Isaiah 7 commentary

Ungodly men are often punished by others as bad as themselves. Being in great distress and confusion, the Jews gave up all for lost. They had made God their enemy, and knew not how to make him their friend. The prophet must teach them to despise their enemies, in faith and dependence on God. Ahaz, in fear, called them two powerful princes. No, says the prophet, they are but tails of smoking firebrands, burnt out already. The two kingdoms of Syria and Israel were nearly expiring. While God has work for the firebrands of the earth, they consume all before them; but when their work is fulfilled, they will be extinguished in smoke. That which Ahaz thought most formidable, is made the ground of their defeat; because they have taken evil counsel against thee; which is an offence to God. God scorns the scorners, and gives his word that the attempt should not succeed. Man purposes, but God disposes. It was folly for those to be trying to ruin their neighbours, who were themselves near to ruin. Isaiah must urge the Jews to rely on the assurances given them. Faith is absolutely necessary to quiet and compose the mind in trials.

Secret disaffection to God is often disguised with the colour of respect to him; and those who are resolved that they will not trust God, yet pretend they will not tempt him. The prophet reproved Ahaz and his court, for the little value they had for Divine revelation. Nothing is more grievous to God than distrust, but the unbelief of man shall not make the promise of God of no effect; the Lord himself shall give a sign. How great soever your distress and danger, of you the Messiah is to be born, and you cannot be destroyed while that blessing is in you. It shall be brought to pass in a glorious manner; and the strongest consolations in time of trouble are derived from Christ, our relation to him, our interest in him, our expectations of him and from him. He would grow up like other children, by the use of the diet of those countries; but he would, unlike other children, uniformly refuse the evil and choose the good. And although his birth would be by the power of the Holy Ghost, yet he should not be fed with angels' food. Then follows a sign of the speedy destruction of the princes, now a terror to Judah. "Before this child," so it may be read; "this child which I have now in my arms," (Shear-jashub, the prophet's own son, 3,) shall be three or four years older, these enemies' forces shall be forsaken of both their kings. The prophecy is so solemn, the sign is so marked, as given by God himself after Ahaz rejected the offer, that it must have raised hopes far beyond what the present occasion suggested. And, if the prospect of the coming of the Divine Saviour was a never-failing support to the hopes of ancient believers, what cause have we to be thankful that the Word was made flesh! May we trust in and love Him, and copy his example.

Let those who will not believe the promises of God, expect to hear the alarms of his threatenings; for who can resist or escape his judgments? The Lord shall sweep all away; and whomsoever he employs in any service for him, he will pay. All speaks a sad change of the face of that pleasant land. But what melancholy change is there, which sin will not make with a people? Agriculture would cease. Sorrows of every kind will come upon all who neglect the great salvation. If we remain unfruitful under the means of grace, the Lord will say, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforth for ever.

1. And it came to pass. Here is related a remarkable prophecy about the wonderful deliverance of Jerusalem, when it appeared to have been utterly ruined. Now the Prophet explains all the circumstances, that by means of them the miracle may be more fully displayed, and to make it manifest, that not by the wisdom or power of man, but by the favor of God, the city has been preserved. For so ungrateful were the people, that, at the close of this transaction, they would not have understood that they had been delivered by the hand of the Lord, if all the circumstances had not been expressly brought to their remembrance. And, indeed, there were very few persons who, in the hour of danger, ventured to hope what Isaiah promised; because they judged of themselves and of the state of public affairs from present appearances. In order, therefore, to make known the remarkable kindness of God, he enters into all the details, that they may perceive from what danger and from whose hand they have been delivered. Let us also understand that this kindness was conferred on ungrateful men, that the Church might be preserved, and that Christ might afterwards appear.

It ought to be observed that the Prophet speaks of the second war which was fought by Rezin and Pekah; and this may easily be inferred from the sacred history; for in the former war Ahaz was vanquished, and a vast multitude were carried into captivity, who were at length restored by the Israelites, when the Prophet, in the name of God, commanded that it should be done. Having again collected an army, (2 Kings 16:5,) the kings of Israel and Syria attacked Ahaz, because they thought that he had been worn out by the former war, and had no power to resist. The mention of this second war is intended to show the greatness of the miracle; for Ahaz had not strength left to resist so great a multitude, the flower of the whole nation having been swept away by the former war, and such of the people as remained being quite dispirited, and not yet recovered from the terror arising out of their recent defeat. So much the more, therefore, are the goodness and power of God displayed, that, pitying so great distress, he gave assistance to his people, and in a moment rescued them from the jaws of death, when all regarded their condition as hopeless.

Went up. This may be regarded as a statement and summary of the whole transaction; for he mentions the subjects on which he is about to speak, and in the Hebrew modes of expression briefly glances at those matters which he will afterwards explain more fully and at large. From the first he tells the result, that the expedition of the two kings was unsuccessful, and afterwards he will assign the reasons why Jerusalem could not be stormed; but before coming to that, he briefly notices the plan or design of King Ahaz.

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 “Syria is arm in arm with Ephraim; leans on the arm of the king of Israel, as on that of a friend.” — Stock. 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. (1 Kings 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.

3. Then said the LORD. First, we see how God, remembering his covenant, anticipates this wicked king by sending the Prophet to meet him; for he does not wait for his prayers, but of his own accord promises that he will grant deliverance. His son Shear-jashub is joined with the Prophet as a witness of the prediction, and there is reason to believe that his name, Shear-jashub, was not given at random, but by the secret inspiration of the Spirit, or by an immediate command of God, and in order to point out the future deliverance of the people. He, therefore, carried in his name what might be regarded as an engraven seal, both of the approaching captivity and of the return. It is also probable that this symbol of the prediction was generally known, for he would not have been joined with his father on any other account than because he bore in his person some authority.

To the way of the fuller’s field. The place is mentioned in order to give authenticity to the history. It is possible that the king, for the purpose of repelling the enemy, may have set out to watch his approach, which appears more clearly from the sacred history. (2 Kings 18:17.) It is called the way of the fuller’s field, perhaps because it was customary to wash clothes there, or because the name arose out of some ancient occurrence. However that may be, it was an evidence of anxiety and dread, that this wretched hypocrite was running about in all directions, when Isaiah came forth to meet him and to soothe his mind.

4. And thou shalt say to him And say unto him. — Eng. Ver. The Hebrew word שמר (shamar,) which signifies to keep, is here put in the Hiphil; This is an oversight; for השמר (hishshamer) is in the Niphal conjugation. — Ed and the greater part of interpreters take it for beware; but they erroneously apply this to an unnatural and far-fetched meaning, that Ahaz should beware of carrying on war. A more natural meaning is, that he ought not to waver or wander about in uncertainty, but to remain calm and serene. Accordingly, I have rendered it refrain. The meaning therefore is, that Ahab should be composed, and should not be agitated or harass his mind by uneasiness, as fickle and unsteady persons are wont to do when they are struck with terror.

This interpretation is confirmed by the word which follows, Be quiet; for these two are connected, first, to keep quiet watch, so as not to be distracted by a variety of opinions, or gaze around in all directions; and, secondly, to have a calm and composed mind. Such are the highly delightful fruits which are yielded by faith; for through a variety of attacks unbelievers give way, and wander in uncertainty, and know not to which hand they ought to turn, while believers keep themselves under restraint, and quietly betake themselves to God. Ungodliness is never at rest; but where faith exists, there the mind is composed, and does not tremble to an immoderate degree. These words very fitly express the power of faith.

Fear not. After having pointed out the remedy for allaying the distresses of the mind, he likewise bids them not fear; for faith, which places our salvation in the hand of God, is not more opposite to anything than to fear. It is impossible, I acknowledge, not to fear when dangers threaten, for faith does not deprive us of all feeling. On the contrary, the children of God are undoubtedly moved by two kinds of fear, one of which arises from the feeling of human nature, even though they be endued with perfect faith. The other arises from the weakness of faith; for no man has made such proficiency as not to have any remains of that distrust against which we ought continually to strive. We must not, therefore, understand the exhortation of the Prophet to mean that the Lord forbids every kind of fear, but he enjoins believers to be armed with such firmness as to overcome fear. As if he had said, “Do not suffer yourselves to be discouraged; and if you are assailed by fierce and severe attacks, maintain unshaken resolution, that you may not be overpowered by dangers, but, on the contrary, live to God and overcome all your distresses.” For the same reason he immediately adds, —

And let not thy heart be faint. To be faint means “to melt away,” for not without reason does the Apostle exhort us to strengthen our hearts by faith. (Hebrews 11:27; 13:9.) It is the softness of indolence, when we forget God and melt away, as it were, through our unbelief. You would not call that man soft or effeminate who relies on the Spirit of God and steadfastly resists adversity. Hence we infer that the Prophet meant nothing else than that Ahaz should undauntedly await the accomplishment of what the Lord had promised to him.

For the two tails. Isaiah employs an elegant metaphor to lessen the conception which the Jews had formed about those two very powerful kings which had filled their minds with terror. Their rage and cruelty appeared to be a devouring fire, which was sufficient to consume the whole of Judea, and could not be quenched. Isaiah, on the other hand, calls them not firebrands, (for that might have been thought to be something great,) but tails, that is, some fragments or ends of firebrands, and these, too, not burning, but only smoking, as if some firebrand snatched from the fire were going out, and gave out nothing else than a slight smoke. This metaphor yields high consolation, for it warns us to form a very different opinion about the violence of the ungodly from what it appears to be. One would think that they are endued with so great power that they could burn and destroy the whole world. To put down the excess of terror, the Lord declares that what we imagined to be a burning, and a perpetual burning, is but a slight smoke and of short duration.

5. The king of Syria hath taken evil counsel against thee. Though he foretold that empty would be the threats, and vain the attempts of the enemies of the people of God, yet he does not conceal that their devices are cruel, if the Lord do not restrain them. By evil counsel he means destructive counsel, for these two kings had leagued together to destroy Judea. To express it more fully, and to place it as it were before their eyes, he relates their very words.

6. Let us go up. That is, Let us make an invasion נקיצנה (nekitzennah) is rendered by some, Let us distress or afflict; which is also expressed by the derivation of the word. But in this conjugation it rather signifies “to stir up and arouse.” Though I do not reject the former interpretation, yet I prefer the latter, because it agrees better with the scope of the passage. Again, I understand the word arouse as meaning to disturb, and to cause revolutions; as we commonly say, to raise disturbances, Remuer les affaires. so as not to allow the tranquillity of that kingdom to be preserved.

Let us open it to us. The following word, נבקיענה, (nabkignennah,) is interpreted by some, Let us break into it Let us make a breach therein for us. — Eng. Ver. Others render it, Let us cause it to break up to us. I have rendered it, Let us open; for בקע (bakang) also signifies what we commonly express by the phrase, to make a breach or opening Faire bresche ou overture. Now, the way to open up the entrance to Judea was to rush through its fortifications by the force of arms, or, through the influence of fear, to induce timid and fickle persons to revolt; for so long as they continue to be loyal, entrance cannot be obtained; but when everything is disturbed by insurrections, an entrance is made, so that it becomes easy to break through into the strongest and best fortified places.

Thus, these two kings hoped that, as soon as they came into Judea, they would immediately terrify the whole nation by the extent and power of the army, so that there would be no ability or inclination to resist. When they brought together an army so prodigiously numerous, it is not probable that they placed any dependence on a long siege; for Jerusalem was strongly fortified; but they thought that the inhabitants of Jerusalem would be terrified and alarmed at the sight of their forces, and would be induced to make an immediate surrender. Yet I leave it to every person to adopt any interpretation of these words that he pleases, for whatever sense be put upon them, the meaning of the Prophet is not doubtful.

The son of Tabeal. Who this Tabeal was cannot easily be learned from history. Probably he was some Israelite, an enemy of the house of David, whom those kings were desirous to set up as one of their own dependents.

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.

8. For the head of Syria is Damascus. As if he had said, “Those two kings shall have their limits, such as they have them now. They aspire to thy kingdom; but I have set bounds to them which they shall not pass.” Damascus was the metropolis of Syria, as Paris is of France. He says, therefore, that those kings ought to be satisfied with their possessions, and that their future condition would be the same as it then was.

And Ephraim shall be broken. After having said that it is now useless to attempt to extend their boundaries, he foretells the calamity of the kingdom of Israel; for by the word broken he means that the kingdom of Israel shall be annihilated, so that it shall no longer exist. The Israelites were carried into captivity, and incorporated with another nation, just as in our own time a part of Savoy has passed under the government of France, and has lost its name. This is what the Prophet means, when he says מעם, (megnam,) that it be not a people; for at that time Israel was mixed with foreign nations, and its peculiar name was blotted out.

Within sixty-five years. The Israelites were led into captivity in the sixth year of King Hezekiah, and Ahaz reigned not more than sixteen years; and, therefore, it is certain that this calculation ought not to be made from the day on which Isaiah was sent to deliver this message, for it was only twenty years to the time when the ten tribes were carried into captivity. Amoz had prophesied of that captivity; and there can be no doubt that this prophecy of Amoz, (Amos 3:11,) and the time specified in it were generally known, and that all understood the reckoning of the number of years. If, therefore, we reckon from the time when Amoz makes this prediction, we shall find it to be sixty-five years; for Jotham reigned sixteen years, (2 Kings 15:33;) Ahaz as many, (2 Kings 16:2;) to those must be added six years of King Hezekiah, which brings us down to the year when the ten tribes were carried into captivity; and if we afterwards add twenty-seven years, during which Uzziah reigned after the publication of the prophecy, there will be sixty-five years This conjecture is highly probable; and there ought not to be any doubt that this was Isaiah’s meaning; for there is a prediction of the Prophet Amoz, in which the Lord warned the people that they might not meet with anything unexpected, and complain that they had been overtaken suddenly. Isaiah confirms that prediction, and announces the same time which already was universally known.

Moreover, by these words he sharply reproves the thoughtlessness of the Israelitish nation, that, when they had been warned of the destruction of their country and their name, not only did they freely indulge in despising the judgment of God, but as if they had purposely intended to mock at the heavenly predictions, they opened their mouth to devour Judea; for a long period was already past, and they thought that they had escaped. The Prophet ridicules this madness, in imagining that the word of God grew old in so small a number of years. But because the Israelites were deaf, Isaiah assigns to the Jews a time when they may look for the destruction of their enemies. Now, this passage shows that the Prophets faithfully assisted each other, that by their united labors they might serve God.

9. Meanwhile And the head of Ephraim. — Eng. Ver. the head of Ephraim is Samaria. As it is a repetition by which he confirms what he formerly said, that God had set bounds to the kingdom of Israel for an appointed time, I have rendered the copulative ו, (vau,) meanwhile. Otherwise, it would have been absurd to say that the metropolis of the kingdom would be preserved, after that the kingdom had been destroyed, as he lately foretold. The meaning therefore is, “In the meantime, till the sixty-five years are fulfilled, Israel enjoys a kind of truce. His head shall be Samaria. Let him be satisfied with his boundaries, and not aim at anything beyond them; for such shall be his condition, until he be utterly destroyed, and be no longer reckoned to be a people.”

If you do not believe. The particle כי (ki) is placed in the middle of the sentence, to mark the reason or cause; and, therefore, some render it, “If you do not believe, the reason is, that you are not believers.” They limit the former clause to the prophecy of Isaiah, but extend the latter to any part of the word of God, as if he had said, “If you have no faith in my sayings, this gives a general proof of your unbelief.” But in that way, the verb תאמינו, (thaaminu,) which is in Hiphil conjugation, will not differ from the verb תאמנו, (theamenu,) which is in the Niphal. It is not without reason, however, that the Prophet has changed the termination; and, from many passages of Scripture, it is abundantly evident that the Hebrew verb אמן, (aman,) in the Niphal conjugation, signifies to stand, or, to remain fixed in its condition. I interpret it, therefore, as if he had said, “This is the only support on which you can rely. Wait calmly and without uneasiness of mind for what the Lord has promised, that is, deliverance. If you do not wait for it, what else remains for you than destruction?”

The particle כי, (ki,) therefore, as in many other instances, means truly; for he declares that they cannot stand, if they do not rely on the promise; and indirectly he expresses still more, that God will stand, though they disbelieve his word, and, as far as lies in their power, endeavor to destroy its stability; but that they will not stand, unless they rely on the promise which has been made to them.

Hence we ought to draw a universal doctrine, that, when we have departed from the word of God, though we may suppose that we are firmly established, still ruin is at hand. For our salvation is bound up with the word of God, and, when this is rejected, the insult offered to it is justly punished by him who was ready to uphold men by his power, if they had not of their own accord rushed headlong to ruin. The consequence is, that either we must believe the promises of God, or it is in vain for us to expect salvation.

10. And Jehovah added to speak to Ahaz. Moreover, the LORD spake again to Ahaz. — Eng. Ver. As the Lord knew that King Ahaz was so wicked as not to believe the promise, so he enjoins Isaiah to confirm him by adding a sign; for when God sees that his promises do not satisfy us, he makes additions to them suitable to our weakness; so that we not only hear him speak, but likewise behold his hand displayed, and thus are confirmed by an evident proof of the fact. Here we ought carefully to observe the use of signs, that is, the reason why God performs miracles, namely, to confirm us in the belief of his word; for when we see his power, if we have any hesitation about what he says to us, our doubt is removed by beholding the thing itself; for miracles added to the word are seals.

11. Either in the deep. I understand it simply to mean Either above or below. He allows him an unrestricted choice of a miracle, to demand either what belongs to earth or what belongs to heaven. But perhaps in the word deep there is something still more emphatic; as if he had said, “It belongs to you to choose. God will immediately show that his dominion is higher than this world, and that it likewise extends to all depths, so that at his pleasure he can raise the dead from their graves.” It was undoubtedly astonishing forbearance towards this wicked king and people of God, that not only did he patiently bear their distrust for a time, but so graciously condescended to them that he was willing to give them any pledge of his power which they chose. Yet he had in his eye not unbelievers only, but he intended likewise to provide for the benefit of the weak, in whom there was a seed of godliness; that they might be fully convinced that Isaiah did not speak at random, for he could easily give a proof of the power of God in confirmation of what he had said.

