Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Isaiah 7:2
And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind.
2. the house of David ] (Cf. Isa 7:13 ; Isa 7:17) either the court (ch. Isa 22:22) or the royal family (1Sa 20:16, &c.), which must have formed a numerous and powerful caste, and must have exercised a considerable influence on the government under a weak king like Ahaz. This was probably the first time that the Davidic dynasty had been menaced by a serious danger.
Syria is confederate with Ephraim ] lit. Syria has alighted upon Ephraim (R.V. marg. “resteth”). The idea seems to be that the Syrian armies already occupy the Ephraimitish territory (settling there like a swarm of locusts, v. Isaiah 19: 2Sa 17:12) preparatory to the joint attack. The fine simile at the end of the verse is enough to prove that Isaiah himself is the narrator.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And it was told the house of David – That is, the royal family; or the king and princes; the government. Ahaz was the descendant and successor of David.
Syria is confederate with Ephraim – Ephraim was one of the tribes of Israel, and the kingdom of Israel was often called Ephraim, or the kingdom of Ephraim; in the same way as the tribes of Judah and Benjamin were called the kingdom of Judah. The phrase, is confederate with, is in Hebrew resteth on; see the margin. The meaning is, that Syria was supported by Ephraim, or was allied with Ephraim. The kingdom of Israel, or Ephraim, was situated between Syria and Jerusalem. Of course, the latter could not be attacked without marching through the former, and without their aid. In this sense it was that Syria, or the Arameans, relied or rested on Ephraim. Though Syria was by far the stronger power, yet it was not strong enough to attack Jerusalem had the kingdom of Israel been opposed to it.
And his heart – The heart of the king – of Ahaz.
Was moved as the trees of the wood – This is a very beautiful and striking image. It expresses universal trembling, consternation, and alarm, as the trees are moved together when the wind passes violently over them. A similar expression is found in Ovid – in Canaces, Epist. xi. ver. 76, 77.
Ut quatitur tepido fraxina virga noto
Sic mea vibrari pallentia membra videres.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
The house of David; Ahaz, and his royal relations and courtiers. He calls them the house of David, to intimate that the following comfortable message was sent to Ahaz, not for his own sake, but only for the sake of his worthy progenitor, David, to whom God had promised an everlasting kingdom.
Ephraim; the kingdom of the ten tribes, commonly called Ephraim, as Isa 28:1; Hos 12:1, because that was far the most numerous and potent of all of them.
Was moved with excessive fear, arising partly from the conscience of their own guilt, whereby they had put themselves out of Gods protection; and partly from the consideration of the great strength and power of his enemies, who having prevailed against him severally, 2Ch 28:5,8, and having now united their threes, he, having no faith in God, nor confidence to desire or expect his help, concluded his case desperate and deplorable.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
2. is confederate withrather,is encamped upon the territory of Ephraim [MAURER],or better, as Rezin was encamped against Jerusalem, “issupported by” [LOWTH]Ephraim, whose land lay between Syria and Judah. The mention of”David” alludes, in sad contrast with the present, to thetime when David made Syria subject to him (2Sa8:6).
Ephraimthe ten tribes.
as . . . trees of . . .wooda simultaneous agitation.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And it was told the house of David,…. Ahaz, and his family, the princes of the blood, his court and counsellors; who had intelligence of the designs and preparations of the Syrians and Israelites against them:
saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim; the ten tribes; or the kingdom and king of Israel. Some render it, “Syria led”; that is, its army “unto Ephraim” y; marched it into the land of Israel, and there joined the king of Israel’s army; others, as the Vulgate Latin version, “Syria rests upon Ephraim” z; depends upon, trusts in, takes heart and encouragement from Ephraim, or the ten tribes, being his ally. The Septuagint version is, “Syria hath agreed with Ephraim”; entered into a confederacy and alliance with each other; which is the sense of our version; and is confirmed by the Targum, which is,
“the king of Syria is joined with the king of Israel:”
and his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind; the metaphor denotes the strength and force of the confederate armies, comparable to a strong, blustering, boisterous wind; see Isa 32:2 and the weakness of the king and people of Judah, who were like to trees shaken by the wind; and also the fear they were possessed with, partly through consciousness of guilt, and partly through distrust of divine power and Providence; and also on account of what they had suffered already from these powerful enemies, when they attacked them singly; and therefore might much more dread them, as they were combined together against them; see 2Ch 28:5.
