Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Isaiah 5:4

What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?

4. (Four lines.) The case for the owner of the vineyard.

What could have been done ] lit. What more is there to do (cf. 2Ki 4:13).

wherefore, when I looked wild grapes ] Lit. why did I look that it should and it brought forth wild grapes. The co-ordination of clauses assimilates the ending of the second stanza to that of the first. (For other examples of the same order, see Davidson, Synt. 126, R. 4.)

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

What could I… – As a man who had done what is described in Isa 5:2, would have done all that could be done for a vineyard, so God says that he has done all that he could, in the circumstances of the Jews, to make them holy and happy. He had chosen them; had given them his law; had sent them prophets and teachers; had defended them; had come forth in judgment and mercy, and he now appeals to them to say what could have been done more. This important verse implies that God had done all that he could have done; that is, all that he could consistently do, or all that justice and goodness required him to do, to secure the welfare of his people. It cannot, of course, be meant that he had no physical ability to do anything else, but the expression must be interpreted by a reference to the point in hand; and that is, an appeal to others to determine that he had done all that could be done in the circumstances of the case. In this respect, we may, without impropriety, say, that there is a limit to the power of God. It is impossible to conceive that he could have given a law more holy; or that he could append to it more solemn sanctions than the threatening of eternal death; or that he could have offered higher hopes than the prospect of eternal life; or that he could have given a more exalted Redeemer. It has been maintained (see the Princeton Bib. Repert., April 1841) that the reference here is to the future, and that the question means, what remains now to be done to my vineyard as an expression of displeasure? or that it is asked with a view to introduce the expression of his purpose to punish his people, stated in Isa 5:5. But that the above is the meaning or the passage, or that it refers to what God had actually done, is evident from the following considerations:

(1) He had specified at length Isa 5:2 what he had done. He had performed all that was usually done to a vineyard; in fencing it, and clearing it of stones, and planting in it the choicest vines, and building a wine-press in it. Without impropriety, it might be said of a man that, whatever wealth he had, or whatever power he had to do other things, he could do nothing more to perfect a vineyard.

(2) It is the meaning which is most naturally suggested by the original. Literally, the Hebrew is, What to do more? mah–laas’oth od. Coverdale renders this, as it is in our translation, What more could have been done for it? Luther, What should one do more to my vineyard, that I have not done for it? Was sollte man doth mehr thun an meinem Weinberge, das ich nicht gethun babe an illin? Vulgate, Quid est quod debui ultra facere. What is there which I ought to do more? Septuagint, Ti poieso eti, What shall I do yet? implying that he had done all that he could for it. The Chaldee renders it, What good thing – mah taba’ – shall I say that I will do to my people that I have not done for them? implying that he had done for them all the good which could be spoken of. The Syriac, What remains to be done to my vineyard, and I have not done it? In all these versions, the sense given is substantially the same – that God had done all that could be done to make the expectation that his vineyard would produce fruit, proper. There is no reference in one of these versions to what he would do afterward, but the uniform reference is to what he had done to make the expectation reasonable, that his vineyard would produce fruit.

(3) That this is the fair interpretation is apparent further, because, when, in Isa 5:5, he says what he would do, it is entirely different from what he said he had done. He had done all that could be done to make it proper to expect fruit; he now would do what would be a proper expression of his displeasure that no fruit had been produced. He would take away its hedge; break down its walls, and lay it waste. But in the interpretation of the passage proposed by the Princeton Repert., there is an entire omission of this part of the verse – that I have not done in it. It is not improper, therefore, to use this passage to show that God had done all that could be consistently done for the salvation of man, and the same appeal may now be made to sinners everywhere; and it may be asked, what God could have done for their salvation more than has been done? Could he have given them a purer law? Could he present higher considerations than have been drawn from the hope of an eternal heaven, and the fear of an eternal hell? Could he have furnished a more full atonement than has been made by the blood of his own Son? The conclusion to which we should come would be in accordance with what is said in the prophet, that God has done all for the salvation of sinners that in the circumstances of the case could be done, and that if they are lost, they only will bear the blame.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Isa 5:4-6

What could have been done more to My vineyard that I have not done in it?

—

Human responsibility and Divine grace

I. In any attempt at the interpretation of the story and the exhibition of its moral and religions uses, its NATIONAL APPLICATION should be considered first. (Isa 5:7.)

1. There is a sense in which it may almost be said that Israel was Jehovahs vineyard as no other race or nation has ever been. Selected from an ancient stock which certainly does not seem to have greatly distinguished itself before, it had been preserved and cherished century after century; and in its most marvellous history are to be found the purest revelations of God in antiquity, leading up to the unspeakable gift in which men have life. That history proves that the nation had enjoyed every condition of blessedness, every opportunity of fruitfulness and service.