The same goodness of God is now also displayed towards men, to whom he exercises such forbearance, when he might justly have been offended at them; for how shockingly do they insult God, when they doubt his truth? What do you leave to God, if you take that from him? And whatever may be our doubts, not only does he pardon us, but even aids our distrust, and not only by his word, but by adding miracles; and he exhibits them not only to believers, but also to the ungodly, which we may behold in this king. And if he was at that time so kind to strangers, what ought not his own people to expect from him?

12. And Ahaz said. By a plausible excuse he refuses the sign which the Lord offered to him. That excuse is, that he is unwilling to tempt the LORD; for he pretends to believe the words of the Prophet, and to ask nothing more from God than his word. Ungodliness is certainly detestable in the sight of God, and in like manner God unquestionably sets a high value on faith. Accordingly, if a man rely on his word alone, and disregard everything else, it might be thought that he deserves the highest praise; for there can be no greater perfection than to yield full submission and obedience to God.

But a question arises. Do we tempt God, when we accept what he offers to us? Certainly not. Ahaz therefore speaks falsehood, when he pretends that he refuses the sign, because he is unwilling to tempt God; for there can be nothing fitter or more excellent than to obey God, and indeed it is the highest virtue to ask nothing beyond the word of God; and yet if God choose to add anything to his word, it ought not to be regarded as a virtue to reject this addition as superfluous. It is no small insult offered to God, when his goodness is despised in such a manner as if his proceedings towards us were of no advantage, and as if he did not know what it is that we chiefly need. We know that faith is chiefly commended on this ground, that it maintains obedience to him; but when we wish to be too wise, and despise anything that belongs to God, we are undoubtedly abominable before God, whatever excuse we may plead before men. While we believe the word of God, we ought not to despise the aids which he has been pleased to add for the purpose of strengthening our faith.

For instance, the Lord offers to us in the gospel everything necessary for salvation; for when he brings us into a state of fellowship with Christ, the sum of all blessings is truly contained in him. What then is the use of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Must they be regarded as superfluous? Not at all; for any one who shall actually, and without flattery, acknowledge his weakness, of which all from the least to the greatest are conscious, will gladly avail himself of those aids for his support. We ought indeed to grieve and lament, that the sacred truth of God needs assistance on account of the defect of our flesh; but since we cannot all at once remove this defect, any one who, according to his capacity shall believe the word, will immediately render full obedience to God. Let us therefore learn to embrace the signs along with the word, since it is not in the power of man to separate them.

When Ahaz refuses the sign offered to him, by doing so he displays both his obstinacy and his ingratitude; for he despises what God had offered for the highest advantage. Hence also it is evident how far we ought to ask signs, namely, when God offers them to us; and therefore he who shall reject them when offered, must also reject the grace of God. In like manner fanatics of the present day disregard Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, and consider them to be childish elements. They cannot do this without at the same time rejecting the whole gospel; for we must not separate those things which the Lord has commanded us to join.

But a question may be asked, Is it not sometimes lawful to ask signs from the Lord? For we have an instance of this in Gideon, who wished to have his calling confirmed by some sign. (Judges 6:17.) The Lord granted his prayer, and did not disapprove of such a desire. I answer, though Gideon was not commanded by God to ask a sign, yet he did so, not at his own suggestion, but by an operation of the Holy Spirit. We must not abuse his example, therefore, so that each of us may freely allow himself that liberty; for so great is the forwardness of men that they do not hesitate to ask innumerable signs from God without any proper reason. Such effrontery ought therefore to be restrained, that we may be satisfied with those signs which the Lord offers to us.

Now, there are two kinds of signs; for some are extraordinary, and may be called supernatural; such as that which the Prophet will immediately add, and that which, we shall afterwards see, was offered to Hezekiah. (Isaiah 38:7.) Some are ordinary, and in daily use among believers, such as Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, which contain no miracle, or at least may be perceived by the eye or by some of the senses. What the Lord miraculously performs by his Spirit is unseen, but in those which are extraordinary the miracle itself is seen. Such is also the end and use of all signs; for as Gideon was confirmed by an astonishing miracle, so we are confirmed by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, though our eyes behold no miracle.

13. And he said, Hear now, O house of David. Under the pretense of honor to exclude the power of God, which would maintain the truth of the promise, was intolerable wickedness; and therefore the Prophet kindles into warmer indignation, and more sharply rebukes wicked hypocrites. Though it would have been honorable to them to be reckoned the descendants of David, provided that they imitated his piety, yet it is rather for the sake of reproach that he calls them the posterity or family of David. It was indeed no small aggravation of the baseness, that the grace of God was rejected by that family from which the salvation of the whole world would proceed. Grievous disgrace must have been brought on them, by naming their ancestry, from which they had so basely and shamefully degenerated.

This order ought to be carefully observed; for we ought not to begin with severe reproof, but with doctrine, that men may be gently drawn by it. When plain and simple doctrine is not sufficient, proofs must be added. But if even this method produce no good effect, it then becomes necessary to employ greater vehemence. Such is the manner in which we hear Isaiah thundering on the present occasion. After having exhibited to the king both doctrine and signs, he now resorts to the last remedy, and sharply and severely reproves an obstinate man; and not him only, but the whole royal family which was guilty of the same kind of impiety.

Is it a small thing for you to weary men? He makes a comparison between God and men; not that it is possible to make an actual separation between God and the prophets and holy teachers of whom he speaks, who are nothing else than God’s instruments, and make common cause with him, when they discharge their duty; for of them the Lord testifies,

He who despiseth you despiseth me. He who heareth you heareth me. (Luke 10:16.)

The Prophet therefore adapts his discourse to the impiety of Ahaz, and of those who resembled him; for they thought that they had to deal with men. Those very words were undoubtedly spoken in ancient times which we hear at the present day from the mouths of the ungodly: “Are they not men that speak to us?” And thus they endeavor to disparage the doctrine which comes from God. As it was customary at that time for irreligious despisers of doctrine to use the same kind of language, the Prophet, by way of admission, says that those who performed the sacred office of teaching the word were men. “Be it so. You tell me that I am a mortal man. That is the light in which you view the prophets of God. But is it a small thing to weary us, if you do not also weary God? Now, you despise God, by rejecting the sign of his astonishing power which he was willing to give to you. In vain therefore do you boast that you do not despise him, and that you have to do with men, and not with God.” This then is the reason why the Prophet was so greatly enraged. Hence we see more clearly what I mentioned a little before, that the proper season for giving reproofs is, when we have attempted everything that God enjoined, and have neglected no part of our duty. We ought then to break out with greater vehemence, and to expose the ungodliness which lurked under those cloaks of hypocrisy.

My God. He formerly said, Ask a sign for thee from the Lord thy God; for at that time his obstinacy and rebellion had not been manifestly proved. But now he claims it as peculiar to himself; for Ahaz, and those who resembled him, had no right to boast of the name of God. He therefore intimates that God is on his side, and is not on the side of those hypocrites: and in this way he testifies his confidence; for he shows how conscientiously he promised deliverance to the king; as if he had said, that he did not come but when God sent him, and that he said nothing but what he was commanded to say. With the same boldness ought all ministers to be endued, not only so as to profess it, but to have it deeply rooted in their hearts. The false prophets also boast of it loudly, but it is empty and unmeaning talk, or a blind confidence arising from rashness.

14. Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Ahaz had already refused the sign which the Lord offered to him, when the Prophet remonstrated against his rebellion and ingratitude; yet the Prophet declares that this will not prevent God from giving the sign which he had promised and appointed for the Jews. But what sign?

Behold, a virgin shall conceive. This passage is obscure; but the blame lies partly on the Jews, who, by much cavilling, have labored, as far as lay in their power, to pervert the true exposition. They are hard pressed by this passage; for it contains an illustrious prediction concerning the Messiah, who is here called Immanuel; and therefore they have labored, by all possible means, to torture the Prophet’s meaning to another sense. Some allege that the person here mentioned is Hezekiah; and others, that it is the son of Isaiah.

Those who apply this passage to Hezekiah are excessively impudent; for he must have been a full-grown man when Jerusalem was besieged. Thus they show that they are grossly ignorant of history. But it is a just reward of their malice, that God hath blinded them in such a manner as to be deprived of all judgment. This happens in the present day to the papists, who often expose themselves to ridicule by their mad eagerness to pervert the Scriptures.

As to those who think that it was Isaiah’s son, it is an utterly frivolous conjecture; for we do not read that a deliverer would be raised up from the seed of Isaiah, who should be called Immanuel; for this title is far too illustrious to admit of being applied to any man.

Others think, or, at least, (being unwilling to contend with the Jews more than was necessary,) admit that the Prophet spoke of some child who was born at that time, by whom, as by an obscure picture, Christ was foreshadowed. But they produce no strong arguments, and do not show who that child was, or bring forward any proofs. Now, it is certain, as we have already said, that this name Immanuel could not be literally applied to a mere man; and, therefore, there can be no doubt that the Prophet referred to Christ.

But all writers, both Greek and Latin, are too much at their ease in handling this passage; for, as if there were no difficulty in it, they merely assert that Christ is here promised from the Virgin Mary. Now, there is no small difficulty in the objection which the Jews bring against us, that Christ is here mentioned without any sufficient reason; for thus they argue, and demand that the scope of the passage be examined: “Jerusalem was besieged. The Prophet was about to give them a sign of deliverance. Why should he promise the Messiah, who was to be born five hundred years afterwards?” By this argument they think that they have gained the victory, because the promise concerning Christ had nothing to do with assuring Ahaz of the deliverance of Jerusalem. And then they boast as if they had gained the day, chiefly because scarcely any one replies to them. That is the reason why I said that commentators have been too much at their ease in this matter; for it is of no small importance to show why the Redeemer is here mentioned.

Now, the matter stands thus. King Ahaz having rejected the sign which God had offered to him, the Prophet reminds him of the foundation of the covenant, which even the ungodly did not venture openly to reject. The Messiah must be born; and this was expected by all, because the salvation of the whole nation depended on it. The Prophet, therefore, after having expressed his indignation against the king, again argues in this manner: “By rejecting the promise, thou wouldest endeavor to overturn the decree of God; but it shall remain inviolable, and thy treachery and ingratitude will not hinder God from being, continually the Deliverer of his people; for he will at length raise up his Messiah.”

To make these things more plain, we must attend to the custom of the Prophets, who, in establishing special promises, lay down this as the foundation, that God will send a Redeemer. On this general foundation God everywhere builds all the special promises which he makes to his people; and certainly every one who expects aid and assistance from him must be convinced of his fatherly love. And how could he be reconciled to us but through Christ, in whom he has freely adopted the elect, and continues to pardon them to the end? Hence comes that saying of Paul, that

all the promises of God in Christ are Yea and Amen. (2 Corinthians 1:20.)

Whenever, therefore, God assisted his ancient people, he at the same time reconciled them to himself through Christ; and accordingly, whenever famine, pestilence, and war are mentioned, in order to hold out a hope of deliverance, he places the Messiah before their eyes. This being exceedingly clear, the Jews have no right to make a noise, as if the Prophet made an unseasonable transition to a very remote subject. For on what did the deliverance of Jerusalem depend, but on the manifestation of Christ? This was, indeed, the only foundation on which the salvation of the Church always rested.

Most appropriately, therefore, did Isaiah say, “True, thou dost not believe the promises of God, but yet God will fulfill them; for he will at length send his Christ, for whose sake he determines to preserve this city. Though thou art unworthy, yet God will have regard to his own honor.” King Ahaz is therefore deprived of that sign which he formerly rejected, and loses the benefit of which he proved himself to be unworthy; but still God’s inviolable promise is still held out to him. This is plainly enough intimated by the particle לכן, (lachen,) therefore; that is, because thou disdainest that particular sign which God offered to thee, הוא, (hu,) He, that is, God himself, who was so gracious as to offer it freely to thee, he whom thou weariest will not fail to hold out a sign. When I say that the coming of Christ is promised to Ahaz, I do not mean that God includes him among the chosen people, to whom he had appointed his Son to be the Author of salvation; but because the discourse is directed to the whole body of the people.

Will give you a sign. The word לכם, (lachem,) to you, is interpreted by some as meaning to your children; but this is forced. So far as relates to the persons addressed, the Prophet leaves the wicked king and looks to the nation, so far as it had been adopted by God. He will therefore give, not to thee a wicked king, and to those who are like thee, but to you whom he has adopted; for the covenant which he made with Abraham continues to be firm and inviolable. And the Lord always has some remnant to whom the advantage of the covenant belongs; though the rulers and governors of his people may be hypocrites.

Behold, a virgin shall conceive. The word Behold is used emphatically, to denote the greatness of the event; for this is the manner in which the Spirit usually speaks of great and remarkable events, in order to elevate the minds of men. The Prophet, therefore, enjoins his hearers to be attentive, and to consider this extraordinary work of God; as if he had said, “Be not slothful, but consider this singular grace of God, which ought of itself to have drawn your attention, but is concealed from you on account of your stupidity.”

Although the word עלמה, (gnalmah,) a virgin, is derived from עלם, (gnalam,) which signifies to hide, because the shame and modesty of virgins does not allow them to appear in public; yet as the Jews dispute much about that word, and assert that it does not signify virgin, because Solomon used it to denote a young woman who was betrothed, it is unnecessary to contend about the word. Though we should admit what they say, that עלמה (gnalmah) sometimes denotes a young woman, and that the name refers, as they would have it, to the age, (yet it is frequently used in Scripture when the subject relates to a virgin,) the nature of the case sufficiently refutes all their slanders. For what wonderful thing did the Prophet say, if he spoke of a young woman who conceived through intercourse with a man? It would certainly have been absurd to hold out this as a sign or a miracle. Let us suppose that it denotes a young woman who should become pregnant in the ordinary course of nature; Quae ex coitu viri gravida esset futura. everybody sees that it would have been silly and contemptible for the Prophet, after having said that he was about to speak of something strange and uncommon, to add, A young woman shall conceive. It is, therefore, plain enough that he speaks of a virgin who should conceive, not by the ordinary course of nature, but by the gracious influence of the Holy Spirit. And this is the mystery which Paul extols in lofty terms, that

God was manifested in the flesh. (1 Timothy 3:16.)

And shall call. The Hebrew verb is in the feminine gender, She shall call; for as to those who read it in the masculine gender, I know not on what they found their opinion. The copies which we use certainly do not differ. If you apply it to the mother, it certainly expresses something different from the ordinary custom. We know that to the father is always assigned the right of giving a name to a child; for it is a sign of the power and authority of fathers over children; and the same authority does not belong to women. But here it is conveyed to the mother; and therefore it follows that he is conceived by the mother in such a manner as not to have a father on earth; otherwise the Prophet would pervert the ordinary custom of Scripture, which ascribes this office to men only. Yet it ought to be observed that the name was not given to Christ at the suggestion of his mother, and in such a case it would have had no weight; but the Prophet means that, in publishing the name, the virgin will occupy the place of a herald, because there will be no earthly father to perform that office.

Immanuel. This name was unquestionably bestowed on Christ on account of the actual fact; for the only-begotten Son of God clothed himself with our flesh, and united himself to us by partaking of our nature. He is, therefore, called God with us, or united to us; which cannot apply to a man who is not God. The Jews in their sophistry tell us that this name was given to Hezekiah; because by the hand of Hezekiah God delivered his people; and they add, “He who is the servant of God represents his person.” But neither Moses nor Joshua, who were deliverers of the nation, were so denominated; and therefore this Immanuel is preferred to Moses and Joshua, and all the others; for by this name he excels all that ever were before, and all that shall come after him; and it is a title expressive of some extraordinary excellence and authority which he possesses above others. It is therefore evident that it denotes not only the power of God, such as he usually displays by his servant, but a union of person, by which Christ became God-man. Hence it is also evident that Isaiah here relates no common event, but points out that unparalleled mystery which the Jews labor in vain to conceal.

15. Butter and honey shall he eat. Here the Prophet proves the true human nature of Christ; for it was altogether incredible that he who was God should be born of a virgin. Such a prodigy was revolting to the ordinary judgment of men. To hinder us from thinking that his fancy now presents to us some apparition, he describes the marks of human nature, in order to show, by means of them, that Christ will actually appear in flesh, or in the nature of man; that is, that he will be reared in the same manner that children commonly are. The Jews had a different way of rearing children from what is followed by us; for they used honey, which is not so customary among us; and to this day they still retain the custom of causing a child to taste butter and honey, as soon as it is born, before receiving suck.

That he may know. That is, until he arrive at that age when he can distinguish between good and evil, or, as we commonly say, till the years of discretion; ל (lamed) denotes the term and period up to which he shall be reared after the manner of a child; and this contributes still more to prove the reality of his nature. He therefore means understanding and judgment, such as is obtained when the period of childhood is past. Thus we see how far the Son of God condescended on our account, so that he not only was willing to be fed on our food, but also, for a time, to be deprived of understanding, and to endure all our weaknesses. (Hebrews 2:14.) This relates to his human nature, for it cannot apply to his Divinity. Of this state of ignorance, in which Christ was for a time, Luke testifies when he says,

And he grew in wisdom, and in stature, and in favor with God and with man. (Luke 2:52.)

If Luke had merely said that Christ grew, he might have been supposed to mean with men; but he expressly adds, with God. Christ must therefore have been, for a time, like little children, so that, so far as relates to his human nature, he was deficient in understanding.

16. Before the child shall know. Many have been led into a mistake by connecting this verse with the preceding one, as if it had been the same child that was mentioned. They suppose that it assigns the reason, and that the particle כי (ki) means for Bishops Lowth and Stock concur in rendering כי (ki) for, which indeed is its ordinary meaning. FOR before this child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. — Ed But if we carefully examine the Prophet’s meaning, it will quickly be apparent that he leaves the general doctrine, to which he had made a short digression, and returns to his immediate subject. After having founded the hope of the preservation of the city on the promised Mediator, he now shows in what way it will be preserved.

