Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Isaiah 7:7
Thus saith the Lord GOD, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.
Their evil counsel, as it is called, Isa 7:5.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
7. (Isa 8:10;Pro 21:30).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Thus saith the Lord GOD, it shall not stand,…. That is, the counsel they had taken against Judah to vex it, make a breach in it, and set a king of their own liking over it; so the Septuagint and Arabic versions render the words, “that counsel shall not stand”; the counsel of God shall stand, but not the counsel of men, when it is against him, Pr 19:21:
neither shall it come to pass; or “shall not be”; so far from standing, succeeding, and going forward, till it is brought to a final accomplishment, it should not take footing, or have a being.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
7. It shall not stand. What he had formerly stated was intended to show more fully that the deliverance was great and uncommon; for when the Lord intends to assist us in our trials, he represents the greatness of the danger, that we may not think that he promises less than the necessity requires. He does not usually give a mitigated view of the evils which press upon us, but rather holds out their full extent, and afterwards makes a promise, and shows that he is able to deliver us, though we may appear to be ruined. Such was the method adopted by the Prophet; for he might have told them in plain terms what would happen, and might have encouraged the king and the nation not to be terrified or discouraged at the sight of those armies. But he opened up the scheme and design of those kings, with which he now contrasts the promise and decree of God, that his wonderful assistance may be more strikingly displayed.
This is the sacred anchor which alone upholds us amidst the billows of temptations; for in adversity we shall never be able to stand if God take away his word from us. Although, therefore, the king was almost overwhelmed with despair, Isaiah shows that there is nothing so dreadful that it may not be despised, provided that he fortify himself by the promise of God, and patiently look for that which is not yet seen, and which even appears to be incredible. He affirms, that whatever men attempt, after the manner of the giants, in rising up against God, it shall not stand. He uses the word תקים, ( thakum,) shall arise, in the same sense in which that metaphor is employed in the Latin language, that a work is making progress; and, in a word, he declares that such daring sacrilege shall not stand
Still more emphatic is that which he adds, לא תהיה, ( lo thihyeh,) it shall not be; that is, it shall be reduced to nothing, as if it had never existed. This mode of expression deserves notice, for it was the bare and naked word of God which was contrasted with the vast army and scheme of the kings.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
Isa 7:7-9. Thus saith the Lord God, &c. We have in these verses the grounds of the consolation given to Ahaz, namely, the overthrow of this expedition; with an admonitory caution to the Jews. Vitringa renders the 8th and 9th verses, For Damascus shall be the head only of Syria, and Rezin the head of Damascus; and within sixteen years and five Ephraim shall be broken, and be no longer a people. Isa 7:9. And the head of Ephraim shall be Samaria, and the head of Samaria Remaliah’s son. But, in refutation of the alteration proposed in the number, Bishop Newton has the following remarks: “This prophesy was delivered in the first year of Ahaz, king of Judah, (see 2Ki 15:37.) and it was to comfort him and the house of David in their difficulties and fears from the confederacy of the kings, that Isaiah was commissioned to assure him, that the kings of Syria and of Ephraim, that is to say, of Israel, should remain only the heads of their respective cities: they should not prevail against Jerusalem; and within threescore and five years Israel should be so broken as to be no more a people. The learned Vitringa is of opinion, that instead of sixty and five it should be sixteen and five. Sixteen and five, as he confesses, is an odd way of computation for one and twenty: but, without recourse to any alteration, the thing may be explicated otherwise: for, from the first of Ahaz, compare sixty and five years, in the reigns of Ahaz, Hezekiah, and Manasseh, and the end of them will fall about the twenty-second year of Manasseh; when Esar-haddon, king of Assyria, made the last deportation of the Israelites, and planted other nations in their stead, and in the same expedition probably took Manasseh captive, and carried him to Babylon. See 2Ch 33:11. Ezr 2:10. 2Ki 17:24. Ephraim was broken from being a kingdom before; but now he was broken from being a people, and, from that time to this, what account can be given of the people of Israel, as distinct from the people of Judah? Where have they subsisted all this while, or what is their condition at present?” See Newton on the Prophesies, vol. 1: p. 204 and Calmet. The meaning of the last clause in the ninth verse is, “If you do not give faith to what I say, you shall not be confirmed; the state of your affairs, whether political or ecclesiastical, shall not be established.” The design of the prophet was, to raise up their fainting minds to a confidence in God, rather than in the king of Assyria. See a remarkable passage parallel to this in 2 Chronicles 20. It is very observable, that, though the Syrians and Ephraimites fell from their vain hopes, and did very little hurt to Judaea, yet the Assyrians, in whom the incredulous Jews had placed their hope, afflicted, spoiled, and distressed both them and their king. See 2Ch 28:20-21.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Isa 7:7 Thus saith the Lord GOD, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.
