Chald., that by the wall is meant the wall of the temple as a holy direction in which to pray, as the Mahometans pray in the direction of Mecca. But cannot mean that. Rather that is correct which is said by Forerius: Nolunt pii homines testes habere suarum lacrymarum, ut eas liberius fundant, neque sensu distrahi, cum orare Deum ex animo volunt.
18. On Isa 38:8 :
Non Deus est numen Parcarum carcere clausum.
Quale putabatur Stoicus esse Deus.
Ille potest Solis cursus inhibere volantes,
At veluti scopulos flumina stare facit.
Melanchthon.
19. On Isa 38:12. Beautiful parables that picture to us the transitoriness of this temporal life. For the parable of the shepherds tent means how restless a thing it is with us, that we have here no abiding place, but are driven from one locality to another, until at last we find a resting-spot in the church-yard. The other parable of the weavers thread means how uncertain is our life on earth. For how easily the thread breaks. Cramer. When the weavers work is progressing best, the thread breaks before he is aware. Thus when a man is in his best work, and supposes he now at last begins really to live, God breaks the thread of his life and lets him die. The rational heathen knew something of this when they, so to speak, invented the three goddesses of life (the three Parcas minime parcas) and included them in this little verse:
Clotho colum gestat, Lachesis trahit,
Atropos occat
But what does the weaver when the thread breaks? Does he stop his work at once? O no! He knows how to make a clever weavers knot, so that one cannot observe the break. Remember thereby that when thy life is broken off, yet the Lord Jesus, as a master artisan, can bring it together again at the last day. He will make such an artful, subtle weavers-knot as shall make us wonder through all eternity. It will do us no harm to have died. Ibid.Omnia sunt hominum tenui pendentia filo.
[As suddenly as the tent of a shepherd is taken down, folded up, and transferred to another place. There is doubtless the idea here that he would continue to exist, but in another place, as the shepherd would pitch his tent in another place. He was to be cut off from the earth, but he expected to dwell among the dead. The whole passage conveys the idea that he expected to dwell in another state. Barnes in loc.].
20. On Isa 38:17. [Note 1) When God pardons sin, He casts it behind His back as not designing to look upon it with an eye of justice and jealousy. He remembers it no more, to visit for it. The pardon does not make the sin not to have been, or not to have been sin, but not to be punished as it deserves. When we cast our sins behind our back, and take no care to repent of them, God sets them before His face, and is ready to reckon for them; but when we set them before our face in true repentance, as David did when his sin was ever before him, God casts them behind His back. 2) When God pardons sin, He pardons all, casts them all behind His back, though they have been as scarlet and crimson. 3) The pardoning of sin is the delivering the soul from the pit of corruption. 4) It is pleasant indeed to think of our recoveries from sickness when we see them flowing from the remission of sin; then the cause is removed, and then it is in love to the soul. M. Henry in loc.]
21. On Isa 38:18. [Cannot hope for thy truth. They are shut out from all the means by which Thy truth is brought to mind, and the offers of salvation are presented. Their probation is at an end; their privileges are closed; their destiny is sealed up. The idea is, it is a privilege to live because this is a world where the offers of salvation are made, and where those who are conscious of guilt may hope in the mercy of God. Barnes in loc.] God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2Pe 3:9). Such is the New Testament sense of these Old Testament words. For though Hezekiah has primarily in mind the preferableness of life in the earthly body to the life in Hades, yet this whole manner of representation passes away with Hades itself. But Hezekiahs words still remain true so far as they apply to heaven and hell. For of course in hell, the place of the damned, one does not praise God. But those that live praise Him. These, however, are in heaven. Since then God wills rather that men praise Him than not praise Him, so He is not willing that men should perish, but that all should turn to repentance and live.
22. On Isa 39:2. Primo (Deus) per obsidionem et bellum, deinde per gravem morbum Ezechiam servaverat, ne in praesumtionem laberetur. Nondum tamen vinci potuit antiquus serpens, sed redit et levat caput suum. Adeo non possumus consistere, nisi Deos nos affligat. Vides igitur hic, quis sit afflictionum usus, ut mortificent scilicet carnem, quae non potest res ferre secundas. Luther.
23. On Isa 39:7. God also punishes the misdeeds of the parents on the children (Exo 20:5) because the children not only follow the misdeeds of their parents, but they also increase and heap them up, as is seen in the posterity of Hezekiah, viz.: Manasseh and Amon.Cramer.