The child. I interpret this word as referring, not to Christ, but to all children in general. Here I differ from all the commentators; for they think that the demonstrative ה points out a particular child. But I view הנער, (hannagnar,) so that ה is indeed added for the purpose of making it more definite, but is intended to point out the age, and not any particular child; as when we say, The child, L’enfant. and add the article The Le. for the purpose of giving greater definiteness. This is very customary in Scripture. If he had pointed out a particular child, he would have added הזה, (hazzeh,) as is frequently done in other passages. It is not probable that this promise of the overturn of the kingdoms of Syria and Samaria, which immediately followed, would be deferred for five hundred years, that is, till the coming of Christ; and, indeed, it would have been altogether absurd. The meaning therefore is, “Before the children, who shall be born hereafter, can distinguish between good and evil, the land which thou hatest shall be forsaken.”

The land. By the land I understand Israel and Syria; for though they were two, yet on account of the league which had been formed between the two kings, they are accounted one. Some understand by it Judea; but that cannot agree on account of the plural noun which follows, her kings. That these things happened as they are written may be easily inferred from the sacred history; for when Ahaz called the Assyrians to aid him, Rezin was slain by them. (2 Kings 16:9.) Not long afterwards, Pekah, king of Israel, died, in the twelfth year of King Ahaz, and was succeeded by Hoshea, the son of Elah. (2 Kings 15:30; 17:1.) Thus, before the children who should afterwards be born were grown up, both countries would be deprived of their kings; for before that time both Rezin and Pekah were removed out of the land of the living. Now the discourse is addressed to Ahaz, and God promises to him, by way of consolation, that he will inflict punishment on the enemies of Ahaz, but for no other purpose than to render him more inexcusable.

Which thou hatest. As to the word hatest, Syria and the land of Israel are said to be hated or abhorred by King Ahaz, because from that quarter he was attacked by invading armies. He therefore promises that those kings will soon perish. Some render מפני, (mippenei,) on account of; “At whose kings thou dost fret אתה קץ מפני, (attah kaz mippenei,) thou art fretting by reason of. See Exodus 1:12.” — Bishop Stock and I admit that this word is generally used in this sense. But I adopt here a more natural rendering, as if he had said, It shall be forsaken from the face or from the presence of the two kings, and shall be left by them, so that they shall no more be seen. And by these words it is sufficiently evident that this must be understood as referring to both kingdoms.

17. The Lord shall bring upon thee. Here the Prophet, on the other hand, threatens the wicked hypocrite, who pretended that he was unwilling to tempt God, and yet called for those whom the Lord had forbidden him to call to his aid. (Exodus 23:32.) That he might not indulge in undue exultation and insolence on account of the former promise, he likewise threatens his destruction, and declares that what he hopes to be his preservation, that is, the aid of the Assyrians, will be utterly destructive to him. (2 Kings 16:7; 2 Chronicles 28:16.) As if he had said, “Thou promisest everything to thyself from the king of Assyria, and thinkest that he will be faithful to thee, because thou hast entered into a league and covenant with him, which God had forbidden; but thou shalt quickly understand of what advantage it will be to thee to have tempted God. Thou mightest have remained at home and at ease, and mightest have received the assistance of God; but thou choosest rather to call in the Assyrians. Thou shalt find them to be worse than thine own enemies;”

This discourse, therefore, agrees with what goes before; for he presses more closely the treachery and ingratitude of the king, who had rejected both the word of God and the sign, and had rendered himself unworthy of every promise. And as it is customary with hypocrites, when they have escaped from any danger and fear, immediately to return to their natural disposition, he affirms that nothing shall protect the Jews from being likewise involved in just punishments. He expressly declares that the family of David, which might have claimed exemption on the ground of its peculiar privilege, will be exposed to the same kind of calamities; for God regulates his judgments in such a manner, that while he spares his Church and provides for her permanent existence, he does not permit the wicked, who are mingled with the good, to escape unpunished.

From the day that Ephraim departed from Judah. In this manner does Scripture speak when it describes any serious calamity; for the Jews could not have received a severer chastisement than when, by the withdrawing of the ten tribes, (1 Kings 12:16,) not only was the kingdom wretchedly divided, but the body of the nation was rent and torn. The revolt of Ephraim from Judah was, therefore, an indication of the worst kind of calamity; for the resources of the kingdom of Judah being more seriously affected by that division than it could have been by any defeat by a foreign enemy, he says that since that time the Jews had not sustained a greater calamity.

Hence, as I have already said, we see how God, while he punishes hypocrites, at the same time remembers believers, and opens the way for his mercy. We ought to observe this wonderful arrangement, that amidst the most dreadful deaths still the Church remains safe. Who would ever have thought that Jerusalem would be delivered from the vast army of the two kings? Or, that the kingdom of Syria, which was then in a flourishing condition, would quickly be overturned? Or, that Samaria was not far from destruction? And in the mean time, that the Assyrians, on whom the Jews relied, would do them more injury than the Israelites and Syrians had ever done? All these things the Lord did for the sake of preserving his Church, but at the same time in such a manner that he likewise took vengeance on the wickedness of King Ahaz.

18. And it shall be in that day. The Jews thought that the Assyrians were bound by their league with them; but the Prophet ridicules this folly, and declares that they will be ready at God’s bidding to drive them in any direction that he thinks fit. Yet instead of command he employs the metaphor hiss, in allusion to the climate of those kingdoms of which he speaks; for Egypt abounds in flies, because the country is hot and marshy; and when the air is both hot and moist, there must be produced a great abundance of flies. Assyria, on the other hand, abounded in bees; and when he says that he will bring them by a hiss, he alludes to the natural habits of bees and flies, but he means that he will find no difficulty in sending them. As if he had said, “There will be no need of great exertion; for as soon as I shall give the sign, they will instantly run.” In this manner he shows what efficacy belongs to his secret operation or design, that by a hiss he compels the most powerful nations to yield obedience.

19. And they shall come. He follows out the same metaphor; for bees commonly seek nests for themselves in caverns, or valleys and bushes, and such like places; as if he had said that there would not be a corner in which the enemy would not settle down and dwell. It is unnecessary to give ourselves much trouble in explaining why he speaks of bushes and thorns rather than of other things, for the language is figurative. And yet I have no doubt that he intended to state, that whether they hide themselves in caverns, or seek concealment in valleys, there will be no escape; for the enemy will take possession of the whole country.

Hence we again infer what has been formerly observed, that nothing takes place at random or by chance, but that everything is governed by the hand of God. Again, though wicked men may rage and may be hurried forward in blind attack, still God puts a bridle on them that they may promote his glory. Therefore, when we see that wicked men throw everything into disorder, let us not think that God has laid the bridle on their neck, that they may rush forward wherever they please; but let us be fully convinced that their violent attacks are under control. From this we ought to derive wonderful consolation amidst those disturbances in which the Christian world is so deeply involved, and by the violence of which it is so powerfully shaken, that almost everything appears to be in a state of confusion. We should consider that the Lord has a concealed bridle by which he restrains furious beasts, so that they cannot break through wherever the madness of their rage drives them, or go beyond the limits which the Lord prescribes to them.

20. The Lord will shave with a hired razor. He now employs a different metaphor, and compares those enemies by whom the Lord had determined to afflict Judea at the appointed time, to a razor, by which the beard and hair are shaved, and other excrescences of the same kind are removed. ב (beth) is here superfluous, and is only employed in accordance with the Hebrew idiom, to denote an instrument, and, therefore, I have merely rendered it he will shave with a razor. What he means he immediately explains; namely, that the Assyrians will serve for a razor in the hand of God, and that they will come from a distant country.

Who are beyond the river. This means that Euphrates will not hinder them from passing over to execute the commands of God. He likewise adds, that it will not be some portion of that nation rushing forward of its own accord into foreign territories, or wandering without a settled leader; but that the king himself will lead them, so that the nation and the king at the same time will overwhelm Judea, and it will sink under such a burden.

A hired razor. It is not without reason that he says that this razor is hired; for he expresses by it the dreadful nature of the calamity which would be brought upon them by the Assyrians. If a man make use of a hired horse or a hired sword, he will use it the more freely, and will not spare or take care of it as he would do with his own, for men wish to gain advantage from what they have hired to the full value of the hire. Thus the Lord threatens that he will not at all spare the razor, though he should be under the necessity of blunting it, which means, that he will send the Assyrians with mad violence and rage. If the Lord took such dreadful vengeance on the Jews for those reasons which the Prophet formerly enumerated, we ought to fear lest we be punished in the same manner; or rather, we ought to dread the razor with which he has already begun to shave us.

The head and the hair of the feet. By the hair of the feet he means the lower parts; for by the feet is meant all that is below the belly, and it is a figure of speech, by which a part is taken for the whole. Unde et aquam pedum urinam vocant; et pedes tegere pro alvum exonerare. In short, he means that the whole body, and even the beard, must be shaved. Now, if we set aside the figures, and wish to get at the plain and natural meaning, it is as if he had said, that this shaving will reach from the top of the head down to the feet, and that kings and princes will not be exempted from that calamity, but that they also must feel the edge of the razor

21. And it shall come to pass on that day. In these verses, down to the end of the chapter, the Prophet describes the state of a country torn and wasted; for he intends to present a striking and lively picture of such overwhelming distress that, wherever you turn your eyes, nothing is to be seen but the traces of frightful desolation. Some think that a mitigation of punishment is here promised, but we shall soon see that this does not agree with the context. Though he employs the appellation, a man, without any limitation, yet strictly it is of the richest men that he speaks; for he does not say that every one will have so many; but they who formerly were accustomed to rear a large number of oxen and sheep will be satisfied with having a few. He means, therefore, that all will be reduced to very deep poverty. Some think that the Hebrew word which the Prophet employs, יחיה, (yechaiyeh,) he shall quicken, means “to deliver from death;” but the meaning which I have adopted is more natural and more generally approved.

22. On account of the abundance of milk. Some explain it thus: “there will scarcely be as much obtained from one cow as would be required for the food of a family;” for those who rear cattle do not feed on milk alone, but likewise make cheeses, and have butter to sell. When, therefore, he says, that out of all their abundance nothing more would be produced than what was necessary for the use of the family, in the opinion of those commentators it denotes poverty. Others think that this is a promise of fertility, that however small may be the number of their cows and sheep, still they will have abundant means of support. A third exposition is preferable; for it appears as if the Prophet intended to show that the men will be so few in number that a small quantity of milk will be sufficient for them all; and it is a far heavier affliction that a country should want inhabitants than that it should have a small supply of herds and flocks.

In the preceding verse Isaiah declared, that Judea would be so impoverished, that very few herds and flocks would be left; but now he adds that the men will be still fewer, for a very little milk will be sufficient for the inhabitants of the land. I adopt this exposition the more readily, because here a promise would be inappropriate. The former sense is forced; and he does not speak only of cattle-feeders who had cows, but of all the inhabitants; for he expressly says, Every one that shall be left, and by that expression he again denotes the smallness of their number. His statement, therefore, is intended to show, that the country will be so generally forsaken and so miserably wasted, that no great supply of milk and butter will be needed; for, when the devastation has taken place, there will be few men left.

23. A thousand vines. As to the opinion of those who think that Isaiah here comforts believers, I pass it by without refutation; for it is sufficiently refuted by the context, and the words plainly declare that Isaiah continues to threaten destruction, and to describe the desolation of the land. Others think that the meaning is this, “Where a thousand vines were, which were sold for a thousand pieces of silver, there briers and thorns will be found.” But it is plain that this would be far too low a price, if the statement were applied to the whole country; for who would think of reckoning a shekel to be the price of a vine, which is the most precious of all possessions? It is of the same import with a common expression, “to sell for a trifle,” to give away for a piece of bread; Bailler pour une piece de pain. when anything is sold at a very low price. Any field, however barren or uncultivated, might be sold at a higher price, if due attention were paid to the cultivation of land, as is usually done where there is a crowded population.

On account of briers and thorns. He assigns a reason for the alteration of the price, which makes it evident that he speaks of desolation. On account of briers and thorns, says he; for there will be none to cultivate the land, which usually happens when a heavy calamity has been sustained. ל, (lamed,) which some render to or for, means, I think, on account of; for, everything having been thrown into confusion by the fury of the invading army, there are no vinedressers or laborers, and the most highly cultivated lands must have been covered over and choked up by briers and thorns. The meaning therefore is, that the inhabitants will be so few, that you will scarcely find and one that would give the smallest coin to buy the most valuable estates.

24. With arrows and bow shall they come thither. The verb יבא, (yabo,) he shall come, is in the singular number; but it ought to be explained by the plural, that the archers will march through Judea. Some think that Isaiah speaks of bows and arrows, because such would be the dread of enemies, that no man unarmed would venture to approach his possessions. But I consider it to be more probable that the Prophet means that, where the richest cultivation formerly existed, opportunity for hunting will be found; for there the wild beasts have their dens. Now, it is a most wretched change, when fields formerly cultivated and fertile are turned into woods and thickets. By bow and arrow here, therefore, I understand hunting, in this sense: “it shall not be approached by husbandmen but by hunters, and they shall not plant or dress vines, but chase wild beasts.” In short, it means nothing else than frightful desolation, which shall change the aspect of the land.

25. And on all the hills that are dug with the hoe. Here the Prophet appears to contradict himself; for, having hitherto spoken of the desolation of the land, he now describes what may be called a new condition, when he says that, where thorns and briers were, there oxen will feed. The consequence has been, that some have applied these words to the consolation of the people. But the intention of the Prophet is totally different; for he means that hills, which were at a great distance from a crowded population, and which could not be approached without much difficulty, will be fit for pasturage, on account of the great number of men who go thither; that is, because men will betake themselves to desert mountains, which formerly were inaccessible, there will be no need to be afraid of briers, “The shepherds shall be under no apprehension of finding on those hills hedges of briar and thorn, to interrupt the free range of their flock.” — Rosenmuller. for there will be abundance of inhabitants. Now, this is a most wretched state of things, when men cannot escape death but by resorting to thorns and briers; for he means hills formerly desolate and uncultivated, in which men shall seek a residence and abode, because no part of the country will be safe. Thus he describes a distressful and melancholy condition of the whole country, and destruction so awful that the aspect of the country shall be altogether different from what it had formerly been.

When he foretold these things to King Ahaz, there can be no doubt that Ahaz despised them; for that wicked king, relying on his forces and on his league with the Assyrians, settled, as it were, on his lees, as soon as the siege of the city was raised. But Isaiah was bound to persevere in the discharge of his office, in order to show that there was no help but from God, and to inform the wretched hypocrite, that his destruction would come from that quarter from which he expected his preservation.

CHAPTER 8

Isaiah Chapter 8:1-22

1. Moreover, the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man’s pen concerning Mahar-shalal-hash-baz.

1. Et dixit Iehova ad me: Sume tibi volumen grande, et scribi in eo stylo vulgari, (vel, hominis:) Accelera ad diripiendum, festina ad praedam.

2. And I took unto me faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.

2. Et adhibui mihi testes fideles, Uriam sacerdotem, et Zachariam filium Iebarachiae.

3. And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son: then said the Lord to me, Call his name Mahar-shalal-hash-baz:

3. Et accessi ad prophetissam, quae concepit, et peperit filium. Dixitque mihi Iehova: Voca nomen ejus, Accelera ad diripiendum; festina ad praedam.

4. For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother, the riches of Damascus, and the spoil of Samaria, shall be taken away before the king of Assyria.

4. Sane antequam sciat puer clamare, Pater mi et mater mea, tolletur substantia Damasci, et spolia Samariae, coram Rege Assyriae.

5. The Lord spake also unto me again, saying,

5. Rursus loquutus est mecum Iehova, iterum dicens:

6. Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly, and rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah’s son;

6. Quandoquidem rejecit populus iste aquas Siloe, quae fluunt cum silentio, et gaudium fuit illi ad Rezin, et filium Romeliae.

7. Now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, strong and many, even the king of Assyria, and all his glory; and he shall come up over all his channels, and go over all his banks.

7. Ideo, ecce Dominus adducit super eos aquas fluvii, violentas et magnas: nempe Regem Assyriae et omne robur ejus; ascendetque super omnes rivos, et transibit super omnes ripas ejus.

8. And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over; he shall reach even to the neck: and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.

8. Et trajiciens in Iudam inundabit, et transibit, pertinget usque ad collum. Et implebit extensio alarum ejus latitudinem terrae tuae, O Immanuel.

9. Associate yourselves, O ye people, and ye shall be broken in pieces; and give ear, all ye of far countries: gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces; gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces.

9. Consociate vos populi, et confringemini; auribus percipite quotquot e longinqua terra estis. Accingite vos, et confringemini; accingite, inquam, vos, et confringemini.

10. Take counsel together, and it shall come to nought; speak the word, and it shall not stand: for God is with us.

10. Consultate consilium, et dissolvetur; decernite decretum, et non stabit; quia nobiscum Deus. (Hebraice, Immanuel.)

11. For the Lord spake thus to me with a strong hand, and instructed me, that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying,

11. Nam sic dixit mihi Iehova, tanquam apprehensione (vel, roboratione) manus; et erudivit me, ne irem per viam populi hujus, dicens:

12. Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid.

12. Ne dicatis, Conspiratio, in quibuscunque populus iste dicit, Conspiratio, neque timorem eorum timueritis, aut formidaveritis.

13. Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself; and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.

13. Iehovam exercituum ipsum sanctificate; et sit ipse timor vester; et idem sit pavor vester.

14. And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling, and for a rock of offence, to both the houses of Israel; for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

14. Tum ipse erit in sanctuarium; in lapidem offendiculi; et in petram ruinae, duabus domibus Israel; in laqueum, et tendiculum incolae Ierusalem.

15. And many among them shall stumble, and fall, and be broken, and be snared, and be taken.

15. Et impingent multi inter eos; ideoque corruent, et conterentur, irretientur, et capientur.

16. Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples.

16. Liga contestationem; obsigna legem inter discipulos meos.

17. And I will wait upon the Lord, that hideth his face from the house of Jacob, and I will look for him.

17. Itaque expectabo Iehovam, qui abscondit faciem suam a domo Iacob, et praestolabor eum.

18. Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath given me, are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the Lord of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion.