2. The kind of career it chose is sufficiently indicated in this fifth chapter, in the latter part of which the vices seem almost to run riot. But it is even more significant of the state of the nation, that these lurid paragraphs are not perhaps quite an adequate representation. For, threatened with an attack from an alliance of the neighbouring tribes, Ahaz sought the aid of the King of Assyria; and to secure it, he actually consented to govern his country as an Assyrian province. Then followed one of the most dismal periods of Jewish history. The weak king became infatuated with his oppressor, and nothing would satisfy him except the introduction of Assyrian manners and morals and worship into Jerusalem. The example of the court infected the nobles and the priests; and at length, in the beautiful valley of Hinnom, amongst the groves that were kept green by the fountains of Siloah, an altar to Moloch was erected. That was the sort of wild grape this choice vine was yielding,–idolatry of the most cruel and savage kind, varied with sensuality and the oppression of the poor.

3. That such a result should disappoint the Owner of the vineyard was only natural; and accordingly this little story represents Him next as trying to find out the cause, or rather, as appearing to the men of Judah to acknowledge what He and they well knew. He sets them up for the moment as judges, and confronts reason and conscience with the question, What could have been done more to My vineyard, that I have not done in it? Everything that could be done and yet leave them free to sin and capable of righteousness had been done.

4. A nation convicted and self-convicted of the most gross offences against God and against morals, offences the entire responsibility of which rests upon itself–what will become of that nation? There are other parts of the Bible, not quite so stern as this, which indicate that further opportunities may be given it, and the final punishment withheld for a time. But it is also true that, in regard of nations as well as of men, the patience of God may be exhausted. We have accordingly, in this song and story, the outline of the history of Judah. Gods consideration, first of all, with every kind of gracious help and opportunity,–all wasted through the neglect or wilfulness of the nation itself, until it became fruitless and hopelessly corrupt; and then the fulfilment of the Divine words: Go to; I will tell you what I will do to My vineyard: I will lay it waste: it shall not be pruned nor digged; but there shall come up briers and thorns: I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it. Judah, in its origins and early career, is a sufficient illustration of the preliminary stages: Judah, in its dispersion and miseries, is a standing witness to the certainty with which national calamity overtakes national contempt of God. A nation that ignores its past, and just surrenders itself to sin, is manifestly good for nothing, filling no worthy function, but cumbering the earth.

II. BUT NO NATIONAL INTERPRETATION OF THIS PARABLE SEEMS QUITE SUFFICIENT. The way in which the Bible insists upon the truth that national responsibility does not obliterate but only gathers together and, as it were, organises personal responsibility, has some important bearings upon current modes of speech and thought. There is a disposition sometimes to speak of the conscience of a nation, to imagine that the phrase stands for something that is entirely separate and apart from ourselves, and to regard it as a power outside of a man, to which he may add or from which he may withhold his own influence. At times it has proved a convenient generalisation; but it is well that an exact meaning should be given it. It must denote, not something apart from any man, but either the average personal conscience, or the aggregate of all the consciences; and an average or an aggregate is a figure upon which every unit tells. All morality, indeed, must always be, in its essence and in its appeals, personal, lifting up a nation by lifting up the individuals that constitute it; exposing it to the wrath of God because the individuals expose themselves. The most effective social movements are found to be accordingly those which address themselves in the name of God to individuals, and persuade them one by one to aim more resolutely at the fulfilment of righteousness.

1. If then this passage be taken personally, no one who recalls his past life, and remembers the way in which God has dealt with him, is likely to object to its symbolism. Every one of us has been and is a vineyard of the Lord; and He does for us all that a God can do.

2. What has been the result of it all? Wild grapes in abundance–weakness and bad temper and almost every kind of fault we can show, but little else.

3. The reason of such failure is not far to seek. That God can be blamed for it, is impossible; for there has been no defect of grace or help on His part. Temperament and circumstance might be pleaded, aptitudes we have inherited, and hindrances amidst which we have found ourselves, but for the obvious reply that, whilst these things may involve effort and strain, they never involve defeat. The man who is most embarrassed by his own disposition and surroundings, but for his own fault might be a better man than he is.

4. The consequences of continuing in fruitlessness are shown by the passage to be fatal and hopeless. To waste Divine grace is to run the risk of losing it altogether. That point, however, has not been reached by anyone who retains any aspiration after God, or any desire to be a better man. In Christ there is power for all to shake off every habit of sin, to reverse tendencies to neglect and waste, to evolve in righteousness and peace. (R. Waddy Moss.)