HOMILETICAL HINTS
[The reader is referred to the ample hints covering the same matter to be found in the volume on 2 Kings 18-20. It is expedient to take advantage of that for the sake of keeping the present volume within reasonable bounds. Therefore but a minimum is here given of what the Author offers, much of which indeed is but the repetition in another form of matter already given.Tr.]
1. On Isa 37:36. 1) The scorn and mockery of the visible world. 2) The scorn and mockery of the unseen world. Sermon of Domprediger Zahn in Halle, 1870.
2. On the entire 38. chapter, beside the 22 sermons in FEUERLEINS Novissimorum primum, there is a great number of homiletical elaborations of an early date; Walther Magirus, Idea mortis et vitae in two parts, the second of which contains 20 penitential and consolatory sermons on Isaiah 38. Danzig, 1640 and 1642. Daniel Schaller (Stendal) 4 sermons on the sick Hezekiah, on Isaiah 38. Magdeburg, 1611. Peter Siegmund Pape in Gott geheilighte Wochenpredigten, Berlin, 1701, 4 sermons. Jacob Tichlerus (Elburg) Hiskiae Aufrichtigkeit bewiesen in Gesundheit, Krankheit und Genesung, 18 sermons on Isaiah 38. (Dutch), Campen, 1636. These are only the principal ones.
3. On Isa 38:1. I will set my house in order. This, indeed, will not be hard for me to do. My debt account is crossed out; my best possession I take along with me; my children I commit to the great Father of orphans, to whom heaven and earth belongs, and my soul to the Lord, who has sued for it longer than a human age, and bought it with His blood. Thus I am eased and ready for the journey. Tholuck, Stunden der Andacht, p. 620.
4. On Isa 38:1. Now thou shouldest know that our word order his house has a very broad meaning. It comprehends reconciliation to God by faith, the final confession of sin, the last Lords Supper, the humble committing of the soul to the grace of the Lord, and to death and the grave in the hope of the resurrection. In one word: There is an ordering of the house above. In reliance on the precious merit of my Saviour, I order my house above in which I wish to dwell. Moreover taking leave of loved ones, and the blessing of them belongs to ordering the house. And finally order must be taken concerning the guardianship of children, the abiding of the widow, and the friend on whom she must especially lean in her loneliness, also concerning earthly bequests. Ahlfeld, Das Leben im Lichte des Wortes Gottes, Halle, 1867, p. 522.
5. On Isa 38:2-8. This account has much that seems strange to us Christians, but much, too, that quite corresponds to our Christian consciousness. Let us contemplate the difference between an Old Testament, and a New Testament suppliant, by noticing the differences and the resemblances. I. The resemblances. 1) Distress and grief there are in the Old, as in the New Testament (Isa 38:3). 2) Ready and willing to help beyond our prayers or comprehension (Isa 38:5-6) is the Lord in the Old as in the New Testament. II. The differences. 1) The Old Testament suppliant appealed to his having done nothing bad (Isa 38:3). The New Testament suppliant says: God be merciful to me a sinner, and Give me through grace for Christs sake what it pleases Thee to give me. 2) The Old Testament suppliant demands a sign (Isa 38:7-8; comp. Isa 38:22); the New Testament suppliant requires no sign but that of the crucified Son of man, for He knows that to those who bear this sign is given the promise of the hearing of all their prayers (Joh 16:23). 3) In Hezekiahs case, the prayer of the Old Testament suppliant is indeed heard (Isa 38:5), yet in general it has not the certainty of being heard, whereas the New Testament suppliant has this certainty.
Footnotes:
[45]Heb. Ararat.
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Isa 37:36-38
36Then the angel of the LORD went out and struck 185, 000 in the camp of the Assyrians; and when men arose early in the morning, behold, all of these were dead. 37So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed and returned home and lived at Nineveh. 38It came about as he was worshiping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons killed him with the sword; and they escaped into the land of Ararat. And Esarhaddon his son became king in his place.
Isa 37:36 the angel of the LORD went out This is similar to the personage of the death angel who represented YHWH’s presence in the last plague on Egypt in Exodus 11 and Exo 12:23; Exo 12:29 (also note 2Sa 24:16).