18. Ecce ego et pueri, quos dedit mihi Iehova, in signa et prodigia in Israel; a Iehova exercituum, qui habitat in monte Sion.

19. And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?

19. Quod si dixerint vobis, Sciscitamini a pythonicis et divinis, qui mussitant et demurmurant; annon populus Deum suum consulet, a vivis ad mortuos?

20. To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

20. Ad legem et testimonium. Si non loquuti fuerint secundum verbum hoc, ideo nempe quod nihil est lucis.

21. And they shall pass through it hardly bestead and hungry: and it shall come to pass, that, when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their king and their God, and look upward.

21. Tum per hanc terram transibunt oppressi et famelici. Et accidet ut cum esurierint, irritentur, ac maledicant regi suo, Deo suo, attollentes sursum faciem.

22. And they shall look unto the earth; and behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they shall be driven to darkness.

22. Et quum spectaverit ad terram, ecce tribulatio et tenebrae, caligo, angustia, et ad obscuritatem impulsus.

CHAPTER 7

Is 7:1-9:7. Prediction of the Ill Success of the Syro- Israelitish Invasion of Judah--Ahaz's Alliance with Assyria, and Its Fatal Results to Judea--Yet the Certainty of Final Preservation and of the Coming of Messiah.

In the Assyrian inscriptions the name of Rezin, king of Damascus, is found among the tributaries of Tiglath-pileser, of whose reign the annals of seventeen years have been deciphered. For the historical facts in this chapter, compare 2Ki 15:37-16:9. Rezin of Syria and Pekah of Israel, as confederates, advanced against Jerusalem. In the first campaign they "smote Ahaz with a great slaughter" (2Ch 28:5). Their object was probably to unite the three kingdoms against Assyria. Egypt seems to have favored the plan, so as to interpose these confederate kingdoms between her own frontier and Assyria (compare Is 7:18, "Egypt"; and 2Ki 17:4, Hoshea's league with Egypt). Rezin and Pekah may have perceived Ahaz' inclination towards Assyria rather than towards their own confederacy; this and the old feud between Israel and Judah (1Ki 12:16) occasioned their invasion of Judah. Ahaz, at the second inroad of his enemies (compare 2Ch 28:1-26 and 2Ki 15:37, with Is 16:5), smarting under his former defeat, applied to Tiglath-pileser, in spite of Isaiah's warning in this chapter, that he should rather rely on God; that king accordingly attacked Damascus, and slew Rezin (2Ki 16:9); and probably it was at the same time that he carried away part of Israel captive (2Ki 15:29), unless there were two assaults on Pekah--that in 2Ki 15:29, the earlier, and that in which Tiglath helped Ahaz subsequently [G. V. Smith]. Ahaz was saved at the sacrifice of Judah's independence and the payment of a large tribute, which continued till the overthrow of Sennacherib under Hezekiah (Is 37:37; 2Ki 16:8, 17, 18; 2Ch 28:20). Ahaz' reign began about 741 B.C., and Pekah was slain in 738 [Winer].

1. Ahaz--In the first years of his reign the design of the two kings against Judah was carried out, which was formed in Jotham's reign (2Ki 15:37).

Syria--Hebrew, Aram (Ge 10:22, 23), originally the whole region between the Euphrates and Mediterranean, including Assyria, of which Syria is an abbreviation; here the region round Damascus, and along Mount Libanus.

Jerusalem--An actual siege of it took place, but was foiled (2Ki 16:5).

2. is confederate with--rather, is encamped upon the territory of Ephraim [Maurer], or better, as Rezin was encamped against Jerusalem, "is supported by" [Lowth] Ephraim, whose land lay between Syria and Judah. The mention of "David" alludes, in sad contrast with the present, to the time when David made Syria subject to him (2Sa 8:6).

Ephraim--the ten tribes.

as ... trees of ... wood--a simultaneous agitation.

3. Go forth--out of the city, to the place where Ahaz was superintending the works for defense and the cutting off of the water supply from the enemy, and securing it to the city. So Is 22:9; 2Ch 32:4.

Shearjashub--that is, A remnant shall return (Is 6:13). His very name (compare Is 7:14; Is 8:3) was a standing memorial to Ahaz and the Jews that the nation should not, notwithstanding the general calamity (Is 7:17-25; Is 8:6-8), be utterly destroyed (Is 10:21, 22).

conduit--an aqueduct from the pool or reservoir for the supply of the city. At the foot of Zion was Fount Siloah (Is 8:6; Ne 3:15; Joh 9:7), called also Gihon, on the west of Jerusalem (2Ch 32:30). Two pools were supplied from it, the Upper, or Old (Is 22:11), or King's (Ne 2:14), and the Lower (Is 22:9), which received the superfluous waters of the upper. The upper pool is still to be seen, about seven hundred yards from the Jaffa gate. The highway leading to the fullers' field, which was in a position near water for the purposes of washing, previous to drying and bleaching, the cloth, was probably alongside the aqueduct.

4. Take heed, &c.--that is, See that thou be quiet (not seeking Assyrian aid in a fit of panic).

tails--mere ends of firebrands, almost consumed themselves (about soon to fall before the Assyrians, Is 7:8), therefore harmless.

smoking--as about to go out; not blazing.

son of Remaliah--Pekah, a usurper (2Ki 15:25). The Easterners express contempt by designating one, not by his own name, but by his father's, especially when the father is but little known (1Sa 20:27, 31).

6. vex--rather, "throw into consternation" [Gesenius].

make a breach--rather, "cleave it asunder." Their scheme was to divide a large portion of the territory between themselves, and set up a vassal king of their own over the rest.

son of Tabeal--unknown; a Syrian-sounding name, perhaps favored by a party in Jerusalem (Is 3:6, 9, 12).

7. (Is 8:10; Pr 21:30).

8. head--that is, in both Syria and Israel the capital shall remain as it is; they shall not conquer Judah, but each shall possess only his own dominions.

threescore and five ... not a people--As these words break the symmetry of the parallelism in this verse, either they ought to be placed after "Remaliah's son," in Is 7:9, or else they refer to some older prophecy of Isaiah, or of Amos (as the Jewish writers represent), parenthetically; to which, in Is 7:8, the words, "If ye will not believe ... not be established," correspond in parallelism. One deportation of Israel happened within one or two years from this time, under Tiglath-pileser (2Ki 15:29). Another in the reign of Hoshea, under Shalmaneser (2Ki 17:1-6), was about twenty years after. But the final one which utterly "broke" up Israel so as to be "not a people," accompanied by a colonization of Samaria with foreigners, was under Esar-haddon, who carried away Manasseh, king of Judah, also, in the twenty-second year of his reign, sixty-five years from the utterance of this prophecy (compare Ezr 4:2, 3, 10, with 2Ki 17:24; 2Ch 33:11) [Usher]. The event, though so far off, was enough to assure the people of Judah that as God, the Head of the theocracy, would ultimately interpose to destroy the enemies of His people, so they might rely on Him now.

9. believe, ... be established--There is a paronomasia, or play on the words, in the Hebrew: "if ye will not confide, ye shall not abide." Ahaz brought distress on himself by distrust in the Lord, and trust in Assyria.

11. Ask thee--since thou dost not credit the prophet's words.

sign--a miraculous token to assure thee that God will fulfil His promise of saving Jerusalem (Is 37:30; 38:7, 8). "Signs," facts then present or near at hand as pledges for the more distant future, are frequent in Isaiah.

ask ... in ... depth--literally, "Make deep ... ask it," that is, Go to the depth of the earth or of Hades [Vulgate and Lowth], or, Mount high for it (literally, "Make high"). So in Mt 16:1. Signs in heaven are contrasted with the signs on earth and below it (raising the dead) which Jesus Christ had wrought (compare Ro 10:6, 7). He offers Ahaz the widest limits within which to make his choice.

12. neither ... tempt--hypocritical pretext of keeping the law (De 6:16); "tempt," that is, put God to the proof, as in Mt 4:7, by seeking His miraculous interposition without warrant. But here there was the warrant of the prophet of God; to have asked a sign, when thus offered, would not have been a tempting of God. Ahaz' true reason for declining was his resolve not to do God's will, but to negotiate with Assyria, and persevere in his idolatry (2Ki 16:7, 8, 3, 4, 10). Men often excuse their distrust in God, and trust in their own devices, by professed reverence for God. Ahaz may have fancied that though Jehovah was the God of Judea and could work a sign there, that was no proof that the local god of Syria might not be more powerful. Such was the common heathen notion (Is 10:10, 11; 36:18-20).

13. Is it a small thing?--Is it not enough for you (Nu 16:9)? The allusion to "David" is in order to contrast his trust in God with his degenerate descendant Ahaz' distrust.

weary--try the patience of.

men--prophets. Isaiah as yet had given no outward proof that he was from God; but now God has offered a sign, which Ahaz publicly rejects. The sin is therefore now not merely against "men," but openly against "God." Isaiah's manner therefore changes from mildness to bold reproof.

14. himself--since thou wilt not ask a sign, nay, rejectest the offer of one.

you--for the sake of the house of believing "David" (God remembering His everlasting covenant with David), not for unbelieving Ahaz' sake.

Behold--arresting attention to the extraordinary prophecy.

virgin--from a root, "to lie hid," virgins being closely kept from men's gaze in their parents' custody in the East. The Hebrew, and the Septuagint here, and Greek (Mt 1:23), have the article, the virgin, some definite one known to the speaker and his hearers; primarily, the woman, then a virgin, about immediately to become the second wife, and bear a child, whose attainment of the age of discrimination (about three years) should be preceded by the deliverance of Judah from its two invaders; its fullest significancy is realized in "the woman" (Ge 3:15), whose seed should bruise the serpent's head and deliver captive man (Jr 31:22; Mi 5:3). Language is selected such as, while partially applicable to the immediate event, receives its fullest, most appropriate, and exhaustive accomplishment in Messianic events. The New Testament application of such prophecies is not a strained "accommodation"; rather the temporary fulfilment of an adaptation of the far-reaching prophecy to the present passing event, which foreshadows typically the great central end of prophecy, Jesus Christ (Re 19:10). Evidently the wording is such as to apply more fully to Jesus Christ than to the prophet's son; "virgin" applies, in its simplest sense, to the Virgin Mary, rather than to the prophetess who ceased to be a virgin when she "conceived"; "Immanuel," God with us (Joh 1:14; Re 21:3), cannot in a strict sense apply to Isaiah's son, but only to Him who is presently called expressly (Is 9:6), "the Child, the Son, Wonderful (compare Is 8:18), the mighty God." Local and temporary features (as in Is 7:15, 16) are added in every type; otherwise it would be no type, but the thing itself. There are resemblances to the great Antitype sufficient to be recognized by those who seek them; dissimilarities enough to confound those who do not desire to discover them.

call--that is, "she shall," or as Margin, "thou, O Virgin, shalt call;" mothers often named their children (Ge 4:1, 25; 19:37; 29:32). In Mt 1:23 the expression is strikingly changed into, "They shall call"; when the prophecy received its full accomplishment, no longer is the name Immanuel restricted to the prophetess' view of His character, as in its partial fulfilment in her son; all shall then call (that is, not literally), or regard Him as peculiarly and most fitly characterized by the descriptive name, "Immanuel" (1Ti 3:16; Col 2:9).

name--not mere appellation, which neither Isaiah's son nor Jesus Christ bore literally; but what describes His manifested attributes; His character (so Is 9:6). The name in its proper destination was not arbitrary, but characteristic of the individual; sin destroyed the faculty of perceiving the internal being; hence the severance now between the name and the character; in the case of Jesus Christ and many in Scripture, the Holy Ghost has supplied this want [Olshausen].

15. Butter--rather, curdled milk, the acid of which is grateful in the heat of the East (Job 20:17).

honey--abundant in Palestine (Jud 14:8; 1Sa 14:25; Mt 3:4). Physicians directed that the first food given to a child should be honey, the next milk [Barnabas, Epistle]. Horsley takes this as implying the real humanity of the Immanuel Jesus Christ, about to be fed as other infants (Lu 2:52). Is 7:22 shows that besides the fitness of milk and honey for children, a state of distress of the inhabitants is also implied, when, by reason of the invaders, milk and honey, things produced spontaneously, shall be the only abundant articles of food [Maurer].

that he may know--rather, until He shall know.

evil ... choose ... good--At about three years of age moral consciousness begins (compare Is 8:4; De 1:39; Jon 4:11).

16. For--The deliverance implied in the name "Immanuel," and the cessation of distress as to food (Is 7:14, 15), shall last only till the child grows to know good and evil;

for ... the land that ... abhorrest ... forsaken of ... kings--rather, desolate shall be the land, before whose two kings thou art alarmed [Hengstenberg and Gesenius].

the land--namely, Syria and Samaria regarded as one (2Ki 16:9; 15:30), just two years after this prophecy, as it foretells. Horsley takes it, "The land (Judah and Samaria) of (the former of) which thou art the plague (literally, 'thorn') shall be forsaken," &c.; a prediction thus, that Judah and Israel (appropriately regarded as one "land") should cease to be kingdoms (Lu 2:1; Ge 49:10) before Immanuel came.

Is 7:17-25. Fatal Consequences of Ahaz' Assyrian Policy.

Though temporary deliverance (Is 7:16; 8:4) was to be given then, and final deliverance through Messiah, sore punishment shall follow the former. After subduing Syria and Israel, the Assyrians shall encounter Egypt (2Ki 23:29), and Judah shall be the battlefield of both (Is 7:18), and be made tributary to that very Assyria (2Ch 28:20; 2Ki 16:7, 8) now about to be called in as an ally (Is 39:1-6). Egypt, too, should prove a fatal ally (Is 36:6; 31:1, &c.).

18. hiss--whistle, to bring bees to settle (see on Is 5:26).

fly--found in numbers about the arms of the Nile and the canals from it (Is 19:5-7; 23:3), here called "rivers." Hence arose the plague of flies (Ex 8:21). Figurative, for numerous and troublesome foes from the remotest parts of Egypt, for example, Pharaoh-nechoh.

bee--(De 1:44; Psa 118:12). As numerous in Assyria as the fly in marshy Egypt. Sennacherib, Esar-haddon, and Nebuchadnezzar fulfilled this prediction.

19. rest--image of flies and bees kept up. The enemy shall overspread the land everywhere, even in "desolate valleys."

thorns--wild, contrasted with "bushes," which were valued and objects of care (see Margin).

20. razor--The Assyrians are to be God's instrument of devastating Judea, just as a razor sweeps away all hair before it (Is 10:5; Eze 29:19, 20).

hired--alluding to Ahaz' hiring (2Ki 16:7, 8) Tiglath-pileser against Syria and Israel; namely,

by them beyond the river--namely, the Euphrates; the eastern boundary of Jewish geographical knowledge (Psa 72:8); the river which Abram crossed; the Nile also may be included (Is 7:18) [G. V. Smith]. Gesenius translates, "With a razor hired in the parts beyond the river."

head ... feet--the whole body, including the most honored parts. To cut the "beard" is the greatest indignity to an Easterner (Is 50:6; 2Sa 10:4, 5; Eze 5:1).

Is 7:21-25. The Coming Desolate State of the Land Owing to the Assyrians and Egyptians.

21. nourish--that is, own.

young cow--a heifer giving milk. Agriculture shall cease, and the land become one great pasturage.

22. abundance--by reason of the wide range of land lying desolate over which the cows and sheep (including goats) may range.

butter--thick milk, or cream.

honey--(See on Is 7:15). Food of spontaneous growth will be the resource of the few inhabitants left. Honey shall be abundant as the bees will find the wild flowers abounding everywhere.

23. where there were, &c.--where up to that time there was so valuable a vineyard as to have in it a 1000 vines, worth a silverling (shekel, about 2s. 3d.; a large price) each, there shall be only briers (So 8:11). Vineyards are estimated by the number of the vines, and the goodness of the kind of vine. Judea admits of a high state of cultivation, and requires it, in order to be productive; its present barrenness is due to neglect.

24. It shall become a vast hunting ground, abounding in wild beasts (compare Jr 49:19).

25. shall be--rather, "were once."

digged--in order to plant and rear vines (Is 5:6).

there shall not come--that is, none shall come who fear thorns, seeing that thorns shall abound on all sides [Maurer]. Otherwise, "Thou shalt not come for fear of thorns" [Gesenius]. Only cattle shall be able to penetrate the briery ground.

lesser cattle--sheep and goats.

Now - נא na, is omitted by two MSS., the Septuagint, Syriac, Arabic, and Vulgate.

The Syriac omits וארם vearam, "and Syria;" the Vulgate reads מלך ארם melech aram, "king of Syria:" one or the other seems to be the true reading. I prefer the former: or, instead of וארם ובן vearam uben, read ופקח בן vepekach ben, and pekah son, MS.

Because - Remaliah - All these words are omitted by one MS. and the Syriac; a part of them also by the Septuagint.

For the head of Syria, etc. - "Though the head of Syria be Damascus, And the head of Damascus Retsin; Yet within threescore and five years Ephraim shall be broken, that he be no more a people: And the head of Ephraim be Samaria; And the head of Samaria Remaliah's son. "Here are six lines, or three distichs, the order of which seems to have been disturbed by a transposition, occasioned by three of the lines beginning with the same word וראש verosh, "and the head," which three lines ought not to have been separated by any other line intervening; but a copyist, having written the first of them, and casting his eye on the third, might easily proceed to write after the first line beginning with וראש verosh, that which ought to have followed the third line beginning with וראש verosh. Then finding his mistake, to preserve the beauty of his copy, added at the end the distich which should have been in the middle; making that the second distich, which ought to have been the third. For the order as it now stands is preposterous: the destruction of Ephraim is denounced, and then their grandeur is set forth; whereas naturally the representation of the grandeur of Ephraim should precede that of their destruction. And the destruction of Ephraim has no coherence with the grandeur of Syria, simply as such, which it now follows: but it naturally and properly follows the grandeur of Ephraim, joined to that of Syria their ally. "The arrangement then of the whole sentence seems originally to have been thus: -

Though the head of Syria be Damascus, And the head of Damascus Retsin And the head of Ephraim be Samaria; And the head of Samaria Remaliah's son: Yet within threescore and five years Ephraim shall be broken that he be no more a people." Dr. Jubb.