God and men

I. THE DEALINGS OF GOD WITH US.

II. OUR CONDUCT TOWARDS HIM. (A. Roberts, M. A.)

Divine disappointment

It may seem irreverent to speak of a Divine disappointment, but this is by no means the only passage of Scripture which in its obvious meaning conveys this idea, Perhaps we may have to leave the explanation of such words till we obtain fuller light in higher worlds upon the great mystery of the relation of Divine foreknowledge to human freedom; but clearly such words are spoken to us after the manner of men, in order that we may the better discern the intensity of desire and the warmth of loving interest with which the God from whom we all proceed seeks to raise us to our true functions and our proper place in His universe, and the sorrow and regret with which He witnesses the failure of His gracious purposes concerning us. (W. Hay Aitken, M. A.)

The moral limits of the Divine resources

1. Perhaps it may occur to you to object, this lamentation and apparent disappointment? Surely, this is a confession of impotence on the part of the Omnipotent. If God be really what we call Him–Almighty–why should He waste words in futile expostulations! Surely, He who makes the vine put forth her tender grapes and prepares the autumn vintage the wide world over, could, if He pleased, by the mere exercise of His superior power, constrain men to bring forth the fruit that He desires to see brought forth. Why did He not increase the pressure of His power on Israel until He had constrained the disobedient nation to become obedient, and had practically forced them to bring forth their fruit? Our answer to this very natural difficulty is simply this–that the suggestion involves a contradiction. This will be sufficiently obvious as soon as we begin to ask,

What is the special fruit that God seeks at the hand of man? The proper fruit of humanity, the fruit that God seeks in human character and life, is the reproduction of the Divine nature. Gods purpose in man is answered when He sees in man His own moral likeness formed. But now, inasmuch as God is a free agent, it is only by the possession of a similar moral faculty, and of the capacity of exercising it, and only by its exercise in the highest and best manner, that man can ever be conformed into the Divine image; for no two things are more essentially unlike than an automaton and a free agent. Indeed. I think we might venture to say that even a free agent who uses his freedom badly is morally more like God, just because he is free, than the most perfect automaton–perfect, I mean, in every other particular you can name–could ever hope to become, seeing that he is not, and can never hope to be, free. No doubt God could have arranged that man should be a very different being, and bring forth very different fruit; but then in doing so He would have had to abandon the specific purpose emphatically announced when man was just about to be called into existence–Let us make man in our image, after our own likeness. St. Paul teaches us that the gifts and calling of God are without repentance, and we see this illustrated all through the natural world. God does not alter the functions of particular organisms, and make them produce something totally distinct from their own proper type. Were He to do so He would be admitting failure and inconsistency. And as in the material so in the spiritual world. Man has been originally designed to occupy a certain unique position there, and to exercise certain definite functions, and to bring forth a particular kind of fruit to the glory of God, and therefore we may be quite sure that God will not transform him into a being of another order altogether, just to make him do and be what he in his free manhood wills not to do or to be.

2. But it might still be urged, Would not God be acting a kinder part if He withdrew this faculty of free will which has caused us so much trouble, and sin and sorrow–if He were so completely to override it by His own superior power, and so control it that it should be able to exercise no appreciable influence incur conduct, but that He Himself should always have His way? To this we answer, God loves man too much to do anything of the kind. Mans capacity of rising to his proper destiny is involved in his possession and exercise of this faculty of volition. Take it away, and we must needs turn our backs forever upon the thought of rising to the prize of our high calling in Christ Jesus; for it is by the use of these wills of ours, and by their voluntary subordination, that we are to be trained, and developed, and educated, and fitted for enjoying that wondrous relation to the Son of God which is spoken of as the spiritual Bridal and Union of Christ and His Church. No; man must remain free, or else his own proper fruit can never be brought forth; and hence there is really and actually moral limit to the Divine resources.

3. Bearing in mind, then, these necessary limitations of the Divine resources, let us each face the inquiry, What more would we have God do for us than He has actually done! I do not my that all are equally privileged, and I can believe that some, in answer to such a challenge, might demand the enjoyment of higher privileges such as others possess. But dont you see that, whatever privileges might thus be secured, the necessity for the action of the will would not and could not be evaded! And so long as this were so, what guarantee would you have that your increased privileges might not mean only enhanced condemnation! Others, who occupy the very position of privilege that you might demand, have only turned their privileges into a curse by sinning against them; and who shall say that it would not be the same with you? Nay, is it not even more than probable that it would be so; for does not our Lord Himself teach us that he that is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much: and he that is unrighteous in a very little is unrighteous also in much! Here we have laid down one of the great laws of the moral world. (W. Hay Aitken, M. A.)