There is no grim reaper. YHWH controls life and death. It is hard to separate the sovereignty of God from conditions of a fallen world. This is not the world that God intended it to be. Death is the result of human rebellion. God knows, allows, and executes His will. Secondary causes, so important to us, were not part of the ancient worldview (i.e., Mat 6:25-27; Mat 10:28-31), where there was no distinction between the supernatural and natural.
SPECIAL TOPIC: THE ANGEL OF THE LORD
struck 185,000 in the camp of the Assyrians This was not before the walls of Jerusalem, but apparently some distance away at the Assyrian camp (cf. 2Ki 19:35). Herodotus, an ancient historian, records this plague and implies that it was related to rodents, possibly bubonic plague. This judgment did not kill the entire army. This very event is foreshadowed in Isa 31:8, where it is described as death by the sword of the LORD. However, here it seems to be a plague. Remember this is hyperbolic poetry, not historical narrative. Modern western readers are unduly affected by their own worldviews and read the Bible (an ancient eastern book) through the filter of their current understanding of history and literature, which always causes confusion and misunderstanding!
Isa 37:37 Nineveh This was the capital of Assyria and was located on the Tigris River.
Isa 37:38 Nisroch his god This is an unknown name.
1. The LXX translation of this is a spelling very similar to the god of the city of Asshur, who was the head of the Assyrian pantheon.
2. It is also possible that it is a misspelling of Nusku (BDB 652), the Babylonian and Assyrian god of light and fire who was worshiped at Haran and associated with the moon god (i.e., his son).
3. E. J. Young thinks it was an intentional corruption of the name Marduk. See James M. Freeman, Manners and Customs of the Bible, p. 182.
We know from historical documentation that there is a twenty-year gap between Isa 37:37-38. This prophecy was literally fulfilled in 681 B.C. when Sennacherib’s two sons assassinated him and the third son took the throne.
Esarhaddon This is one of the king’s sons who reigned in Assyria from 681-669 B.C.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Then, &c. Compare 2Ki 19:35-37.
they: i.e. the Israelites.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Isa 37:36-38
Isa 37:36-38
“And the angel of Jehovah went forth, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred and four score and five thousand; and when men arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead bodies. So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh. And it came to pass that as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword; and they escaped into the land of Ararat. And Esar-haddon his son reigned in his stead.”
Scholars make a point that the actual assassination of Sennacherib took place in 681 B.C., some twenty years after the events of this chapter; but, if this is indeed accurate, it does not contradict what is said here. The text merely states that “it came to pass.”
Tradition has a story that these two sons of Sennacherib who murdered him lived to found substantial dynasties in Armenia. Nothing is known of their motives for murdering their father, but it was evidently not for the sake of succeeding him in the throne. The identity of what god Sennacherib claimed and which he was in the act of worshipping when they killed him is not positively identified. “Nisroch might have been the title of some better-known deity.
Homer Hailey’s summary of this section is excellent:
“It is not impossible for Isaiah himself to have added this historical section. If he began his prophetic work at age 30, he could have lived unto the murder of Sennacherib, which was about sixty years from the beginning of Isaiah’s ministry. The account was probably added as Isaiah edited his book before his death. Two facts stand out clearly: (1) Through Isaiah, God declared what he would do, and (2) he did it; but how quickly was this remarkable deliverance forgotten by Manasseh, Hezekiah’s son, who was one of the most wicked kings of Judah!
Some love to speculate with regard to just how “the angel of the Lord” executed so many men so quickly. No dogmatic answer is possible; but Barnes pointed out that God usually employed natural means in achieving many of his great miracles, as, for example, in the instance of the “strong wind” that rolled back the waters of the Red Sea, or the terrible hail as one of the plagues in Egypt (Exo 9:22-25). His conclusion was that, “The most satisfactory explanation is that it was a great storm of hail, with thunder and lightning … This description in its suddenness, its terror, and its ruinous effects accords more nearly with the account of the destruction than any other speculation that has been made.