y “duxit exercitum”, Tigurine version. z “Syria quievit super Ephraim”, Forerius, Cocceius; “Syria acquiescit in Ephraimo”, Piscator.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
It is this which is referred to in Isa 7:2: “And it was told the house of David, Aram has settled down upon Ephraim: then his heart shook, and the heart of his people, as trees of the wood shake before the wind.” The expression nuach al (settled down upon) is explained in 2Sa 17:12 (cf., Jdg 7:12) by the figurative simile, “as the dew falleth upon the ground:” there it denotes a hostile invasion, here the arrival of one army to the support of another. Ephraim ( feminine, like the names of countries, and of the people that are regarded as included in their respective countries: see, on the other hand, Isa 3:8) is used as the name of the leading tribe of Israel, to signify the whole kingdom; here it denotes the whole military force of Israel. Following the combination mentioned above, we find that the allies now prepared for a second united expedition against Jerusalem. In the meantime, Jerusalem was in the condition described in Isa 1:7-9, viz., like a besieged city, in the midst of enemies plundering and burning on every side. Elath had fallen, as Rezin’s timely return clearly showed; and in the prospect of his approaching junction with the allied army, it was quite natural, from a human point of view, that the court and people of Jerusalem should tremble like aspen leaves. is a contracted fut. kal, ending with an a sound on account of the guttural, as in Rth 4:1 (Ges. 72, Anm. 4); and , which is generally the form of the infin. abs. (Isa 24:20), is here, and only here, the infin. constr. instead of (cf., noach , Num 11:25; shob , Jos 2:16; mot , Psa 38:17, etc.: vid., Ewald, 238, b).
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
2. And it was told the house of David. He does not mean that, at the very time when the two kings were approaching to the city, the king received intelligence about the league; for it would not have been safe for Ahaz to go out, when the invading army was spread over the country; but before they had collected their forces, it is said that King Ahaz trembled. Hence there is reason to believe that his consternation became greater when he saw the danger nearer. The house of David means the king’s palace and court; as if the Prophet had said that Ahaz and his counsellors had been informed about the conspiracy which had been formed against Judea.
As to the words, נחה ( nachah) is variously rendered by interpreters. The signification of this Hebrew word being to lead, some draw from it this meaning, “The King of Syria led his soldiers to aid the army;” and they think that על ( al) with ע ( ain) is put for אל ( al) with א ( aleph). Others derive it from נוח ( nuach), as if the letter ו ( vau) were wanting, and render it, he rested. According to others, it is rather an inversion of the letters, and נחה ( nahah) is put for חנה ( chanah), which means to pitch a camp; and, therefore, they choose to render it, Syria is confederate (101) Nothing else was meant by the Prophet than that a league in war hath been formed between the Israelites and the Syrians, that with their united forces they might attack Jerusalem. In the use of the word Ephraim there is a figure of speech (synecdoche) very frequent in the Prophets, by which a part is taken for the whole. Under Ephraim the whole kingdom of Israel is included, not only because that tribe was superior to the rest in numbers and wealth, but because their first king, Jeroboam, was descended from it. (1Kg 11:26.)
And his heart was moved. We see that by the house of David is here meant nothing else than “the king’s palace,” from which the terror spread to the whole nation; and indeed it was impossible but that, when they heard of the alarm of the king and the princes, the body of the people should be moved by the same kind of terror. As soon as this intelligence was received, all were struck with such dread that no man was master of himself. He expresses their trembling by an appropriate metaphor, which is also frequently employed by ourselves, ( Il tremble comme la fueille en l’arbre ,) he trembles like the leaf of a tree. The design of this is to heighten the miracle; for we learn from it that not only in the opinion of others, but likewise in their own opinion, their case was desperate. They would therefore have been utterly ruined if the Lord had not seasonably interposed.