God employs various means in dealing with men

He does not exhaust all the means that He is capable of employing without any inconsistency all at once. Just as He dealt in different ways with Israel of old, sometimes sending a miracle-working prophet like Elijah, and sometimes a man of mighty eloquence such as Isaiah; sometimes raising up a saintly hierarch like Samuel, and sometimes a philosophic moralist like Solomon; sometimes speaking in pestilence, defeat, disaster, and sometimes in prosperity and deliverance, even so He employs first one means and then another in dealing with us. But each of these, when it fails to bring about the end for which it was designed, represents the exhaustion of yet another resource; and when the last which the Holy Ghost can righteously and consistently have recourse to has been exhausted, the soul is lost. (W. HayAitken, M. A.)

Thankfulness for past mercies the way to obtain future blessings

I. THE FORM AND MANNER OF THE COMPLAINT. It runs in a pathetic, interrogatory exclamation; which way of expression naturally and amongst men importing in it surprise and a kind of confusion in the thoughts of him who utters it, must needs be grounded upon that which is the foundation of all surprise, which I conceive is reducible to these two heads–

1. The strangeness;

2. The indignity of anything, when it first occurs to our apprehensions.

II. THE COMPLAINT ITSELF; for which there are these things to be considered.

1. The Person complaining, who was God Himself.

2. The persons complained of, which were His peculiar Church and people.

3. The ground of this complaint; which was their unworthy and unsuitable returns made to the dealings of God with them.

4. The issue and consequent of it; which was the confusion and destruction of the persons so graciously dealt with and so justly complained of. (R. South, D. D.)

Gods vineyard

With ill men nothing is more common than to accuse Almighty God of partiality and injustice, as if it were in His nature to be austere and cruel, and expect more than can reasonably be done by them in their circumstances. When the earth is unprofitable, and its productions are fit only to be burned in the fire, the fault is neither in the sun nor yet in the clouds, but in those whose business it is to prepare the earth for the influences of the heavens. In like manner, and with equal justice, may God appeal to His people: and this is the purport of the question, What could have been done more for My vineyard, that I have not none in it?

1. The vineyard, with all the circumstances relating to it, is thus described by the prophet (Isa 5:1-4).

2. If Christians should at last fall away, the justice of God may then appeal to them, What could have been done more for My vineyard, that I have not done in it?

3. As true religion brings with it the blessing of God upon any nation, and this blessing is the source of inward peace, wisdom, health, plenty, and prosperity; so the decay of Christianity must bring such evils upon us as were brought on the impenitent Jews. (W. Jones, M. A.)

The impenitent inexcusable

There is something very affecting, very startling, in the assertion that as much had been done as could be done in order to produce from the ancient Church the fruits of righteousness. And, if you only ponder the arrangements of the Gospel, you will feel forced to assent to the reproachful truth which is conveyed in the question of the text. There is a wonderful variety in the arguments and appeals which are addressed in Scripture to the thoughtless and obdurate. At one time they are attacked with terrors, at another acted upon by the loving kindness of God, and allured by the free mercies of the Gospel. In our text there is nothing alleged but the greatness of what God has done for us–a greatness such that nothing more can be done, consistently, at least, with that moral accountableness which must regulate the amount of influence which God brings to bear upon man. Of course, if this be so, then, if we are not convinced and renewed under the existing instrumentality, there is nothing that can avert from us utter destruction.

I. This is the first way of vindicating the question of our text–atheism has a far better apology for resisting the evidences of a God which are spread over creation, than worldly-mindedness for manifesting insensibility to redemption through Christ. It is not, we think, too bold a thing to say, that in redeeming us, God exhausted Himself. He gave Himself; what greater gift could remain unbestowed! Therefore it is the fact that nothing more could have been done for the vineyard, which proves the utter ruin which must follow neglect of the proffered salvation. Having shown yourselves too hard to be softened by that into which Deity has thrown all His strength, too proud to be humbled by that which involved the humiliation of God, too grovelling to be attracted by that which unites the human and the Divine, too cold to be warmed by that which burns with all the compassions of that Infinite One, whose very essence is love,–may we not argue that you thus prove to yourselves that there is no possible arrangement by which you could be saved?

II. Consider more in detail what has been done for the vineyard, in order to bring out, in all its reproachfulness, the question before us.