Threescore and five years - It was sixty-five years from the beginning of the reign of Ahaz, when this prophecy was delivered, to the total depopulation of the kingdom of Israel by Esarhaddon, who carried away the remains of the ten tribes which had been left by Tiglath-pileser, and Shalmaneser, and who planted the country with new inhabitants. That the country was not wholly stripped of its inhabitants by Shalmaneser appears from many passages of the history of Josiah, where Israelites are mentioned as still remaining there, 2Chr 34:6, 2Chr 34:7, 2Chr 34:33; 2Chr 35:18; 2Kgs 23:19, 2Kgs 23:20. This seems to be the best explanation of the chronological difficulty in this place, which has much embarrassed the commentators: see Usserii Annal. 5. T. ad an. 3327, and Sir 1. Newton, Chronol. p. 283. "That the last deportation of Israel by Esarhaddon was in the sixty-fifth year after the second of Ahaz, is probable for the following reasons: The Jews, in Seder Olam Rabba, and the Talmudists, in D. Kimchi on Ezekiel iv., say that Manasseh king of Judah was carried to Babylon by the king of Assyria's captains, 2Chr 33:11, in the twenty-second year of his reign; that is, before Christ 676, according to Dr. Blair's tables. And they are probably right in this. It could not be much earlier; as the king of Assyria was not king of Babylon till 680, ibid. As Esarhaddon was then in the neighborhood of Samaria, it is highly probable that he did then carry away the last remains of Israel, and brought those strangers thither who mention him as their founder, Ezr 4:2. But this year is just the sixty-fifth from the second of Ahaz, which was 740 before Christ. Now the carrying away the remains of Israel, who, till then, though their kingdom was destroyed forty-five years before, and though small in number, might yet keep up some form of being a people, by living according to their own laws, entirely put an end to the people of Israel, as a people separate from all others: for from this time they never returned to their own country in a body, but were confounded with the people of Judah in the captivity; and the whole people, the ten tribes included, were called Jews." - Dr. Jubb. Two MSS. have twenty-five instead of sixty-five; and two others omit the word five, reading only sixty.

If ye will not believe "If ye believe not" - "This clause is very much illustrated by considering the captivity of Manasseh as happening at the same time with this predicted final ruin of Ephraim as a people. The near connection of the two facts makes the prediction of the one naturally to cohere with the prediction of the other. And the words are well suited to this event in the history of the people of Judah: 'If ye believe not, ye shall not be established;' that is, unless ye believe this prophecy of the destruction of Israel, ye Jews also, as well as the people of Israel, shall not remain established as a kingdom and people; ye also shall be visited with punishment at the same time: as our Savior told the Jews in his time, 'Unless ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish;' intimating their destruction by the Romans; to which also, as well as to the captivity of Manasseh, and to the Babylonish captivity, the views of the prophet might here extend. The close connection of this threat to the Jews with the prophecy of the destruction of Israel, is another strong proof that the order of the preceding lines above proposed is right." - Dr. Jubb. "If ye believe not in me." - The exhortation of Jehoshaphat, 2Chr 20:20, to his people, when God had promised to them, by the prophet Jahaziel, victory over the Moabites and Ammonites, is very like this both in sense and expression, and seems to be delivered in verse: "Hear me, O Judah; and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem;

Believe in Jehovah your God, and ye shall be established:

Believe his prophets, and ye shall prosper."

Where both the sense and construction render very probable a conjecture of Archbishop Secker on this place; that instead of כי ki, we should read בי bi. "If ye will not believe in me, ye shall not be established." So likewise Dr. Durell. The Chaldee has, "If ye will not believe in the words of the prophet;" which seems to be a paraphrase of the reading here proposed. In favor of which it may be farther observed that in one MS. כי ki is upon a rasure; and another for the last לא lo reads ולא velo, which would properly follow בי bi, but could not follow כי ki.

Some translate thus, and paraphrase thus: If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established. Or, If ye do not give credit, it is because ye are unfaithful. Ye have not been faithful to the grace already given: therefore ye are now incapable of crediting my promises.

In the depth "Go deep to the grave" - So Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and the Vulgate.

The Lord "Jehovah" - For אדני Adonai, twenty-five of Kennicott's MSS., nine ancient, and fourteen of De Rossi's, read יהוה Jehovah. And so Isa 7:20, eighteen MSS.

Immanuel - For עמנואל Immanuel, many MSS. and editions have עמנו אל immanu El, God with us.

That he may know "When he shall know" - "Though so much has been written on this important passage, there is an obscurity and inconsequence which still attends it, in the general run of all the interpretations given to it by the most learned. And this obscure incoherence is given to it by the false rendering of a Hebrew particle, viz., ל le, in לדעתו ledato. This has been generally rendered, either 'that he may know,' or 'till he know.' It is capable of either version, without doubt; but either of these versions makes Isa 7:15 incoherent and inconsistent with Isa 7:16. For Isa 7:16 plainly means to give a reason for the assertion in Isa 7:16, because it is subjoined to it by the particle כי ki, for. But it is no reason why a child should eat butter and honey till he was at an age to distinguish, that before that time the land of his nativity should be free from its enemies. This latter supposition indeed implies, what is inconsistent with the preceding assertion. For it implies, that in part of that time of the infancy spoken of the land should not be free from enemies, and consequently these species of delicate food could not be attainable, as they are in times of peace. The other version, 'that he may know,' has no meaning at all; for what sense is there in asserting, that a child shall eat butter and honey that he may know to refuse evil and choose good? Is there any such effect in this food? Surely not. Besides, the child is thus represented to eat those things, which only a state of peace produces, during its whole infancy, inconsistently with Isa 7:16, which promises a relief from enemies only before the end of this infancy: implying plainly, that part of it would be passed in distressful times of war and siege, which was the state of things when the prophecy was delivered. "But all these objections are cut off, and a clear, coherent sense is given to this passage, by giving another sense to the particle ל le. which never occurred to me till I saw it in Harmer's Observat., vol. i., p. 299. See how coherent the words of the prophet run, with how natural a connection one clause follows another, by properly rendering this one particle: 'Behold this Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and thou shalt call his name Immanuel; butter and honey, shall he eat, when he shall know to refuse evil, and choose good. For before this child shall know to refuse evil and choose good, the land shall be desolate, by whose two kings thou art distressed.' Thus Isa 7:16 subjoins a plain reason why the child should eat butter and honey, the food of plentiful times, when he came to a distinguishing age; viz., because before that time the country of the two kings, who now distressed Judea, should be desolated; and so Judea should recover that plenty which attends peace. That this rendering, which gives perspicuity and rational connection to the passage, is according to the use of the Hebrew particle, is certain. Thus לפנות בקר liphnoth boker, 'at the appearing of morning, or when morning appeared,' Exo 14:27; לעת האכל leeth haochel, 'at mealtime, or when it was time to eat,' Rut 2:14. In the same manner, לדעתו ledato, 'at his knowing, that is, when he knows.' "Harmer (ibid.) has clearly shown that these articles of food are delicacies in the East, and, as such, denote a state of plenty. See also Jos 5:6. They therefore naturally express the plenty of the country, as a mark of peace restored to it. Indeed, in Isa 7:22 it expresses a plenty arising from the thinness of the people; but that it signifies, Isa 7:15, a plenty arising from deliverance from war then present, is evident; because otherwise there is no expression of this deliverance. And that a deliverance was intended to be here expressed is plain, from calling the child which should be born Immanuel, God with us. It is plain, also, because it is before given to the prophet in charge to make a declaration of the deliverance, Isa 7:3-7; and it is there made; and this prophecy must undoubtedly be conformable to that in this matter." - Dr. Jubb.

The circumstance of the child's eating butter and honey is explained by Jarchi, as denoting a state of plenty: "Butter and honey shall this child eat, because our land shall be full of all good." Comment in locum. The infant Jupiter, says Callimachus, was tenderly nursed with goat's milk and honey. Hymn, in Jov. 48. Homer, of the orphan daughters of Pandareus: - Κομισσε δε δι' Αφροδιτη Τυρῳ και μελιτι γλυκερῳ, και ἡδει οινῳ.

Odyss. XX., 68. "Venus in tender delicacy rears

With honey, milk, and wine, their infant years."

Pope. Τρυφης εστιν ενδειξις; "This is a description of delicate food," says Eustathius on the place.

Agreeably to the observations communicated by the learned person above mentioned, which perfectly well explain the historical sense of this much disputed passage, not excluding a higher secondary sense, the obvious and literal meaning of the prophecy is this:" that within the time that a young woman, now a virgin, should conceive and bring forth a child, and that child should arrive at such an age as to distinguish between good and evil, that is, within a few years, (compare Isa 8:4), the enemies of Judah should be destroyed." But the prophecy is introduced in so solemn a manner; the sign is so marked, as a sign selected and given by God himself, after Ahaz had rejected the offer of any sign of his own choosing out of the whole compass of nature; the terms of the prophecy are so peculiar, and the name of the child so expressive, containing in them much more than the circumstances of the birth of a common child required, or even admitted; that we may easily suppose that, in minds prepared by the general expectation of a great Deliverer to spring from the house of David, they raised hopes far beyond what the present occasion suggested; especially when it was found, that in the subsequent prophecy, delivered immediately afterward, this child, called Immanuel, is treated as the Lord and Prince of the land of Judah. Who could this be, other than the heir of the throne of David; under which character a great and even a Divine person had been promised? No one of that age answered to this character except Hezekiah; but he was certainly born nine or ten years before the delivery of this prophecy. That this was so understood at that time is collected, I think, with great probability, from a passage of Micah, a prophet contemporary with Isaiah, but who began to prophesy after him; and who, as I have already observed, imitated him, and sometimes used his expressions. Micah, having delivered that remarkable prophecy which determines the place of the birth of Messiah, "the Ruler of God's people, whose goings forth have been of old, from everlasting;" that it should be Bethlehem Ephratah; adds immediately, that nevertheless, in the mean time, God would deliver his people into the hands of their enemies: "He will give them up, till she, who is to bear a child, shall bring forth," Mic 5:3. This obviously and plainly refers to some known prophecy concerning a woman to bring forth a child; and seems much more properly applicable to this passage of Isaiah than to any others of the same prophet, to which some interpreters have applied it. St. Matthew, therefore, in applying this prophecy to the birth of Christ, does it, not merely in the way of accommodating the words of the prophet to a suitable case not in the prophet's view, but takes it in its strictest, clearest, and most important sense; and applies it according to the original design and principal intention of the prophet. - L.

After all this learned criticism, I think something is still wanting to diffuse the proper light over this important prophecy. On Mat 1:23 I have given what I judge to be the true meaning and right application of the whole passage, as there quoted by the evangelist, the substance of which it will be necessary to repeat here: -

At the time referred to, the kingdom of Judah, under the government of Ahaz, was reduced very low. Pekah, king of Israel, had slain in Judea one hundred and twenty thousand persons in one day; and carried away captives two hundred thousand, including women and children, together with much spoil. To add to their distress, Rezin, king of Syria, being confederate with Pekah, had taken Elath, a fortified city of Judah, and carried the inhabitants away captive to Damascus. In this critical conjuncture, need we wonder that Ahaz was afraid that the enemies who were now united against him must prevail, destroy Jerusalem, end the kingdom of Judah, and annihilate the family of David? To meet and remove this fear, apparently well grounded, Isaiah is sent from the Lord to Ahaz, swallowed up now both by sorrow and by unbelief, in order to assure him that the counsels of his enemies should not stand; and that they should be utterly discomfited. To encourage Ahaz, he commands him to ask a sign or miracle, which should be a pledge in hand, that God should, in due time, fulfill the predictions of his servant, as related in the context. On Ahaz humbly refusing to ask any sign, it is immediately added, "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son; and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat," etc. Both the Divine and human nature of our Lord, as well as the miraculous conception, appear to be pointed out in the prophecy quoted here by the evangelist: He shall be called עמנואל Immanuel; literally, The Strong God with Us: similar to those words in the New Testament: The word which was God - was made flesh, and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; Joh 1:1, Joh 1:14. And God was manifested in the flesh, 1Tim 3:16. So that we are to understand God with us to imply, God incarnated - God in human nature. This seems farther evident from the words of the prophet, Isa 7:15 : Butter and honey shall he eat - he shall be truly man - grow up and be nourished in a human natural way; which refers to his being With Us, i.e., incarnated. To which the prophet adds, That he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good; or rather, According to his knowledge, לדעתו ledato, reprobating the evil, and choosing the good; this refers to him as God, and is the same idea given by this prophet, chap. Isa 53:11 : By (or in) his knowledge, בדעתו bedato, (the knowledge of Christ crucified), shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their offenses. Now this union of the Divine and human nature is termed a sign or miracle, אות oth, i.e., something which exceeds the power of nature to produce. And this miraculous union was to be brought about in a miraculous way: Behold, a Virgin shall conceive: the word is very emphatic, העלמה haalmah, The virgin; the only one that ever was, or ever shall be, a mother in this way. But the Jews, and some called Christians, who have espoused their desperate cause, assert that "the word עלמה almah does not signify a Virgin only; for it is applied Pro 30:19 to signify a young married woman." I answer, that this latter text is no proof of the contrary doctrine: the words דרך גבר בעלמה derech geber bealmah, the way of a man with a maid, cannot be proved to mean that for which it is produced. Besides, one of De Rossi's MSS. reads בעלמיו bealmaiv, the way of a strong or stout man (גבר geber) In His Youth; and in this reading the Syriac, Septuagint, Vulgate, and Arabic agree; which are followed by the first version in the English language, as it stands in a MS. in my own possession: the weie of a man in his waxing youth: so that this place, the only one that can with any probability of success be produced, were the interpretation contended for correct, which I am by no means disposed to admit, proves nothing. Besides, the consent of so many versions in the opposite meaning deprives it of much of its influence in this question.

The word עלמה almah, comes from עלם alam, to lie hid, be concealed: and we are told, that "virgins were so called, because they were concealed or closely kept up in their father's houses till the time of their marriage." This is not correct: see the case of Rebecca, Gen 24:43 (note), and my note there; that of Rachel, Gen 29:6-9 (note), and the note there also; and see the case of Miriam, the sister of Moses, Exo 2:8, and also the Chaldee paraphrase on Lam 1:4, where the virgins are represented as going out in the dance. And see also the whole history of Ruth. This being concealed or kept at home, on which so much stress is laid, is purely fanciful; for we find that young unmarried women drew water, kept sheep, gleaned publicly in the fields, etc., etc., and the same works they perform among the Turcomans to the present day. This reason, therefore, does not account for the radical meaning of the word; and we must seek it elsewhere. Another well-known and often-used root in the Hebrew tongue will cast light on this subject. This is גלה galah, which signifies to reveal, make manifest, or uncover; and is often applied to matrimonial connections in different parts of the Mosaic law: עלם alam, therefore, may be considered as implying the concealment of the virgin, as such, till lawful, marriage had taken place. A virgin was not called עלמה almah, because she was concealed by being kept at home in her father's house, which is not true; but, literally and physically, because as a woman she had not been uncovered - she had not known man. This fully applies to the blessed virgin, see Luk 1:34. "How can this be, seeing I know no man?" And this text throws much light on the subject before us. This also is in perfect agreement with the ancient prophecy, "The seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent," Gen 3:15; for the person who was to destroy the work of the devil was to be the progeny of the woman, without any concurrence of the man. And hence the text in Genesis speaks as fully of the virgin state of the person from whom Christ, according to the flesh, should come, as that in the prophet, or this in the evangelist. According to the original promise there was to be a seed, a human being, who should destroy sin: but this seed or human being, must come from the woman Alone; and no woman Alone could produce such a human being without being a virgin. Hence, A virgin shall bear a son, is the very spirit and meaning of the original text, independently of the illustration given by the prophet; and the fact recorded by the evangelist is the proof of the whole. But how could that be a sign to Ahaz which was to take place so many hundreds of years after? I answer, the meaning of the prophet is plain: not only Rezin and Pekah should be unsuccessful against Jerusalem at that time, which was the fact; but Jerusalem, Judea, and the house of David should be both preserved, notwithstanding their depressed state, and the multitude of their adversaries, till the time should come when a Virgin should bear a son. This is a most remarkable circumstance the house of David could never fail, till a virgin should conceive and bear a son - nor did it: but when that incredible and miraculous fact did take place, the kingdom and house of David became extinct! This is an irrefragable confutation of every argument a Jew can offer in vindication of his opposition to the Gospel of Christ. Either the prophecy in Isaiah has been fulfilled, or the kingdom and house of David are yet standing. But the kingdom of David, we know, is destroyed: and where is the man, Jew or Gentile, that can show us a single descendant of David on the face of the earth? The prophecy could not fail: the kingdom and house of David have failed; the virgin, therefore, must have brought forth her son, and this son is Jesus, the Christ. Thus Moses, Isaiah, and Matthew concur; and facts the most unequivocal have confirmed the whole! Behold the wisdom and providence of God!

Notwithstanding what has been said above, it may be asked, In what sense could this name, Immanuel, be applied to Jesus Christ, if he be not truly and properly God? Could the Spirit of truth ever design that Christians should receive him as an angel or a mere man; and yet, in the very beginning of the Gospel history, apply a character to him which belongs only to the most high God? Surely no. In what sense, then, is Christ God with Us? Jesus is called Immanuel, or God with us, in his incarnation; God united to our nature; God with man, God in man; God with us, by his continual protection; God with us, by the influences of his Holy Spirit, in the holy sacrament, in the preaching of his word, in private prayer. And God with us, through every action of our life, that we begin, continue, and end in his name. He is God with us, to comfort, enlighten, protect, and defend us, in every time of temptation and trial, in the hour of death, in the day of judgment; and God with us and in us, and we with and in him, to all eternity. Isa 7:17

The Lord shall bring "But Jehovah will bring" - Houbigant reads וביא vaiyabi, from the Septuagint, αλλα επαξει ὁ Θεος, to mark the transition to a new subject.