This passage sets before us a very bright mirror, in which we may behold the thoughtlessness of the ungodly, when they do not feel the hand of God; and, on the other hand, the fearful trembling with which they are suddenly seized, when the Lord presents to them any danger. In the midst of their prosperity they are so much at their ease that they hardly believe that they are subject to the government of God, and undoubtedly imagine that they are placed beyond the reach of all danger. Adversity stuns them in such a manner that they suddenly fall down, and their senses are so entirely overpowered by terror that they lie like people who are lifeless or bereft of their senses. Such is the punishment by which the Lord arouses them from their deep slumber. At first they appear to be firm and immovable, as if nothing could throw them down from their rank; but now, at the slightest noise, they are suddenly seized with trembling. That terror is the righteous vengeance of God, to whom they never do homage until they are compelled.
Let us learn, that if we have any spark of faith, we ought not to distrust God when we are in any danger. It is indeed impossible that we should not be agitated and alarmed when dangers press upon us; but we ought not to tremble so as to be tossed about by our anxiety in every direction, and unable to see a harbour to which we may safely direct our course. There must always be this difference between the fear of the godly and of the ungodly, that the ungodly find no remedy for composing their minds; but the godly immediately betake themselves to God, in whom, knowing that they have a very safe harbour, though they be harassed by uneasiness, still they remain calm.
(101) “ Syria is arm in arm with Ephraim; leans on the arm of the king of Israel, as on that of a friend.” — Stock.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(2) Syria is confederate with Ephraim.Literally, rests upon . . . Ephraim stands, of course, as often elsewhere, for the northern kingdom of Israel as a whole.
His heart was moved.There was a general panic. King and people alike asked, How could they resist? Would it not be better to join the confederacy, and take their chance with it in attacking the king of Assyria? The image of the trees is generic, but suggests something like the quivering of the aspen leaves.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
(2) The other interpretation sets out from an entirely different starting-point. The words of Mat. 1:23 are taken as, once for all, deciding the entire meaning of the Immanuel prophecy. The prophet is supposed to have passed into a state of ecstasy in which he sees clearly, and with a full consciousness of its meaning, the history of the incarnation and the marvel of the travail-pangs of the Virgin mother. The vision of the future Christ thus presented to his mind, colours all his after-thoughts, and forms the basis of his whole work. The article emphasises the definiteness of his visions. He sees the virgin mother of the far-off future. And the prophet learns to connect the vision with the history of his own time. The growth of that Christ-child in the far-off future serves as a measure of time for the events that were passing, or about to pass, within the horizon of his earthly vision. Before the end of an interval not longer than that which separates youth from manhood, the Syro-Ephraiminitic confederacy should be broken up. So far, here also, we have a coherent and consistent view. It is attended, however, by some serious difficulties. A sign, in the language of Hebrew prophets, is that which proves to the person to whom it is offered that there is a supernatural power working with him who gives it. If a prediction, it is one which will speedily be tested by a personal experience, the very offer of which implies in the prophet the certainty of its fulfilment. He stakes, as it were, his reputation as a prophet on the issue. (Comp. Isa. 37:30; Isa. 38:7; Exo. 4:8-14; 1Sa. 12:16.) But how could the prediction of a birth in the far-off distance, divided by several centuries from Isaiahs time, be a sign to Ahaz or his people? And what would be the meaning, we may ask again, of the words butter and honey shall he eat, as applied to the Christ-child? Do not the words Before the child shall know to refuse the evil . . . point, not to a child seen as afar in vision, but to one who was to be born and grow up among the men of that generation? Should we not have expected, if the words had implied a clear revelation of the mystery of the virgin-birth, that Isaiah himself would have dwelt upon it elsewhere, that later prophets would have named it as one of the notes of the Messiah, that it would have become a tradition of the Jewish schools of interpretation? As a matter of fact, no such allusion is found in Isaiah, nor in the prophets that follow him (see Note on Jer. 31:22, for the only supposed, one cannot say even apparent, exception); the Jewish interpreters never include this among their notes of the Christ. It is indeed, as has been said in the New Testament portion of this Commentary, one of the strongest arguments for the historical, non-mythical character of the series of events in Matthew 1, Luke 1, 2, that they were contrary to prevailing expectation. (See Note on Mat. 1:23.)