1. As much has been done as could have been done because of the agency through which redemption was effected. The Author of our redemption was none other than the eternal Son of God, who had covenanted from all eternity to become the surety and substitute for the fallen. So far as we have the power of ascertaining, no being but a Divine taking to Himself flesh, could have satisfied justice in the stead of fallen man. But this is precisely the arrangement which has been made on our behalf.

2. As much has been done as could have been done for the vineyard, regard being had to the completeness and fullness of the work as well as to the greatness of its Author. The sins of the whole race were laid upon Christ; and such was the value which the Divinity gave to the endurances of the humanity, that the whole race might be pardoned if the whole race would put faith in the Mediator as punished in their stead. The scheme of redemption not only provides for our pardon, so that punishment may be avoided; it provides also for our acceptance, so that happiness may be obtained. Not only is there full provision for every want, but there is the Holy Spirit to apply the provision, and make it effectual in the individual case.

3. There is yet one more method of showing that so much has been done for the vineyard that there remains nothing more which the Owner can do. In the teachings of the Redeemer we have such clear information as to our living under a retributive government,–a government whose recompenses shall be accurately dealt out in another state of being,–that ignorance can be no mans excuse if he live as though God took no note of human actions. And we reckon that much of what has been done for the vineyard consists in the greatness of the reward which the Gospel proposes to righteousness, and the greatness of the punishment which it denounces on impenitence. (H. Melvill, B. D.)

The Lords vineyard

I. THE ADVANTAGES.

II. THE SINS.

III. THE PUNISHMENT of the elder Church. (G. J. Cornish, M. A.)

Christmas thoughts

I. The solemnity of the present season calls upon us to commemorate in an especial manner THE MERCIES OF GOD IN THE REDEMPTION OF THE WORLD, the last and most gracious of all His dispensations. The preceding vouchsafements were preparatory to this, which is therefore to be considered as the completion of the others. Wherefore, if those other dispensations had so much grace in them as to warrant the prophets expostulation in the text and context, the argument will be so much the stronger, and our obligation so much the greater, as the grace in which we stand is more abounding and the advantage of our situation more favourable and auspicious to us. This whole matter will appear in a stronger light to us if we turn our thoughts to those three great periods of religion under one or other of which the Church of God and His Christ hath all along subsisted. In each of these we shall have occasion to reflect upon the merciful care of providence and the shameful negligence and ingratitude of mankind in their returns to it.

1. The patriarchal;

2. The Jewish;

3. The Christian, marked by the personal appearance of Christ, our blessed Mediator, who had all along transacted the great affairs of the Church under the two preceding economies.

The two main ends which were here consulted were–

(1) The atonement of past offences.

(2) The prevention of future offences.

II. THE RETURNS WHICH HAVE BEEN MADE to all this tender indulgence of our merciful Father. (N. Marshall, D. D.)

National wickedness in danger of provoking national judgments

I. WHAT GOD HATH DONE FOR US AND WHAT RETURNS WE HAVE MADE.

1. In early ages, when we were overrun with heathenism and idolatry, it pleased God to plant the Christian religion among us; a religion every way worthy of the Divine dispensation, and suited to the exigencies of mankind. When this religion had flourished many centuries in its unalloyed purity, in a very dark age it became adulterated with impure doctrines, and quite overgrown with a heap of monstrous absurdities: but it pleased God, by the ministry of His faithful servants, to re-enlighten this land with the beams of truth; to restore Christianity to its original simplicity and sincerity.

2. A thorough disregard to Christianity has prevailed.

II. WHAT WE MAY EXPECT AS THE CONSEQUENCE OF OUR INGRATITUDE AND IMPIETY. Vice, when diffused through a kingdom, must have a fatal influence over the whole community, and at last accomplish the destruction of it. In its universal progress it must be attended with idleness and immoderate expense, the natural parents of poverty. Honest poverty would cast about for honest and unthought of expedients for supporting itself and bettering its condition, but poverty, contracted by the profligate courses of drunkenness, lewdness, and debauchery, takes quite another turn, and preys upon the little industry that is left to the nation, and thereby gives a check to that very industry; for the less secure men grow in their properties the less will they labour to improve them. Hence will it come to pass that among those of higher condition, self-interest will be made the ruling principle. And among the meanest of the people what power can we suppose will the voice of human laws have against the louder calls of poverty, set free from the barrier of conscience, and thereby at liberty to relieve itself by all the methods that wickedness can suggest! In proportion as the hands of the government grow weak will the hearts of its enemies he strengthened, and greater force must still be provided for its support, and the maintenance of that must again fall on the public; and general burdens of that kind, should they ever he felt, would be followed by a general discontent. And this will give a great temptation to our foreign enemies to take the advantage of such fatal opportunities and try to make us no more a nation. In the ordinary course of things then, vice, when it becomes epidemical, is not only the reproach, but bids fair for the ruin of any people. National wickedness never failed, sooner or later, to provoke the Almighty to a national vengeance.