Even the king of Assyria - Houbigant supposes these words to have been a marginal gloss, brought into the text by mistake; and so likewise Archbishop Secker. Besides their having no force or effect here, they do not join well in construction with the words preceding, as may be seen by the strange manner in which the ancient interpreters have taken them; and they very inelegantly forestall the mention of the king of Assyria, which comes in with great propriety in the 20th verse (Isa 7:20). I have therefore taken the liberty of omitting them in the translation.

Hiss for the fly "Hist the fly" - See note on Isa 5:26.

Egypt, and - Assyria - Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, Pharaoh-necho, and Nebuchadnezzar, who one after another desolated Judea.

Holes of the rocks "Caverns" - So the Septuagint, Syriac, and Vulgate, whence Houbigant supposes the true reading to be הנחללים hannachalolim. One of my oldest MSS. reads הנחלולים hannochalolim.

The river - That is, the Euphrates: הנהר hanahar. So read the Septuagint and two MSS.

Shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired "Jehovah shall shave by the hired razor" - To shave with the hired razor the head, the feet, and the beard, is an expression highly parabolical, to denote the utter devastation of the country from one end to the other; and the plundering of the people, from the highest to the lowest, by the Assyrians, whom God employed as his instrument to punish the Jews. Ahaz himself, in the first place, hired the king of Assyria to come to help him against the Syrians, by a present made to him of all the treasures of the temple, as well as his own. And God himself considered the great nations, whom he thus employed as his mercenaries; and paid them their wages. Thus he paid Nebuchadnezzar for his services against Tyre, by the conquest of Egypt, Eze 29:18-20. The hairs of the head are those of the highest order in the state; those of the feet, or the lower parts, are the common people; the beard is the king, the high priest, the very supreme in dignity and majesty. The Eastern people have always held the beard in the highest veneration, and have been extremely jealous of its honor. To pluck a man's beard is an instance of the greatest indignity that can be offered. See Isa 50:6. The king of the Ammonites, to show the utmost contempt of David, "cut off half the beards of his servants, and the men were greatly ashamed; and David bade them tarry at Jericho till their beards were grown," 2Sam 10:4, 2Sam 10:6. Niebuhr, Arabie, p. 275, gives a modern instance of the very same kind of insult. "The Turks," says Thevenot, "greatly esteem a man who has a fine beard; it is a very great affront to take a man by his beard, unless it be to kiss it; they swear by the beard." Voyages, i., p. 57. D'Arvieux gives a remarkable instance of an Arab, who, having received a wound in his jaw, chose to hazard his life, rather than suffer his surgeon to take off his beard. Memoires, tom. iii., p. 214. See also Niebuhr, Arabie, p. 61.

The remaining verses of this chapter, Isa 7:21-25, contain an elegant and very expressive description of a country depopulated, and left to run wild, from its adjuncts and circumstances: the vineyards and cornfields, before well cultivated, now overrun with briers and thorns; much grass, so that the few cattle that are left, a young cow and two sheep, have their full range, and abundant pasture, so as to yield milk in plenty to the scanty family of the owner; the thinly scattered people living, not on corn, wine, and oil, the produce of cultivation; but on milk and honey, the gifts of nature; and the whole land given up to the wild beasts, so that the miserable inhabitants are forced to go out armed with bows and arrows, either to defend themselves against the wild beasts, or to supply themselves with necessary food by hunting.

A Very judicious friend has sent me the following observations on the preceding prophecy, which I think worthy of being laid before the reader; though they are in some respects different from my own view of the subject. "To establish the primary and literal meaning of a passage of Scripture is evidently laying the true foundation for any subsequent views or improvements from it. "The kingdom of Judah, under the government of Ahaz, was reduced very low. Pekah, king of Israel, had slain in Judea one hundred and twenty thousand in one day; and carried away captive two hundred thousand including women and children, with much spoil. To add to this distress, Rezin, king of Syria, being confederate with Pekah, had taken Elath, a fortified city of Judah, and carried the inhabitants to Damascus. I think it may also be gathered from the sixth verse of chap. 8, that the kings of Syria and Israel had a considerable party in the land of Judea, who, regardless of the Divine appointment and promises, were disposed to favor the elevation of Tabeal, a stranger, to the throne of David. "In this critical conjuncture of affairs, Isaiah was sent with a message of mercy, and a promise of deliverance, to Ahaz. He was commanded to take with him Shearjashub, his son whose name contained a promise respecting the captives lately made by Pekah, whose return from Samaria, effected by the expostulation of the prophet Oded and the concurrence of the princes of Ephraim, was now promised as a pledge of the Divine interposition offered to Ahaz in favor of the house of David. And as a farther token of this preservation, notwithstanding the incredulity of Ahaz, Isaiah was directed to predict the birth of another son which should be born to him within the space of a year, and to be named Emmanuel, signifying thereby the protection of God to the land of Judah and family of David at this present conjuncture, with reference to the promise of the Messiah who was to spring from that family, and be born in that land. Compare Isa 8:8. Hence Isaiah testifies, Isa 8:18 : 'Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath given me are for signs and for types in Israel.' Compare Zac 3:8 : 'Thy companions are men of sign and type:' see Dr. Lowth on this verse. The message of Divine displeasure against Israel is in like manner expressed by the names the prophet Hosea was directed to give his children; see Hos 1:1-11 and 2. "Concerning this child, who was to be named Immanuel, the prophet was commissioned to declare, that notwithstanding the present scarcity prevailing in the land from its being harassed by war, yet within the space of time wherein this child should be of age to discern good and evil, both these hostile kings, viz., of Israel and Syria, should be cut off; and the country enjoy such plenty, that butter and honey, food accounted of peculiar delicacy, should be a common repast. See Harmer's Observations, p. 299. "To this it may be objected that Isaiah's son was not named Immanuel, but Maher-shalal-hash-baz; the signification of which bore a threatening aspect, instead of a consolatory one. To this I think a satisfactory answer may be given. Ahaz, by his unbelief and disregard of the message of mercy sent to him from God, (for instead of depending upon it he sent and made a treaty with the king of Assyria), drew upon himself the Divine displeasure, which was expressed by the change of the child's name, and the declaration that though Damascus and Samaria should, according to the former prediction, fall before the king of Assyria, yet that this very power, i.e., Assyria, in whom Ahaz trusted for deliverance, (see 2Kgs 16:7, etc.), should afterwards come against Judah, and 'fill the breadth of the land,' which was accomplished in the following reign, when Jerusalem was so endangered as to be delivered only by miracle. The sixth and seventh verses of chap. 8 indicate, I think, as I before observed, that the kings of Syria and Israel had many adherents in Judah, who are said to refuse the peaceful waters of Shiloah or Siloam, him that is to be sent, who ought to have been their confidence, typified by the fountain at the foot of Mount Zion, whose stream watered the city of Jerusalem; and therefore, since the splendor of victory, rather than the blessings of peace, was the object of their admiration, compared to a swelling river which overflowed its banks, God threatens to chastise them by the victorious armies of Ashur. The prophet at the same time addresses words of consolation to such of the people who yet feared and trusted in Jehovah, whom he instructs and comforts with the assurance (Isa 8:10) that they shall prove the fulfillment of the promise contained in the name Immanuel. "But it may still be objected, that according to this interpretation of the fourteenth verse of chap. 7 nothing miraculous occurs, which is readily admitted; but the objection rests upon the supposition that something miraculous was intended; whereas the word אות oth, 'sign,' does by no means generally imply a miracle, but most commonly an emblematic representation, (see Eze 4:3-12; 11; Eze 20:20; Zac 6:14), either by actions or names, of some future event either promised or threatened. Exo 3:12; 1Sam 2:34; 2Kgs 19:29; Jer 44:29, Jer 44:30, are all examples of a future event given as a sign or token of something else which is also future. The birth of Isaiah's son was indeed typical of him whose name he was, at first, appointed to bear, viz., Immanuel, even as Oshea the son of Nun had his name changed to Jehoshua, the same with Jesus, of whom he was an eminent type. Hence the prophet, in the ninth chapter, breaks forth into a strain of exultation: 'To us a child is born;' after which follow denunciations against Rezin and the kingdom of Israel, which are succeeded by declarations, that when Assyria had completed the appointed chastisement upon Judah and Jerusalem, that empire should be destroyed. The whole of the tenth chapter is a very remarkable prophecy, and was probably delivered about the time of Sennacherib's invasion. "But still it will be urged, that St. Matthew, when relating the miraculous conception of our Lord, says, 'Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet,' etc. To this it may readily be answered, that what was spoken by the prophet was indeed now fulfilled in a higher, more important, and also in a more literal sense, than the primary fulfillment could afford, which derived all its value from its connection with this event, to which it ultimately referred. "In like manner the prophecy of Isaiah, contained in the second chapter, received a complete fulfillment in our Savior's honoring Capernaum with his residence, and preaching throughout Galilee; though there appears reason to interpret the passage as having a primary respect to the reformation wrought by Hezekiah and which, at the eve of the dissolution of the kingdom of Israel by the captivity of the ten tribes, extended to the tribes of Asher and Zebulun, and many of the inhabitants of Ephraim and Manasseh, who were hereby stirred up to destroy idolatry in their country. See 2Chr 31:1. And without doubt the great deliverance wrought afterwards for Judah by the miraculous destruction of Sennacherib's army, and the recovery of Hezekiah in so critical a conjuncture from a sickness which had been declared to be unto death, contributed not a little to revive the fear of God in that part of Israel which, through their defection from the house of David, had grievously departed from the temple and worship of the true God; and as Galilee lay contiguous to countries inhabited by Gentiles, they had probably sunk deeper into idolatry than the southern part of Israel. "In several passages of St. Matthew's Gospel, our translation conveys the idea of things being done in order to fulfill certain prophecies; but I apprehend that if the words ἱνα και ὁπως were rendered as simply denoting the event, so that and thus was fulfilled, the sense would be much clearer. For it is obvious that our Lord did not speak in parables or ride into Jerusalem previously to his last passover, simply for the purpose of fulfilling the predictions recorded, but also from other motives; and in chap. 2 the evangelist only remarks that the circumstance of our Lord's return from Egypt corresponded with the prophet Hosea's relation of that part of the history of the Israelites. So in the twenty-third verse Joseph dwelt at Nazareth because he was directed so to do by God himself; and the sacred historian, having respect to the effect afterwards produced, (see Joh 7:41, Joh 7:42, Joh 7:52), remarks that this abode in Nazareth was a means of fulfilling those predictions of the prophets which indicate the contempt and neglect with which by many the Messiah should be treated. Galilee was considered by the inhabitants of Judea as a degraded place, chiefly from its vicinity to the Gentiles; and Nazareth seems to have been proverbially contemptible; and from the account given of the spirit and conduct of the inhabitants by the evangelists, not without reason." - E. M. B.

To my correspondent, as well as to many learned men, there appears some difficulty in the text; but I really think this is quite done away by that mode of interpretation which I have already adopted; and as far as the miraculous conception is concerned, the whole is set in the clearest and strongest light, and the objections and cavils of the Jeers entirely destroyed.

Ahaz - A most wicked king: yet no prophecies are more comfortable than those which were delivered in his time; God so ordering it for the encouragement of the faithful that lived under his impious reign.

David - Ahaz, and his relations. He calls them the house of David, to intimate that the following comfortable message was sent to Ahaz, not for his own sake, but for the sake of his worthy progenitor David. Ephraim - The kingdom of the ten tribes, commonly called Ephraim, because that was the most numerous of all. Moved - With fear, arising from a consciousness of their own guilt, and their enemies strength.

Thy son - Whose very name carried in it a sign and pledge of the promised deliverance, signifying, The remnant shall return. Fuller's field - Whither he probably went to take care about the waters which thence were brought into the city, to secure them to himself, or keep them from the enemy, as Hezekiah afterward did, 2Chron 32:3,4.

Be quiet - Settle thy mind by the belief of that joyful message which I am now to deliver thee from the Lord. Fire - brands - They are not whole fire - brands, but small pieces or ends of them, taken out of the fire, in which there is more smoak than fire. They have more of shew and terror, than of strength. Pekah, king of Israel, he calls only the son of Remaliah, to intimate, that he was unworthy the name of king, as having got that title by usurpation, and the murder of his master, 2Kings 15:25.

Let us - Break their power and kingdom and subdue it to ourselves.

Damascus - Damascus shall still continue the capital of the kingdom of Syria; and therefore Jerusalem shall not become a part of Rezin's dominion: but he shall keep within his own bounds, and be king of Damascus only.

Samaria - Samaria shall continue to be the chief city if the kingdom of Israel, and Pekah shall not conquer Jerusalem. If - If you do not believe this, but seek to the Assyrians for succour, ye shall be consumed thereby.

I will not - By asking a sign, as if I questioned the truth of his word: but this was deep hypocrisy.

David - He reproves them all, because they were the king's counsellors. Is it a small thing - Is it not wickedness enough. My God - To vex God's prophets and people, with your oppressions and horrid impieties. And by your ingratitude and unbelief, and disobedience of his commands.

Therefore - Because you despise me, and the sign which I now offer to you, God of his own free grace will send you a more honourable messenger, and give you a nobler sign. A sign - Of your deliverance. But how was this birth, which was not to happen 'till many ages after, a sign of their deliverance from present danger? This promised birth supposed the preservation of that city, and nation and tribe, in and of which the Messiah was to be born; and therefore there was no cause to fear that ruin which their enemies now threatened. Immanuel - God with us; God dwelling among us, in our nature, John 1:14. God and man meeting in one person, and being a mediator between God and men. For the design of these words is not so much to relate the name by which Christ should commonly he called, as to describe his nature and office.

Butter - The common food of children in that country. He - The virgin's son. Know - To discern between things good and evil.

Yea - Not only this land shall be preserved until the virgin's son shall be born, but thine enemies land shall be sorely scourged, and these two kings destroyed within a very little time. This child - Shear - Jashub, whom in all probability the prophet pointed at, and who was brought hither by God's special command, ver.3. for this very use. The land - The lands of Syria and Israel. Forsaken - So far shall Pekah and Rezin be from conquering thy land, that they shall lose their own lands, and their lives too; which they did within two years after this time, being both slain by the king of Assyria.

Shall bring - But altho' God will deliver you at this time, yet he will requite all your wickedness. Thee - For part of this Assyrian storm fell in Ahaz's reign. And - Upon thy sons and successors, the kings of Judah. Days - Calamities. Departed - When ten tribes revolted from thy father's house. The king - Who may well be called their plague or calamity, as he is called the rod of God's anger, chap.10:5.

The fly - The flies. So he calls these enemies, to imply their great numbers. In - In their extremity, where they go out into the sea. Rivers - Of the river Nile, which may be called rivers, either for its greatness, or because towards the end of it, it is divided into seven streams. When the Chaldeans had in good measure subdued the Egyptians, it is probable great numbers of the Egyptian soldiers listed themselves in the Chaldean army, and with them invaded the land of Judah. The bee - The Assyrian army, compared to bees, as for their numerous forces and orderly march, so for their fierce attempts and mischievous effects. Assyria - In the empire of Assyria, or Babylon; for these two were united into one empire, and therefore in scripture are promiscuously called sometimes by one title, and sometimes by the other.

Valleys - Such as they found fruitful, but made desolate. Rocks - To which possibly the Israelites fled for refuge. Bushes - Which he mentions because flies and bees use frequently to rest there; and to intimate, that no place should escape their fury.

Shave - Utterly spoil, as shaving takes away the hair. Hired - By Ahaz, who did hire them, 2Kings 16:7,8. And so the prophet notes the just judgment of God, in scourging them with a rod of their own making. By - By the successive kings of the Assyrian empire, Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, and especially by Nebuchadnezzar. The head - By these metaphorical expressions he signifies the total destruction of their state, from head to foot, from the highest to the lowest.

Sheep - They who formerly used to keep great herds of cattle, and many flocks of sheep, shall esteem it a happiness if they can keep but one cow and two sheep.

Abundance - Because they shall have large pastures, by reason of the great scarcity of cattle. Butter - Which the poorer sort had formerly used to sell, to procure them cheaper food for themselves: but now the land should be so destitute of people, that there were none to whom they could sell them.

Of silver - Each of the thousand vineyards might have been sold or let for a thousand shekels, which was the yearly rent of some excellent vineyards.

With arrows - Either to hunt, or to defend themselves from wild beasts, which commonly abide in desolate grounds.

Digged - That used to be digged and dressed for the planting of vines, or other choice fruit - trees. The fear - That they might be freed from briars and thorns. Cattle - All sorts of cattle may enter, and feed there, the fences being broken down, and the owners slain, or carried into captivity.

AND it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up towards Jerusalem to war against it , but could not prevail against it.

A most wicked King: Yet no Prophesies are more comfortable than those which were delivered in his time; God so ordering it, partly for the encouragement of the Faithful that lived under his tyrannical and impious Reign; and partly to manifest the Riches and Freeness of his Grace, in conferring such Favours upon a most worthless Generation.

Which they attempted before in Iotham's Reign, 2 Kings 15. 37. but now more seriously undertook, though without success, as is noted here, and 2 Kings 16. 5.

Marginal references: 2 King. 16. 5. 2 Chron. 28. 5.; Heb. fight.

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 shaken with the wind.

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 onely for the sake of his worthy Progenitor, David, to whom God had promised an everlasting Kingdom.

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.

With excessive fear, arising partly from the conscience of their own Guilt, whereby they had put themselves out of God's Protection; and partly from the consideration of the great Strength and Power of his Enemies, who having prevailed against him severally, 2 Chron. 28. 5, 8. and having now united their Forces, he, having no Faith in God, nor Confidence to desire or expect his Help, concluded his Case desperate and deplorable.

Marginal references: Heb. resteth [illegible: 1+ letters]n Ephraim.

3 Then said the LORD unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz , thou, and Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the high-way of the fullers field .