A truer way of interpretation than either of those that have been thus set forth, is, it is believed, open to us. We may remember (1) as regards St. Matthews interpretation of Isaiahs prophecy, that two other predictions cited, as by the Evangelist himself, in the history of the Nativity, in Matthew 1, 2 are, as it were, detached from their position, in which they had a distinct historical meaning, and a new meaning given to them (see Notes on Mat. 2:15; Mat. 2:18). and that this holds good of other prophecies cited by him elsewhere (see Notes on Mat. 21:5; Mat. 27:9). It was not, as some have thought, that facts were invented or imagined that prophecies might appear to be fulfilled, but that the facts being given, prophecies were shown to have a meaning which was fulfilled in them, though that meaning may not have been present to the prophets own mind. In this case the use of the word for virgin in the LXX. version may have determined St. Matthews interpretation of the words. Here, in the history which had come to him attested by evidence which satisfied him, he found One who, in the truest and highest sense, was the Immanuel of Isaiahs prophecy. We must not forget (2) the limits within which the prophets lived and moved, as they are stated in 1Pe. 1:10. They enquired and searched diligently as to the time and manner of the fulfilment of their hopes; but their normal state (the exceptions being only enough to prove the rule) is one of enquiry and not of definite assurance. They had before them the ideal of a righteous king, a righteous sufferer, of victory over enemies and sin and death, but the times and the seasons were hidden from them, as they were afterwards from the apostles, and they thought of that ideal king as near, about to burst in upon the stage that was filled with the forms of Assyria, Syria, Ephraim, Judah, as the apostles appear to have thought afterwards that the advent of the Lord would come upon the stage of the worlds history that was filled with the forms of Emperors and rebellious Jews and perverse heretics and false prophets (1Th. 4:15; 1Co. 15:51; 2Th. 2:3-4; 1Pe. 4:7; 1Ti. 4:1-3; 1Jn. 2:18). And neither prophets nor apostles, though left to the limitations of an imperfect knowledge, were altogether wrong. Prophecy has, in Bacons words, its springing and germinant accomplishments. The natural birth of the child Immanuel was, to the prophet and his generation, a pledge and earnest of the abiding presence of God with His people. The overthrow of Assyria, and Babylon, and Jerusalem were alike forerunners of the great day of the Lord in which the ultimate and true Immanuel, the name at last fulfilled to the uttermost, shall be at once the Deliverer and the Judge.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
2. Told the house of David This signal phrase refers not to the court of Ahaz, but to the blood royal, the lineage; as in modern phrase, “the house of Bourbon,” “the house of Brunswick.” So always, as 1Ki 12:19: “Israel rebelled against the house of David unto this day;” as also 1Ki 12:16 and 1Ki 12:26, same chapter. And in Nathan’s memorable message to David, (2 Samuel 7,) the king was told that as he had purposed to build Jehovah a “house,” so Jehovah would build him “a house,” that is, a royal lineage. “Thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee.” 2Sa 7:16. And David replies, (2Sa 7:18; 2Sa 7:25-25, and 2Sa 7:29,) “Bless the house of thy servant that it may continue before thee for ever.” And so Luk 1:27: “To a virgin of the house of David.” Illustrious was the pedigree of that house, as given by Luke, beginning with Adam and the fall, and reaching to the Messiah. And never yet, in Ahaz’s time, had the line of David on the throne been broken. The royal line in the northern kingdom had been changed by a succession of usurpers, of whom this Pekah was then the last one. Doubtless the royal family of David realized their high descent, and were most deeply alarmed at the thought that its sacred continuity should be broken, and a usurper, the son of Tabeal, should break the promised line.