III. THE PROPER MEANS WHEREBY WE MAY HOPE TO AVERT GODS DISPLEASURE. (Jer 18:7-8.) As we make a part of the nation, our sins must make a part of the national guilt; and consequently none of us can think ourselves unconcerned in the important work of a national reformation. (J. Seed, M. A.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

What work is there belonging to the office of a master or keeper of the vineyard which I have neglected? How unworthy and inexcusable a crime is it, that you have not only been unfruitful in good works, but also filled with all the fruits of wickedness!

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

4. God has done all that couldbe done for the salvation of sinners, consistently with His justiceand goodness. The God of nature is, as it were, amazed at theunnatural fruit of so well-cared a vineyard.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it?…. Or “ought”, as the Vulgate Latin: this is generally understood of good things done to it in time past; as what better culture could it have had? what greater privileges, blessings, and advantages, natural, civil, and religious, could have been bestowed on this people? what greater favour could have been shown them, or honour done them? or what of this kind remains to be done for them? they have had everything that could be desired, expected, or enjoyed: though it may be rendered, “what is further or hereafter to be done to my vineyard” u, and “I have not done in it?” that is, by way of punishment; I have reproved and chastised them, but all in vain; what remains further for me, and which I will do, because of their ingratitude and unfruitfulness? I will utterly destroy them as a nation and church; I will cause their civil and ecclesiastical state to cease. The sense may be gathered from the answer to the question in the following verse Isa 5:5,

wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes? that is, why have these people acted so ill a part, when such and so many good things have been bestowed upon them; on account of which it might have been reasonably expected they would have behaved in another manner? or rather the words may be rendered, “why have I looked or expected w that it should bring forth grapes, seeing it brought forth wild grapes?” why have I been looking for good fruit, when nothing but bad fruit for so long a time has been produced? why have I endured with so much patience and longsuffering? I will bear with them no longer, as follows. The Targum is for the former sense,

“what good have I said to do more to my people, which I have not done to them? and what is this I have said, that they should do good works, and they have done evil works?”

u “quid faciendum amplius fuit”, Junius Tremellius, Piscator “et quid ultra faciendum erat”; so some in Vatablus, Montanus. w “quare expectavi?” Cocceius.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

4. What more ought to have been done to my vineyard? He first inquires what could have been expected from the best husbandman or householder, which he has not done to his vineyard ? Hence he concludes that they had no excuse for having basely withheld from him the fruit of his toil.

How did I expect that it would yield grapes? In this clause he appears to expostulate with himself for having expected any good or pleasant fruit from so wicked a people; just as, when the result does not answer to our expectation, we complain of ourselves, and are angry at having ill-bestowed our labor on ungrateful persons whose wickedness ought to have restrained us from doing what we did, and acknowledge that we are justly deceived, because we were too simple and easily imposed on. But a more natural interpretation will be this: “Since I discharged every part of my duty, and did more than any one could have expected in dressing my vineyard, how comes it that it yields me so poor a return, and that, instead of the fruit which was expected, it yields what is absolutely bitter?”

If it be objected that God had the remedy in his hands, if he had turned the hearts of the people, this is an idle evasion as applied to those men; for their conscience holds them fast, so that they cannot escape by laying the blame on another. Though God do not pierce the hearts of men by the power of his Spirit, so as to render them obedient to him, yet they will have no right to complain that this was wanting; for every pretense of ignorance is fully and abundantly taken away by the outward call. Besides, God does not speak here of his power, but declares that he was not under any obligation to do more than he did.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

THE INEXCUSABILITY AND HOPELESSNESS OF UNBELIEF

Isa. 5:4. What could have been done more to my vineyard that I have not done in it?

In a subsequent verse God condescends to explain what is here meant by His vineyard, so that there might be no doubt as to the scope and import of the passage (Isa. 5:7). God had done everything which could be done for the spiritual culture of His ancient Church (Isa. 5:3-4). The assertion that as much had been done as could be done is very affecting and startling. And if this could be said of the Jewish vineyard, what shall be said of the Christian?