Though he do not seek nor send to thee, as he ought. This is an eminent Instance of Preventing Mercy.

Whose very Name carried in it a Sign and Pledge of the promised Deliverance.

Whither he probably went to take care about the Waters which thence were brought into the City, either to secure them to himself, or to keep them from the Enemy, as Hezekiah afterward did, 2 Chron. 32. 3, 4.

Marginal references: That is, The remnant shall return. See Chap 6. 13. & 10. 21.; 2 Kings 18. 17. Ch. 36. 2.; Or, causey.

4 And say unto him, take heed, and be quiet ; fear not, neither be faint-hearted for the two tails of these smoaking fire-brands , for the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah .

See that thou be quiet, abandon thy Fears, and settle thy Mind by the belief of that joyful Message and Promise which I am now to deliver to thee from the Lord.

They are not whole Firebrands burning in the Fire, but onely small Pieces or Ends of them, taken out of the Fire, in which there is more Smoke than Fire, and the Fire will be speed[illegible: 1+ letters]ly extinguished. They have more of Shew and Terrour, than of Strength.

Pekah King of Israel, v. 1. whom here, and in the next Verse, he calls onely the son of Remaliah, to intimate, that he was unworthy of the Name of King, as having got that Title and Power by Usurpation, and the Murder of his Master and King, Pekahiab, 2 Kings 15. 25.

Marginal references: Heb. let not thy heart be tender.

6 Let us go up against Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal .

Either, 1. break and divide that Country into two parts, one for thee, and another for me; or rather, 2. break their Power and Kingdom, and subdue it to our selves: For, 1. the same Word and Phrase is so used, 2 Chron. 32. 1. where there was no such Division intended. 2. Because the next Clause intimates, that the Kingdom of Iudah was still to be united under another King, who should pay Tribute to them severally, as they should agree.

Some considerable Captain, in whose Fidelity both of them had good confidence; but whether he was an Israelite or Syrian, is uncertain, and not material.

Marginal references: Or, weaken.

7 Thus saith the LORD God, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.

Their evil Counsel, as it is called, v. 5.

8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.

Or, rather, shall be: for the Verb is not expressed in the Hebrew Text, and therefore may be either way supplied. The sence is, Damascus shall still continue to be the Capital and Chief City of the Kingdom of Syria; and therefore Ierusalem shall not be taken, nor become a part of Rezin's Dominion; but he shall be kept within his own Bounds, and be King of Damascus onely, and not, as he hopes, of Ierusalem.

To be computed either, 1. from the Prophecy of Amos, who prophesied in the days of Uzziah▪ two years before the earthquake, Amos 1. 1. which the Iews affirm to have hapned about the time of his Usurpation of the Priests Office, and being smitten with Leprosie, 2 Chron. 26. 16, &c. which though it be not proved, yet may be admitted, because it cannot be disproved. And it is more than probable, that that Action and Accident was divers years before his death, during which time Iotham acted as his Viceroy, 2 Chron. 26. 21. And the Prophecy of Amos being express and full concerning the Destruction of the People and Commonwealth of Israel, being also fresh in the memory of many now living, the Prophet Isaiah might well have respect to it. So the sence is as if he had said, There shall be but 65 years between the Delivery and the Execution of that Prophecy. And so the number of years may be thus made up. Fix the beginning of them Ten years before Uzziah's death, add the 16 years of Iotham's Reign, and then the 16 years of Ahaz his Reign, and then Six of Hezekiah's Reign, in which Israel was carried Captive, 2 Kings 18. 10. these make up 48 years: And for the 17 years, which yet remain of the 65, they may be taken out of the rest of Hezekiah's Reign. For although the Transportation of that People began in the Sixth year of Hezekiah, yet it might be continued or repeated divers years after, and compleated 17 years after, Ier. 52. 28, 29, 30. Or rather, 2. these years may be computed from the time of this Prophecy of Isaiah. And whereas it may be objected against this Opinion, That the Judgment here threatned was executed in the Sixth year of Hezekiah, as was before noted, and therefore within 18 or 19 years of this Prophecy, which was delivered in the third or fourth year of Ahaz; Two things may be answered, 1. That the Israelites were not transported in the Sixth year of Hezekiah: For although Samaria be said to be taken in the Sixth year of Hezekiah, 2 Kings 18. 10. and the Transportation of the Israelites be mentioned immediately after it, v. 11▪ yet it doth not thence follow, that it was done immediately, and at that one time; because this is not unusual in Scripture, in Historical Relations, to mention those things together which were done at a considerable distance of time one from another; as it is recorded Act. 7. 15, 16. Iacob—died, h[illegible: 1+ letters] and our fathers, and were carried over into Sychem, and laid in the Sepulchre of Abraham, &c. although it was above 200 years ere all which is said in those few words was done. And other Instances of like nature might easily be produced. 2. That this Work of Transportation was not done at once, but successively, and by degrees. Thus it certainly was in the Transportation of Iudab, which was begun in Nebuchadnezzar's Seventh year, continued in his Eighteenth year, and perfected in his Three and twentieth year, Ier. 52. 28, 29, 30. And thus it might be, and probably was, in this Transportation. It might be begun presently after the taking of Samaria, and afterwards continued, until at last the whole Body of the People was removed. And as soon as that was done, and not before, the King of Assyria brought into their place those new Colonies mentioned 2 Kings 17. 24. Which that it was not done at the time of the taking of Samaria, but many years after it, seems to me evident, because those Colonies were not brought thither by Shalmanezer, who took Samari[illegible: 1+ letters], 2 Kings 18. 10. no nor by Sennacherib, his next Successour; but by Esarhaddon, as is affirmed Ezra 4. 2. who was the Son and Successour of Senacherib, 2 Kings 19. 37. and reigned above Fifty years; for he seems to have begun his Reign about the Fourteenth year of Hezekiah's Reign, by comparing 2 Kings 18. 13. & 19. 35, 36, 37. and so he reigned with Hezekiah about Fifteen years, and with Man[illegible: 1+ letters]sseh above Forty years, as the Learned Sir Iohn Marsham affirms in his Chronicus Canon, &c. pag. 496. And this Work of Transporting the Remainders of the Israelites, and bringing the new Colonies, might not be done till towards the end of his Reign: Which delay might be occasioned by his Wars, or other great Affairs. And lest this should seem to be onely my own private Conjecture, if the Reader consult Sir Iohn Marsham's fourth and last Chronological Table, inserted after pag. 589. of his Work, he will find that Learned Chronologer to be of the same mind, and to make above Fifty years distance between the taking of Samaria, and the Translation of the new Colonies into those Parts. And thus these Sixty five years might well be accomplished in his time. And so this Place agrees with other Scriptures, and the Difficulties objected against other Interpretations, seem to be avoided.

Marginal references: Heb. from a people.

9 And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliahs son : If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established .

Or either, shall be; and the sence is the same as in the foregoing Verse, Samaria shall continue to be the Chief City of the Kingdom of Israel, and Pekah shall not conquer Ierusalem, as he hoped and designed to do.

If you do not believe this and the other Promises of God, but, in distrust of God, shall seek to the Assyrians for Succour, to which I perceive you are inclined, in stead of that Deliverance and Settlement which you expect, you shall be distressed and consumed thereby; the Accomplishment of which Threatning is recorded 2 Chron. 28. 20. And by this Threatning he implies, That if they did rely upon God's Word and Help, they should be established. Onely he delivereth it in the form of a Threatning, rather than of Promise, partly because he foresaw that they would chuse the worse part, and bring the Judgment threatned upon themselves; and partly because this was most necessary for them, to affright them out of their present Security and Infidelity.

Marginal references: See 2 Chr. [illegible: 1+ letters]. 20.; Or, Do ye [illegible: 1 word] believe? [illegible: 1 word] is because [illegible: 1+ letters]e are not sta [illegible: 1+ letters], or shall [illegible: 1 word] be established.

11 Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God , ask it either in the depth, or in the heighth above .

I perceive thou dost not believe God's Word and Message now delivered by me; yet God is so patient and merciful to thee, that he gives thee liberty to demand of him any Signal or miraculous Work, whereby thou mayst be assured of the Truth and Certainty of this Promise.

Both by right of Dominion, and by vertue of his gracious Covenant made with all Israel, of whom thou art a Member, and King; and by thy own Profession, for he still worshipped God together with his Idols; and by the continuance of his Care and Kindness to thee, and to thy People, notwithstanding all your Wickedness; whereof this Promise and Offer is a clear Demonstration.

Demand some Prodigie to be wrought, either in Earth or in Heaven, at thy pleasure.

Marginal references: Or, make thy p[illegible: 1+ letters]on deep.

12 But Ahaz said, I will not ask , neither will I tempt the LORD .

This Refusal proceeded not from the strength of his Faith, but from his contempt of God, and total distrust and disregard of his Word, and inward Resolution to take another Course; as is manifest both from the following words, and from the History of Ahaz, 2 Chron. 28.

Either, 1. by asking a Sign, as if he questioned the Truth of his Word: So this was deep Hypocrisie: Or, 2. by neglecting any means necessary for my preservation, which were indeed a tempting of God. And therefore I shall not sit still and relie upon God till I be destroyed, which will be the effect of thy Counsel; but I shall do as becometh a wife King, seek for Succour from Potent Allie[illegible: 1+ letters] ▪ such as the Assyrian is. So this is flat Rebellion against God.

13 And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David , Is it a small thing for you to weary men , but will ye weary my God also ?

Of which, see above, v. 2. He reproveth them all, because they were the Kings Counsellors, and promoted the Design of sending for the Assyrian Succours.

Is not that Wickedness more than enough? Must you add more to it?

To vex God's Prophets and People, and the generality of your Subjects, with your Oppressions and horrid Impieties.

By your cursed Ingratitude and Unbelief, and Disobedience to his Commands. He saith, my God, i. e. the God whose Servant and Prophet or Messenger I am, to intimate, that this heinous Offence was not committed against a weak and foolish Man, such as they might think the Prophet to be, but against God himself, who sent the Message. Compare Exod. 16. 8.

14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign ; Behold , a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel .

Because you despise me, and the Sign which I now offer to you, God of his own free Grace will send you a more honourable Messenger, and give you a nobler Sign, to try whether that will cure you of your Infidelity. Or, Nevertheless, as this Particle seems to be understood, Isa. 30. 18. Ier. 16. 14. & 30. 16. Although you deserve no Sign nor Favour, yet for the comfort of those few Believers which are among you, and to leave you without excuse, I shall mind you of another and a greater Sign, which God hath promised, and will in his due time perform; which also [illegible: 1+ letters]s a Pledge of the certain Accomplishment of all God's Promises. Or, Surely, as this Particle is sometimes used, as Gen. 4. 15. Ier. 2. 33. & 5. 2. Zech. 11. 7.

To wit, of your Deliverance. Qu. How was this Birth of a Virgin, which was not to come till many Ages after, a Sign of their Deliverance from the present Danger? Answ. 1. Because this was a clear Demonstration of God's infinite Power and Goodness, and Faithfulness, and consequently of the certain Truth of all God's Promises from time to time, which can never fail so long as those Attributes of God stand: And mens Faith is either strong or weak, as they believe them or doubt of them. Of which see Psal. 77. 8. & 78. 19, 20. Rom. 4. 20, 21. And so this was a proper Remedy for Ahaz his Disease, which was a secret Suspicion that God either could not, or would not deliver them. 2. Because that Promise, I say, not onely the actual Giving, which was long after▪ but even the Promise of the Messiah, which had been made long since, and oft renewed, and was universally believed by all the People, was the Foundation of all God's Mercies and Promises unto them, 2 Cor. 1. 20. and a Pledge of the Accomplishment of them. 3. Because this promised Birth did suppose and require the Preservation of that City, and Nation, and Tribe, in and of which the Messiah was to be born; and therefore there was no cause to fear that utter Ruine which their Enemies now threatned to bring upon them. 4. This is one, but not the onely Sign here given, as we shall see at v. 16.

You who will not believe that God alone is able to deliver you from the united Force of Syria and Israel, take nocice, for your full satisfaction, that God is not onely able to do this Work, but to do far greater and harder things, which he hath promised, and therefore both can and will accomplish.

Strictly and properly so called. The Iews, that they may obscure this plain Text, and weaken this Proof of the Truth of Christian Religion, pretend that this Hebrew Word signifies a young woman, and not a virgin. But this corrupt Translation is easily confuted, 1. Because this Word constantly signifies a virgin in all other places of Scripture where it is used, which are Gen. 24. 43. compared with v. 15. Exod. 2. 8. Psal. 68. 25. Cant. 1. 3. & 6. 8. To which may be added Prov. 30. 19. the way of a man with a maid, or a virgin: For, though it be supposed that he did design and desire to corrupt her, and afterwards did so; yet she may well be called a virgin, partly because he found her a Virgin, and partly because she seemed and pretended to others to be such, which made her more careful to use all possible Arts to preserve her Reputation, and so made the discovery of her impure Conversation with the Man more difficult, whereas the filthy Practices of Common Harlots are easily and vulgarly known. 2. From the scope of this Place, which is to confirm their Faith by a strange and prodigious Sign, which surely could not be, that a young Woman should conceive a Child, but that a Virgin should conceive, &c.

Or rather, bring f[illegible: 1+ letters]rth, as it is rendred Mat. 1. 23. and as this Hebrew Word is used Gen. 16. 11. & 1[illegible: 1+ letters] ▪ [illegible: 1+ letters]9. Iudg. 13. 5.

The Virgin, last mentioned, shall call: Which is added as a further Evidence of her Virginity, and that this Son had no Humane Father, because the Right of Naming the Child (which, being a Sign of Dominion, is primarily in the Husband, and in the Wife onely by his consent or permission, as is evident from Gen. 5. 29. & 35. 18. Luke 1. 60, 63. and many other places of Scripture) is wholly appropriated to her.

Which signifies, God with us, God dwelling among us, in our Nature, Ioh. 1. 14. God and Man meeting in one Person, and being a Mediator between God and Men. For the design of these Words is not so much to relate the Name by which Christ should commonly be called, as to describe his Nature and Office: As we read that his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, &c. Isa. 9. 6. and that this is said to be his (the Messiah's) name whereby he shall be called, The Lord our righteousness, Ier. 23. 6. although he be never called by these Names in any other place of the Old or New Testament; but the meaning of these Places is, He shall be Wonderful, and our Counsellor, &c. and our Righteousness: for, to be called is oft put for to be, as Isa. 1. 26. & 4. 3. &c.

Marginal references: Ma[illegible: 1+ letters]. 1. 2[illegible: 1+ letters]. Luk. 1. [illegible: 1+ letters]1.; Or, thou, O virgin, [illegible: 1 word] al[illegible: 1+ letters] call.

15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and chuse the good .

The common Food of Children in that Country, where they were in great abundance, and of the best sort.

The Virgins Son last mentioned, who, though he be God blessed for ever, yet shall become Man, and, to shew the truth of his Humanity, shall not onely be conceived and brought forth, but also shall be nou[illegible: 1+ letters]ished and brought up by the same means and steps as other children; which is justly mentioned here as a stupendious and miraculous Work of God.

That by this Food he may grow up, and so may know, &c. Or, until he know, as it is rendred by divers Learned Men, and, among others, by the Chaldee Interpreter, who best knew the use of this Particle among the Hebrews.

To discern between things morally good and evil; which Children are capable of doing in some measure, when they are five or six years old. Compare Deut. 1. 39. where young Children are described by this Character, that they had no knowledge between good and evil.

16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and chuse the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her Kings .

Or, Yea; for so this Particle is used by way of amplification or addition, Isa. 32. 13. Ier. 14. 5, 18. So the sence is, Not onely this Land of thine shall be preserved until the Virgins Son be born, but thine Enemies Land shall be sorely scourged, and these two Kings destroyed, within a very little time.

Heb. this child; not the Virgins Son, but the Prophets Child, Shear-jashub, whom in all probability the Prophet, to prevent mistakes, pointed at, and who was brought hither by God's special command, v. 3. and that for this very use; for otherwise his Presence was wholly insignificant.

The Lands, to wit, of Syria and Israel, as is evident from the next Words. It is an Euallage of the Singular for the Plural.

For its cruel Designs and Practices against. Or, which vexeth or moles[illegible: 1+ letters]eth thee, as this Word is used Exod. 1. 12. Numb. 22. 3. &c.

So far shall Pekah and Rezin be from conquering thy Land, that they shall lose their own Lands, and their Lives too; which they did within two years after this time, being both slain by the King of Assyria, 2 Kings 15. 29, 30. & 16. 9.

Marginal references: See Ch. 8. 4.

17 The LORD shall bring upon thee and upon thy people and upon thy fathers house , days that have not come, from the day that Ephraim departed from Judah , even the king of Assyria .

But although God will deliver you at this time for his own Names sake, yet he will remember and requite all your present and following Wickedness, and hath a dreadful Judgment in store for you.

For part of this Assyrian Storm fell in Ahaz his Reign, 2 Chron. 28. 20. &c.

Upon thy Sons and Successours, the Kings of Iudah: the Accomplishment whereof is recorded in their History.

To wit, evil days, by a Synechdcche; or Calamities: for days are oft put for the Events which happen in them, and especially for Judgments or Tribulations, as Iob. 18. 20. Psal. 137. 7. Isa. 9. 4. Obad. v. 12.

When Ten Tribes revolted from thy Fathers House, and set up another opposite Kingdom.

Who may well be called their Plague or Calamity, as he is called the rod of God's anger, Isa. 10. 5. Or, with (as this Hebrew Particle oft signifies) the king, &c. or, by the king, &c. And king is here put for kings, as Dan. 2. 37. & 8. 21.

Marginal references: 1 Kings 12. 16.

18 And it shall come to pass in that day , that the LORD shall hiss for the flie , that is in the uttermost p[illegible: 1+ letters] of the rivers of Egypt, and for the bee that is in the land of Assyria .

Known to God, and appointed by him, for the execution of these Judgments.

See on Isa. 5. 26.

The Flies. So he calls these Enemies, to imply either their great Numbers, or their speedy March, or their unavoidable Assault.