His heart David’s “heart,” ideally identified with David’s “house;” and so his people, no other than David’s.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Isa 7:2 And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind.
Ver. 2. And it was told the house of David, ] i.e., the king and chief officers of the crown and court. Ill news flieth swift, and filleth all places.
Syria is confederate with Ephraim.
And his heart was moved.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
the house of David. Not to Ahaz only, but to the house which had received the promise of Jehovah’s protection (2Sa 7).
Ephraim. The leading tribe, put by Figure of speech Synecdoche (of Part), for the rest of the ten tribes. Sometimes called “Samaria” (1Ki 16:24).
His. i.e. Ahaz.
wind. Hebrew. ruach. App-9.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Ephraim
In the prophetic books “Ephraim” and “Israel” are the collective names of the ten tribes who, under Jeroboam, established the northern kingdom, subsequently called Samaria 1Ki 16:24 and were (B.C. 722) sent into an exile which still continues. 2Ki 17:1-6.
They are distinguished as “the outcasts of Israel” from “the dispersed of Judah.” Isa 11:12. “Hidden” in the world Mat 13:44 they, with Judah, are yet to be restored to Palestine and made one nation again.; Jer 23:5-8; Eze 37:11-24.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
the house: Isa 7:13, Isa 6:13, Isa 37:35, 2Sa 7:16, 1Ki 11:32, 1Ki 12:16, 1Ki 13:2, Jer 21:12
is confederate with: Heb. resteth on, Isa 7:17, Isa 11:13, 2Ch 25:10, 2Ch 28:12, Eze 37:16-19, Hos 12:1
And his heart: Isa 8:12, Isa 37:27, Lev 26:36, Lev 26:37, Num 14:1-3, Deu 28:65, Deu 28:66, 2Ki 7:6, 2Ki 7:7, Psa 11:1, Psa 27:1, Psa 27:2, Psa 112:7, Psa 112:8, Pro 28:1, Mat 2:3
Reciprocal: Gen 43:18 – the men Exo 14:10 – sore afraid Lev 26:16 – terror 1Sa 17:24 – sore 1Sa 28:5 – he was afraid 2Ki 16:5 – Rezin Psa 83:5 – they are Isa 8:6 – rejoice Isa 8:9 – Associate Isa 33:14 – sinners Eze 21:7 – For the Eze 27:16 – Syria Mat 1:20 – Joseph Act 21:3 – Syria 2Th 2:2 – shaken Rev 6:13 – of a
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Isa 7:2. And it was told the house of David Ahaz and his royal relations and courtiers. He calls them the house of David, to intimate that the following comfortable message was sent to Ahaz, not for his own sake, but only for the sake of his worthy progenitor David, to whom God had promised an everlasting kingdom. Syria is confederate with Ephraim With the kingdom of the ten tribes, commonly called Ephraim, because that tribe was by far the most numerous and potent of them. And his heart was moved Namely, the heart of Ahaz; and the heart of his people With excessive fear, arising partly from a consciousness of their own guilt, whereby they had put themselves out of Gods protection; and partly from the consideration of the great strength and power of their enemies.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
7:2 And it was told the house of {b} David, saying, Syria is confederate with {c} Ephraim. And his heart was {d} moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the forest are moved with the wind.
(b) Meaning, the kings house.
(c) That is, Israel, because that tribe was the greatest, Gen 48:19 .
(d) For fear.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
When Ahaz ("the house of David" of all people!) heard that Syria had moved its army into the Northern Kingdom (Ephraim) and had settled down there, he and his people shook with fear. The date of this attack was probably between 736 and 734 B.C. This prophecy of Isaiah is dateable to 734 B.C. Ahaz had previously suffered defeat at the hands of both these enemies (2Ch 28:5-8). Edom and Philistia were also threatening Judah at this time (2Ch 28:17-18). What Ahaz would do would affect the future of his dynasty, the house of David.