There is a peculiar argument thus suggested, which, wrought out, will show that men are inexcusable in persisting in their unbelief, since nothing more could have been done to win them to the side of righteousness and to turn them to God. Notice carefully the variety of the arguments addressed in Scripture to the thoughtless and obdurate. At one time they are attacked with terrors, the picture being set before them of Divine wrath; at another they are acted on by the loving-kindness of God, and allured by the free mercies of the Gospel. In the text it is not precisely either the one or the other of these methods. There is nothing alleged but the greatness of what has been done for usa greatness such that nothing more can be done, consistently, at least, with that moral accountableness which must regulate the amount of influence which God brings to bear on men. If this be so, if we are not convinced and renewed under the existing instrumentality, there is nothing that can avert from us utter destruction.

But is this so? Review the means provided and proffered for our rescue, and let us see whether any of us can be other than silent. If we were arguing with a man who disbelieved the existence of God, we should probably reason up from the creation to the Creator. Our adversary might challenge us to prove that nothing short of Infinite Power could have built and furnished this planet. It may be allowed that certain results lie beyond human agency, and yet disputed whether they need such an agency as we strictly call Divine. We do not, therefore, maintain that the evidences in creation are the strongest which can be conceived. Hence we should not perhaps feel warranted in saying to the atheist, What more could have been done to produce belief in you if you resist all these tokens of God in Nature? But if we cannot say to the atheist, when pointing to the surrounding creation, What more could have been done that has not been done for your conviction? we can ply the worldly-minded with this question when pointing to the scheme of salvation through Christ. We deny that the worldly-minded can appeal from what God has done on their behalf to a yet mightier interference which imagination can picture. It is the property of redemption, if not of creation, that it leaves no room for imagination. Those who turn with indifference from the proffers of the Gospel are just in the position of the atheist who should remain such after God had set before him the highest possible demonstration of Himself. It is not, we think, too bold a thing to say that, in redeeming us, God exhausted HimselfHe gave Himself. And may we not argue that, resisting what has been granted, you demonstrate that you cannot be overcome, and thus your condemnation is sealed by the incontrovertible truth involved in the question of the text?

Looked at more in detail, the argument is
I. As much has been done as could have been done, because of the Agency through which mans redemption was effected. In looking at the cross, considering our sins as laid on the Being who hangs there in weakness and ignominy, the overcoming thought is, that this Being is none other than the Everlasting God, and that however He seem mastered by the powers of wickedness, He could by a single word, uttered from the altar on which He immolates Himself, scatter the universe into nothing, and call up an assemblage of new worlds and new creatures.What a condemning force this throws into the question of the text! If it give an unmeasured stupendousness to the work of our redemption, that He who undertook, carried on, and completed that work was the brightness of the Fathers glory and the express image of His person, then surely what has been done for the vineyard proclaims us ruined if we bring not forth such fruits as God requires at our hands.If the extent of what has been done may be given in evidence that if it prove ineffectual there remains nothing more to be tried, what say you to the justice of the question? what to the condemnation under which it leaves the worldly-minded and rebellious?

II. As much has been done as could have been done, regard being had to the completeness and fulness of the work, as well as to the greatness of its Author. We might have been sure beforehand that what the Divine Agent undertook would be thoroughly effected. The sins of the whole race were laid on Christ. There is consequently nothing in our own guiltiness to make us hesitate as to the possibility of forgiveness. The penalties of a violated law have been actually discharged.

The scheme of redemption provides also for our acceptance, so that happiness may be obtained. If it met our necessities only in part, there might be excuse for refusing it our attention. When you add to the unsearchable riches of grace in Christ the continued and earnest agency of the Holy Spirit, have you a word to plead against the remonstrance of God in the text?

III. We are bound to regard the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the grand revelation of future punishment and reward. Until the Redeemer appeared and brought more direct tidings from the invisible would, the sanctions of eternity were scarcely, if at all, brought to bear on the occupations of time. So imperfect had been the foregoing knowledge regarding the immortality of the soul that Paul declared of Christ that He abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light by the Gospel. Much of what has been done for the vineyard consists in the greatness of the reward which the Gospel promises to righteousness, and the greatness of the punishment which it denounces on impenitence.

It was not redemption from mere temporary evil that Christ effected. Redemption does not make men immortal, but, finding them so, it sheds its influence throughout their unlimited existence, wringing the curse from its every instant, and leaving a blessing in its stead. The Gospel sets before us an array of motives, concerning which it is no boldness to say, that, if ineffectual, it is because we are immovable; if heaven fails to attract, hell to alarmthe heaven and the hell opened to us by the revelation of Scriptureit can only be because of a set determination to continue in sin. What more could have been done for the vineyard? If you are waiting to be forced, you are waiting to be ruined. Seek the Lord while He may be found; call on Him while He is near.Henry Melvill, B.D.: Golden Lectures, pp. 485492.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

A SAD CANTICLE

Isa. 5:4-6. What could have been done more to my vineyard? &c.