Isa 37:36-37 DEPARTURE: This epilogue is an historical record of the fulfillment of all of Isaiahs prophecies of the failure of the Assyrian empire to destroy the covenant people of God. The only possible way God could carry out His promise to deliver Jerusalem and Palestine from the Assyrian was by supernatural intervention (either directly or indirectly through providence). It is a matter of record (see also 2Ki 19:35-37, and 2Ch 32:20-23), that God intervened supernaturally and directly. An angel (Heb. maleak) of Jehovah (Heb. Yahweh) went into the Assyrian army camp and killed 185,000 soldiers. The account in 2 Kings 19 records that the slaying took place the same night Sennacheribs message of arrogant blasphemy was delivered to Hezekiah. How would the angel of the Lord perform such a herculean task? This event reminds the Bible student of the destroying angel of Exo 12:12-23 and 2Sa 24:1-16. The ministry of angels is spectacular and comprehensive in the Biblical record. One angel had the power to restrain Persia and Greece (cf. Dan 10:15-21). One angel has the power to harm a third of the earth (Revelation 8, 9). God is able to make His angels wind and fire (Heb 1:7), and sends them forth as ministering spirits to serve for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation (Heb 1:14). Angels do not necessarily have to take human form to do Gods service. They may serve in any form, wind, fire, disease, pestilence, war, famine, or whatever suits Gods purposes. We simply do not know how the angel of the Lord smote 185,000 men in one night. The Hebrew verb yaceh generally means to smite with a disease. America suffered approximately 50,000 war deaths in the more than two years of war in Korea. There were over 55,000 American soldiers slain in the over ten years of war in Viet Nam. With all mans modern technology and massive destructive powers 185,000 dead in a single night still seems a staggering number.
The annals of King Sennacherib make no mention of a disaster to his troops in Palestine. However, there is an interesting tradition preserved by Herodotus (II, 141) which relates that Sennacherib, king of the Assyrians and the Arabians, led a great army against Egypt. This military move seems to have been subsequent to the subjugation of Philistia and Judea, and to have been a final stroke to secure one of the ultimate objects of his expedition-the conquest of Egypt. The tradition states that the Egyptian army was made up of traders, artisans, and merchants, and that in great fear they encamped at Pelusium, within range of the enemy (Assyrians). The Assyrians camp was completely overrun by an army of field mice, which gnawed apart all of their leather trappings, such as bowstrings, quivers, and shield-straps. On the next morning with only fragments of weapons, the Assyrian troops were routed, put to flight, and many of them slain. This tradition probably has some basis in fact and is an echo of some calamity to the Assyrian army. Some have suggested the mice may have carried bubonic plague, which is both swift and deadly in its working. When Sennacherib and the remainder of his army awoke in the morning the scene must have stunned them. Death on such a massive, sudden scale would cause first, dumbfoundedness, then fear, then, perhaps, chaos. The Hebrew language is forceful-and behold! all of them, corpses, dead ones! What else could Sennacherib conclude but that a Power greater than he and his army had visited during the night. This great catastrophe had happened so unexpectedly, so silently, so suddenly. No one had awakened during the night when it was happening. This was no place for Sennacherib. He would not dare go boasting to Hezekiah now. He had never before suffered such an inglorious defeat. So he left Judea. His departure is stated in the Hebrew language in short, rapid terms, And he set out, and he went, and he returned to Nineveh.
Although Sennacherib subjugated the entire eastern coastline of the Mediterranean Sea, carried off a vast amount of booty, and levied tribute on the conquered cities and provinces, there is no hint in his records during the remaining 20 years of his reign that he ever again visited this territory. Nor does the Babylonian chronicler of this period mention any such campaign. It seems that some specter haunted his memory and chilled his ambition regarding the final conquest of Egypt.