Ver. 7. It shall not stand. ] The counsel of the Lord, that shall stand Psa 33:11 when the world’s wizards shall be taken in their own craftiness. 1Co 3:19
It shall not be.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Isa 8:10, Isa 10:6-12, Isa 37:29, Isa 46:10, Isa 46:11, Psa 2:4-6, Psa 33:11, Psa 76:10, Pro 21:30, Lam 3:37, Dan 4:35, Act 4:25-28
Reciprocal: 1Ki 12:16 – now see 2Ki 11:2 – they hid him 2Ki 17:3 – king of Assyria 2Ch 13:8 – the kingdom 2Ch 21:7 – Howbeit Psa 21:11 – are not Psa 83:3 – They Pro 19:21 – many Isa 9:8 – sent a word Isa 28:18 – your covenant
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Isa 7:7-9. It shall not stand Namely, their evil counsel. For the head of Syria is Damascus As if he had said, As Damascus is the head city of Syria, and Rezin is the head, or king, of Damascus, so shall they continue to be, and not advance themselves, and enlarge their territories, by possessing themselves of Jerusalem and the kingdom of Judah as they design. Rezin shall be kept within his own bounds, and be head of Damascus only. And, in a similar sense, (Isa 7:9,) Samaria shall continue to be the chief city of the kingdom of Israel, and Pekah shall not conquer Jerusalem as he hopes to do. The Hebrew particle , however, which introduces this passage, instead of being tendered for, may, with propriety, be translated though, as it frequently is, (see Jos 17:18; 1Sa 14:39,) and then the meaning will be, Though the head of Syria be Damascus, and the head of Damascus Rezin, and the head of Ephraim be Samaria, &c., yet within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, &c. In this sense Bishop Lowth understands the words, joining the first clause of the ninth verse to the first of the eighth, judging that, by some means, a transposition of it has taken place, which seems very probable. As to the chronological difficulty, which has embarrassed commentators in this place, the best solution seems to be that of Archbishop Usher, (see his Annals of the Old Testament, A.M. 3327,) who explains the latter clause of Isa 7:8, not of the first captivity of the ten tribes by Shalmaneser, but of their final deportation by Esar-haddon, who totally dispeopled the land, and brought new inhabitants from Babylon, Cuthah, and other cities of the Assyrians, to inhabit the cities of Israel. See Ezr 4:2, compared with 2Ki 17:24. Compute, says Bishop Newton, who adopts this explication, sixty-five years in the reigns of Ahaz, Hezekiah, and Manasseh, and the end of them will fall about the twenty-second year of Manasseh; when Esar-haddon, king of Assyria, made the last deportation of the Israelites, and planted other nations in their stead, and in the same expedition probably took Manasseh captive, and carried him to Babylon, 2Ch 33:11. Ephraim was broken from being a kingdom before; but now he was broken from being a people, and from that time to this what account can be given of the people of Israel, as distinct from the people of Judah? On the Prophecies, vol. 1. p. 204. This interpretation of the passage is also approved by Bishop Lowth. It may seem strange, at first sight, that the prophet, who here foretels the entire destruction of Ephraim, should say nothing about the Syrians. But the Syrians were now in confederacy with Ephraim, and therefore what is here said of one may be well supposed to be spoken of both; and that the destruction of both, at or near the same time, is indicated. In fact, the Syrians and Israelites were such near neighbours, that the Israelites could scarcely be invaded by a foreign army, without Syria being subdued. If ye will not believe, &c. If ye will not believe what I now speak to you in the name of God; if ye will not put confidence in him, but, distrusting his providence, will seek to the Assyrians for succour; ye shall not be established Or, preserved in your possessions, any more than the Syrians or Israelites: your state, whether political or ecclesiastical, shall not be upheld and confirmed; but ye shall be distressed and consumed by those to whom you seek for help: the accomplishment of which threatening is recorded 2Ch 28:20. The design of the prophet was to raise up their fainting minds to a reliance on God, rather than on the king of Assyria. See a passage very like this, 2Ch 20:20.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
In contrast to what the two enemy kings said (Isa 7:6), the sovereign God assured Ahaz that the evil that Judah’s enemies had planned for her would not materialize. By pointing out that the head of Syria was Damascus and the head of Damascus was Rezin, God was contrasting the limited sovereignty of Rezin with His own. This is also the point of His reference to the "son of Remaliah" being over Samaria, which was Ephraim’s capital. An additional point may be that these nations would remain as they were without the addition of Judah. They would not conquer Judah. [Note: See Young, 1:274.] God promised that Israel would not be a people (i.e., would be destroyed as a nation) within 65 years. The Northern Kingdom suffered defeat in 722 B.C., only about 13 years from then. To make matters worse, in 671 B.C., about 62 years after this prophecy, King Esarhaddon began importing foreign settlers into the former Northern Kingdom, which made return and resettlement there impossible (cf. 2Ki 17:24; 2Ch 33:11; Ezr 4:2; Ezr 4:10).
Ahaz’s responsibility, and the responsibility of all who heard this prophecy (the "you" is plural), especially the government leaders, was to believe this promise of God and trust Him. If they would not believe it, they would not last.
"Only through trusting in the present and ultimate veracity of God is any real security possible." [Note: Oswalt, p. 202.]
"God literally says, ’If you do not firm up, you will not be confirmed.’ In other words, ’You’ll live by faith, or you won’t live at all. But if you do want my support, all you have to do is lean on me.’ God is attracted to weakness and need and honesty. He is repelled by our self-assured pride." [Note: Ortlund, p. 89.]