There are certain epochs in the history of the Church when on every hand may be seen the saddest indifference. This state of things is not owing to a suspension of Divine gifts, nor to the absence of earnest pastors, nor to the circumstances by which Gods people are surrounded. Everything has been done for the vineyard which the wise and gracious husbandman could perform, yet no fruit is produced. The fault lies with the Church itself. Individual members have relapsed into a state of ease and supineness. Faithful warnings have been unheeded; earnest entreaties have been disregarded; mercies have been unnoticed; chastisements have been profitless. At such a time they who sigh and cry for this desolation, turn to the despised or forgotten Lord, and sing their mournful canticle, My well-beloved, &c. (Isa. 5:1-2). Then the Lord replies, Judge, I pray you, &c. (Isa. 5:3-6). It is too true the sorrowful singer admits, and says, He looked for judgment, &c. (Isa. 5:7).

Let us consider the similitude under which the Church is represented, the just complaint of the Lord, and the terrible condemnation He pronounces.

I. The similitude. A vineyard.

This parable is peculiarly interesting on account of the fact that our Lord Jesus uttered one in many respects similar to it (Mat. 21:33). The figure of the vineyard is often used in the Old Testament, generally to represent the Church. The vineyard of the parable is represented as being

1. In a very favourable locality.

2. Planted with the choicest vine.

3. Carefully fenced and diligently cultivated.

4. Having the husbandman living in the midst. Built a tower. God is His own watchman on the walls of Zion.

II. The Complaint. It brought forth wild grapes. Observe the complaint is not based upon the poverty or paucity of the crop, or even upon the absence of a crop altogether, or because of the lateness of the crop. There is an abundant crop; but of what? wild grapes, i.e., poisonous berries, like those the servant of Elisha gathered, (2Ki. 4:39). A crop that could have grown without the husbandman at all. An unnatural production. One calculated to injure, if not to destroy life. The husbandmans design is thwarted; he expected that which would nourish and stimulate life; whereas the opposite is produced. The allegory explains itself. The inconsistencies and follies, the disobedience and idolatry of the Church, are like deadly upas trees in the world; they tend to produce infidelity, i.e., moral death, among men. The mission of the Church is to proclaim life, by Gods Spirit to communicate it; instead of that, a worldly and apostate Church leads men to say and believe, There is no God. This is unnatural; the proper fruit of the Church is holiness, obedience, and zeal.

III. The Condemnation. (Isa. 5:5-6).

1. Observe the mercy of the condemnation. It shall be eaten up. The obnoxious growth shall be destroyed. The pride, the ignorance, the idolatry of the Church shall be removed. God will not abandon her, as He does the world, to fill up her measure of iniquity. He must be glorified in His saints, although not now, yet afterward. The patient husbandman will wait for another year, when his choice vine shall yield choice fruit.

2. Observe the severity of the condemnation. Her privileges shall not be enjoyed. The hedge taken away. Direful persecution shall be experienced. It shall be trodden down. The Spirits influence shall be withheld. I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it. It is so with the Jews. That vineyard is desolate now;the vines are trodden under foot; the rain rains not on them, BUT THEY ARE NOT ROOTED UP. God shall plant another hedge, dwell again in the forsaken tower; and His ancient people shall grow and flourish on the fruitful hill; bringing forth such fruit that the husbandman shall rejoice, and earth and heaven be glad.Stems and Twigs, vol. i. pp. 246249.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

(4) What could have been done more . . .The prophet cuts off from the people the excuse that they had been unfairly treated, that their Lord was as a hard master, reaping where he had not sown (Mat. 25:24). They had had all the external advantages that were necessary for their growth in holiness, yet they had not used them rightly. (Comp. the striking parallelism of Heb. 6:4-8.)

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

Isa 5:4 What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?

Ver. 4. What could have been done to my vineyard? ] See the like angry expostulations, Jer 2:5 Mic 6:3 ; when God hath done all that can be done to do wretched men good, they oft do their utmost to defeat him, and undo themselves. Quid debui facere Domino meo quod fecerim? said Augustine of himself, by way of penitent confession: quis ego, qualis ego? quid non mali ego? The cypress tree, the more it is watered, the less fruitful; so it is with many people. But God can no way be charged with their barrenness.

“ At Paris ut vivat regnetque beatus,

Cogo posse negat. ” – Horat.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)