Isa 37:38 DEATH: Sennacherib lived another 20 years after he left Judea. Then one day as he was worshipping in the temple of his god, Nisroch (which Edward J. Young thinks is an intentional corruption of Marduk), he is slain by two of his sons who apparently are attempting an insurrection. Sennacheribs son, Esar-haddon, in an inscription found by archaeologists at the Dog River near Beirut, Lebanon, tells of this event (see our comments, Isaiah, Vol. I, pg. 189-190). Hezekiah worshipped his God and Jehovah delivered him from his enemies. Sennacherib worshipped his god and found not deliverance but assassination. The two assassins did not gain the throne. They had to flee for their own lives to the land of Ararat (modern Armenia). Esar-haddon, another son of Sennacherib, succeeded to the throne of Assyria, eventually restored the city of Babylon, conquered Egypt, imported foreigners into Samaria, forced Manasseh (Hezekiahs son) to pay heavy tribute to help build Esar-haddons palace in Nineveh, and extended the Assyrian empire to its greatest power. In a second Egyptian campaign, Esar-haddon died and his son, the famous Assurbanipal, the one who built the great library from which archaeologists get most of their Assyrian artifacts, succeeded him.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
angel
(See Scofield “Heb 1:4”)
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
the angel: Isa 10:12, Isa 10:16-19, Isa 10:33, Isa 10:34, Isa 30:30-33, Isa 31:8, Isa 33:10-12, Exo 12:23, 2Sa 24:16, 2Ki 19:35, 1Ch 21:12, 1Ch 21:16, 2Ch 32:21, 2Ch 32:22, Psa 35:5, Psa 35:6, Act 12:23
and when: Exo 12:30, Job 20:5-7, Job 24:24, Psa 46:6-11, Psa 76:5-7, 1Th 5:2, 1Th 5:3
Reciprocal: Gen 19:13 – Lord hath Exo 15:7 – them that Num 16:21 – that I may Jdg 8:10 – fell an hundred 2Sa 24:15 – seventy thousand men 1Ki 20:29 – an hundred thousand 2Ch 13:15 – God smote 2Ch 13:17 – five hundred 2Ch 20:24 – they were dead Job 5:12 – their hands Job 12:19 – General Job 34:20 – troubled Job 36:19 – nor all Psa 7:9 – Oh Psa 8:2 – still Psa 46:4 – city Psa 65:5 – terrible Psa 76:3 – There Psa 76:6 – both Psa 94:2 – render Psa 94:10 – chastiseth Ecc 5:8 – higher than they Isa 8:9 – gird Isa 9:5 – burning Isa 10:17 – devour Isa 10:19 – few Isa 10:25 – For yet Isa 14:25 – I will Isa 19:20 – he shall send Isa 22:2 – thy slain Isa 25:4 – when Isa 29:5 – the multitude Isa 29:7 – the multitude Isa 30:25 – in the day Isa 31:4 – so shall Isa 33:12 – thorns Isa 37:7 – I will cause Isa 43:12 – declared Isa 47:11 – thou shalt not know Isa 48:3 – and I Isa 51:13 – where is Jer 48:44 – that fleeth Jer 50:18 – as I Jer 51:57 – sleep a Eze 6:13 – when Eze 14:19 – if I Eze 32:22 – Asshur Dan 3:28 – hath sent Dan 10:20 – to fight Joe 3:11 – cause Amo 8:3 – many Mic 5:9 – hand Nah 1:12 – Through Nah 1:15 – no Nah 2:13 – and the sword Nah 3:3 – and there Zep 3:6 – cut 1Co 1:28 – to bring Rev 20:9 – and fire
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
The Lord’s deliverance 37:36-38
Isaiah had predicted that God would break Assyria’s power in the Promised Land (Isa 14:24-27). This short section records how He miraculously fulfilled that promise. This divine act of massive proportions settled the issue of Assyria’s fate and provided the crowning demonstration that Yahweh controls world history. He will always fulfill His promises. The literal fulfillment of these near prophecies should encourage us to look for a literal fulfillment of Isaiah’s far distant prophecies.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
The Lord Himself slew 185,000 of the Assyrian soldiers in one night. Evidently this was an act of the angel of the Lord similar to the slaying of the Egyptian firstborn before the Exodus (Exo 12:12-13; Exo 12:23; cf. 2Sa 24:1; 2Sa 24:15-16; Luk 12:20). The angel of the Lord may have been the preincarnate Christ, since He is identified as the Lord (Yahweh), and yet distinct from the Lord, in various Old Testament passages. Some scholars believe the angel of the Lord was an angel whom the Lord sent who was intimately identified with the Lord in the Old Testament because he represented the Lord and carried out His will precisely. Probably the phrase designates the preincarnate Christ in some places and simply an angelic representative of Yahweh in others. The verb "to smite" implies smiting with a disease. [Note: Young, 2:505. Cf. Josephus, 10:1:5.] Sennacherib had sent a messenger to intimidate Hezekiah’s people and, ironically, Yahweh responded by sending a messenger to destroy Sennacherib’s army. George Robinson reproduced Lord Byron’s famous poem, "The Destruction of Sennacherib." [Note: George L. Robinson, The Book of Isaiah, pp. 122-23.]