In, or near, or towards their Extremity or End, where they go out into the Sea.

Of the River Nilus, which may be called rivers, either for its greatness, for which cause the Title of rivers is given also to Euphrates, Psal. 137. 1. and to Tig[illegible: 1+ letters]is, Na[illegible: 1+ letters]. 2. 6. or because, towards the end of it, it is divided into seven famous Streams, by which it emptieth it self into the Midland Sea, Isa. 11▪ 15. He seems plainly to design and describe the Egyptians, who were always dangerous Neighbours to Iudah, and did probably animate and assist the Philistins, and Edomites, and others, against them, and at last made a formal Invasion and Conquest of their Land, 2 Kings 23. 33, &c. Besides, when the Chaldaeans had in good measure subdued the Egyptians, it is very probable that great numbers of the Egyptian Soldiers did list themselves in the Chaldaean Army, and with them invade the Land of Iudah.

The Bees, the Assyrian Army, who are compared to Bees, as for their numerous Forces and orderly March, so for their fierce Attempts and mischievous Effects.

In the Empire of Assyria, or Babylon; for these two were united into one Empire, and therefore in Scripture are promiscuously called sometimes by one Title, and sometimes by the other.

19 And they shall come, and shall rest all of them in the desolate valleys , and in the holes of the rocks , and upon all thorns, and upon all bushes .

The Flies, and especially the Bees.

They shall have an easie Victory; few or none of them shall be slain in the Attempt.

Either, 1. such as were and had long been desolate. So it signifies the vast Numbers of their Enemies, which filled all Places, both such as are well inhabited, and such as were in a great measure desolate: Or, 2. such as they found very fruitful, but made them desolate.

To which possibly the Israelites fled for refuge.

Which he mentions partly because Flies and Bees use frequently to rest there; and partly to intimate, that no Place should escape the fury of this Enemy.

Marginal references: Or, commendable trees.

20 In the same day shall the LORD shave with a rasour that is hired , namely by them beyond the river , by the king of Assyria , the head and the hair of the feet : and it shall also consume the beard .

i. e. Utterly spoil and destroy, as shaving takes away all the Hair, and leaves not any thing of it visible, as there is when the Hair is onely cut or polled.

Either, 1. by Ahaz, who did hire them, 2 Kings 16. 7▪ 8. And so the Prophet notes the just Judgment of God, in scourging with a Rod of their own making; and by this Threatning he endeavours to prevent that wicked Design which then was on foot, of hiring Assyrian Succours: Or, 2. by God, who did stir them up, and send them upon his Errand against Iudah, as he threatens Isa. 10. 6. and paid them liberally for that Service, as he did Nebuchadnezzar, of which see Ier. 25. 9. & 27. 6, 7. Dan. 2. 37, 38.

Euphrates, called the river by way of eminency, Psal. 72. 8. Ier. 2. 18. beyond which Assyria lay.

By the Successive Kings of the Assyrian Empire, Sennacherib, 2 Kings 18. 13. &c. Esarhaddon, 2 Chron. 33. 11. and especially by Nebuchadnezzar, who having subdued the Assyrian Monarchy, from thenceforth was King of Assyria as well as of Chaldaea. And the Prophet rather mentions Assyria than Chaldaea, or Babylon, partly because the Assyrian began and continued to execute this Judgment, although the Babylonian compleated it; and partly to inform them, that they laid the Foundation of their own Ruine, by opening the Door to the Assyrian, who afterwards entred at his pleasure, and left it open for Nebuchadnezzar.

Of the lower or secret Parts▪ which come under that name, Ezek. 16. 7, 25. and elsewhere, as hath been noted again and again; and which the Iewish Writers affirm to have been shaved in the Purification of Lepers and Levites, Levit. 14. 8, 9. Numb. 8. 7.

Which they highly esteemed, as a great Ornament. By these Metaphorical Expressions he signifies the total Destruction of their State, from head to foot, from the highest to the lowest.

Marginal references: 2 Kings 19. 35.

21 And it shall come pass in that day, that a man shall nourish a young cow, and two sheep .

This and the following Verse contain either, 1. a Mitigation of the foregoing Calamity, or some Comfort for the Remainders of the People, after the publick Devastation; or rather, 2. a further Declaration of the threatned Desolation; which best agrees not onely with the foregoing, but also with the following Verses. So the sence of this Verse is this, They who formerly used to keep great Herds of Cattel, and many Flocks of Sheep, shall esteem it a great happiness if they can keep but one Cow and two Sheep, to keep themselves from extremity of Famine.

22 And it shall come to pass for the abundance of milk that they shall give , he shall eat butter: for butter and honey shall every one eat that is left in the land.

Because they shall have excellent and large Pastures, by reason of the great scarcity of Cattel; whereas formerly their Lands were oft times over-stocked with Cattel.

Which may be here mentioned, either, 1. as mean and vulgar Food, being very common in those Parts; which are opposed to that Flesh and Corn, and other excellent Fruits of the Earth, wherewith their Land formerly abounded; or, 2. as very good and pleasant Food, which the poorer sort had formerly used to sell, to procure more necessary and cheaper Food for themselves: but now the Land should be so destitute of People, that there were none to whom they could sell them, and those few who did survive might freely eat all sorts of Provisions.

Marginal references: Heb. in the midst of the land.

23 And it shall come to pass in that day, that every place shall be, where there were a thousand vines at a thousand silverlings , it shall even be for briers and thorns c.

Or, pieces of silver, as the same Word is commonly rendred. Whereby we may understand either, 1. so many Pounds; a Pound for each Vineyard, to wit, for the Annual Rent: or, 2. so many Shekels, which Word is most commonly understood, when no particular kind of Coin is expressed, as 2 Sam. 18. 11, 12. Mat. 26. 15. and then the meaning is, not that the thousand Vineyards were let for a thousand Shekels, a Vineyard for a Shekel, which is a contemptible Price; but that each of the thousand Vineyards might have been sold or let for a thousand Shekels, which was the yearly Rent of some excellent Vineyards, as may be gathered from Cant. 8. 11. Except we understand this not of so many Vineyards, as other Interpreters do, but of so many single Vines, as the Word properly and generally signifies, planted together in one large Vineyard, which may be here meant by the place of the River; and then each Vine may be valued at a Shekel. But this place may possibly be otherwise rendred, and that exactly according to the Hebrew Text, Every place where there are a thousand vines, shall be for a thousand pieces of silver, i. e. It shall be valued, or offered, either to be let, or rather to be sold, at that Price; which was a very low Price, and therefore [illegible: 1+ letters]itly signifies the greatness of the Desolation.

o Because it shall be utterly neglected, and therefore overspread with them. Or, yea it shall be for briers and thorns. No man will either buy or hire it upon any terms.

24 With arrows and with bows shall men come thither: because all the land shall become briers and thorns.

Either to hunt, or to defend themselves from Wild Beasts, which commonly abide in such desolate and overgrown Grounds.

25 And on all hills that shall be digged with the mattock, there shall not come thither the fear of briers and thorns : but it shall be for the sending forth of oxen, and for the treading of lesser cattel .

Or, that were digged, to wit, formerly, that used to be digged and dressed for the planting of Vines, or other choice Fruit-trees.

The Words thus rendred, sound like a Promise: But that doth no way agree with the scope of the Place. And they may be, and are by some, understood not of Briers and Thorns growing in those Grounds, which would hinder the feeding of Cattel there, but of such wherewith they were fenced, and by which the Cattel were affrighted or hindred from breaking into them, which cause of their Fear being now removed by the general Devastation, they [illegible: 1+ letters]ght now enter there, and feed at pleasure, as the next [illegible: 1 word] imply. Or they may be rendred thus, as they are by a late Learned Interpreter, That there might not come [illegible: 1 word] &c. which is mentioned as the Reason why they were digged and dressed, that they might be freed from Briers and Thorns. And so there is onely a defect of the Hebrew Particle asher, which is frequent, and that not onely as it signifies which, but as it is taken finally for that, as Isa. 5. 11. & 10. 2. and elsewhere.

Or, even (as this Particle is oft rendred) there shall be, to wit, a place; which Word is understood, 2 Sam. 7. 1. 1 Kings 18. 12. Or the Words may be thus rendred, And all hills that shall be digged—and thorns, even they or each of them shall be, the Singular being taken collectively, as is very usual.

All sorts of Cattel may fairly enter, and feed there, the Fences being broken down, and the Owners generally slain, or carried into Captivity.

Marginal references: Chap. 32. 20.

Isa 7:1

As the following prophecies could not be understood apart from the historical circumstances to which they refer, the prophet commences with a historical announcement.”It came to pass, in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah (Uziyâhu), king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Aramaea, and Pekah (Pekach)the son of Remaliah (Remalyâhu), king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, and (he)could not make war upon it.” We have the same words, with only slight variations, in the history of the reign of Ahaz in 2Ki 16:5. That the author of the book of Kings copied them from the book of Isaiah, will be very apparent when we come to examine the historical chapters (36-39) in their relation to the parallel sections of the book of Kings. In the passage before us, the want of independence on the part of the author of the book of Kings is confirmed by the fact that he not only repeats, but also interprets, the words of Isaiah. Instead of saying, “And (he) could not make war upon it,” he says, “And they besieged Ahaz, and could not make war.” The singular yâcol (he could) of Isaiah is changed into the simpler plural, whilst the statement that the two allies could not assault or storm Jerusalem (which must be the meaning of nilcham ‛al in the passage before us), is more clearly defined by the additional information that they did besiege Ahaz, but to no purpose (tzur ‛al, the usual expression for obsidione claudere; cf., Deu 20:19). The statement that “they besieged Ahaz” cannot merely signify that “they attempted to besiege him,” although nothing further is known about this siege. But happily we have two accounts of the Syro-Ephraimitish war (2 Kings 16 and 2 Chron 28). The two historical books complete one another. The book of Kings relates that the invasion of Judah by the two allies commenced at the end of Jotham’s reign (2Ki 15:37); and in addition to the statement taken from Isa 7:1, it also mentions that Rezin conquered the seaport town of Elath, which then belonged to the kingdom of Judah; whilst the Chronicles notice the fact that Rezin brought a number of Judaean captives to Damascus, and that Pekah conquered Ahaz in a bloody and destructive battle. Indisputable as the credibility of these events may be, it is nevertheless very difficult to connect them together, either substantially or chronologically, in a certain and reliable manner, as Caspari has attempted to do in his monograph on the Syro-Ephraimitish war (1849). We may refer here to our own manner of dovetailing the historical accounts of Ahaz and the Syro-Ephraimitish war in the introduction to the present work (p. 23ff.). If we could assume that יכל (not יכלוּ) was the authentic reading, and that the failure of the attempt to take Jerusalem, which is mentioned here, was occasioned by the strength of the city itself, and not by the intervention of Assyria - so that Isa 7:1 did not contain such an anticipation as we have supposed, although summary anticipations of this kind were customary with biblical historians, and more especially with Isaiah - the course of events might be arranged in the following manner, viz., that whilst Rezin was on his way to Elath, Pekah resolved to attack Jerusalem, but failed in his attempt; but that Rezin was more successful in his expedition, which was a much easier one, and after the conquest of Elath united his forces with those of his allies.

Isa 7:2

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. וינע 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 נוע, which is generally the form of the infin. abs. (Isa 24:20), is here, and only here, the infin. constr. instead of נוּע (cf., noach, Num 11:25; shob, Jos 2:16; mōt, Psa 38:17, etc.: vid., Ewald, §238,b).

Isa 7:3

In this season of terror Isaiah received the following divine instructions. “Then said Jehovah to Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou and Shear-jashub thy son, to the end of the aqueduct of the upper pool, to the road of the fuller’s field.” The fuller’s field (sedēh cōbēs) was situated, as we may assume with Robinson, Schultz, and Thenius, against Williams, Krafft, etc., on the western side of the city, where there is still an “upper pool” of great antiquity (2Ch 32:30). Near to this pool the fullers, i.e., the cleaners and thickeners of woollen fabrics, carried on their occupation (Cōbēs, from Câbas, related to Câbash, subigere, which bears the same relation to râchatz as πλύνειν to λούειν). Robinson and his companions saw some people washing clothes at the upper pool when they were there; and, for a considerable distance round, the surface of this favourite washing and bleaching place was covered with things spread out to bleach or dry. The road (mesillâh), which ran past this fuller’s field, was the one which leads from the western gate to Joppa. King Ahaz was there, on the west of the city, and outside the fortifications - engaged, no doubt, in making provision for the probable event of Jerusalem being again besieged in a still more threatening manner. Jerusalem received its water supply from the upper Gihon pool, and there, according to Jehovah’s directions, Isaiah was to go with his son and meet him. The two together were, as it were, a personified blessing and curse, presenting themselves to the king for him to make his own selection. For the name Sheâr-yâshub (which is erroneously accentuated with tiphchah munach instead of merchah tiphchah, as in Isa 10:22), i.e., the remnant is converted (Isa 10:21-22), was a kind of abbreviation of the divine answer given to the prophet in Isa 6:11-13, and was indeed at once threatening and promising, but in such a way that the curse stood in front and the grace behind. The prophetic name of Isaiah’s son was intended to drive the king to Jehovah by force, through the threatening aspect it presented; and the prophetic announcement of Isaiah himself, whose name pointed to salvation, was to allure him to Jehovah with its promising tone.

Isa 7:4

No means were left untried. “And say unto him, Take heed, and keep quiet; and let not thy heart become soft from these two smoking firebrand-stumps: at the fierce anger of Rezin, and Aram, and the son of Remaliah.” The imperative השּׁמר (not pointed השּׁמר, as is the case when it is to be connected more closely with what follows, and taken in the sense of cave ne, or even cave ut) warned the king against acting for himself, in estrangement from God; and the imperative hashkēt exhorted him to courageous calmness, secured by confidence in God; or, as Calvin expresses it, exhorted him “to restrain himself outwardly, and keep his mind calm within.” The explanation given by Jewish expositors to the word hisshamēr, viz., conside super faeces tuas (Luzzatto: vivi riposato), according to Jer 48:11; Zep 1:12, yields a sense which hardly suits the exhortation. The object of terror, at which and before which the king’s heart was not to despair, is introduced first of all with Min and then with Beth, as in Jer 51:46. The two allies are designated at once as what they were in the sight of God, who sees through the true nature and future condition. They were two tails, i.e., nothing but the fag-ends, of wooden pokers (lit. stirrers, i.e., fire-stirrers), which would not blaze any more, but only continue smoking. They would burn and light no more, though their smoke might make the eyes smart still. Along with Rezin, and to avoid honouring him with the title of king, Aram (Syria) is especially mentioned; whilst Pekah is called Ben-Remaliah, to recall to mind his low birth, and the absence of any promise in the case of his house.

The ya‛an 'asher (“because”) which follows (as in Eze 12:12) does not belong to Isa 7:4 (as might appear from the sethume that comes afterwards), in the sense of “do not be afraid because,” etc., but is to be understood as introducing the reason for the judicial sentence in Isa 7:7.

Isa 7:5-7 “Because Aram hath determined evil over thee, Ephraim and the son of Remaliah (Remalyahu), saying, We will march against Judah, and terrify it, and conquer it for ourselves, and make the son of Tâb'êl king in the midst of it: thus saith the Lord Jehovah, It will not be brought about, and will not take place.” The inference drawn by Caspari (Krieg, p. 98), that at the time when Isaiah said this, Judaea was not yet heathen or conquered, is at any rate not conclusive. The promise given to Ahaz was founded upon the wicked design, with which the war had been commenced. How far the allies had already gone towards this last goal, the overthrow of the Davidic sovereignty, it does not say. But we know from 2Ki 15:37 that the invasion had begun before Ahaz ascended the throne; and we may see from Isa 7:16 of Isaiah’s prophecy, that the “terrifying” (nekı̄tzennah, from kūtz, taedere, pavere) had actually taken place; so that the “conquering” (hibkia‛, i.e., splitting, forcing of the passes and fortifications, 2Ki 25:4; Eze 30:16; 2Ch 21:17; 2Ch 32:1) must also have been a thing belonging to the past. For history says nothing about a successful resistance on the part of Judah in this war. Only Jerusalem had not yet fallen, and, as the expression “king in the midst of it” shows, it is to this that the term “Judah” especially refers; just as in Isa 23:13 Asshur is to be understood as signifying Nineveh. There they determined to enthrone a man named Tâb'êl (vid., Ezr 4:7; it is written Tâb'al here in pause, although this change does not occur in other words (e.g., Israel) in pause - a name resembling the Syrian name Tab-rimmon),The Hauran inscriptions contain several such composite names formed like Tâb'êl with el: see Wetzstein,Ausgewählte griechische und lateinische Inschriften, pp. 343-4, 361-363). By the transformation into Tab'al, as Luzzatto says, the name is changed from Bonus Deus to Bonus minime. a man who is otherwise unknown; but it never went beyond the determination, never was even on the way towards being realized, to say nothing of being fully accomplished. The allies would not succeed in altering the course of history as it had been appointed by the Lord.

Isa 7:8-9 “For head of Aram is Damascus, and head of Damascus Rezin, and in five-and-sixty years will Ephraim as a people be broken in pieces. And head of Ephraim is Samaria, and head of Samaria the son of Remalyahu; if ye believe not, surely ye will not remain.” The attempt to remove Isa 7:8, as a gloss at variance with the context, which is supported by Eichhorn, Gesenius, Hitzig, Knobel, and others, is a very natural one; and in that case the train of thought would simply be, that the two hostile kingdoms would continue in their former relation without the annexation of Judah. But when we look more closely, it is evident that the removal of Isa 7:8 destroys both the internal connection and the external harmony of the clauses. For just as Isa 7:8 and Isa 7:8 correspond, so do Isa 7:9 and Isa 7:9. Ephraim, i.e., the kingdom of the ten tribes, which has entered into so unnatural and ungodly a covenant with idolatrous Syria, will cease to exist as a nation in the course of sixty-five years; “and ye, if ye do not believe, but make flesh your arm, will also cease to exist.” Thus the two clauses answer to one another: Isa 7:8 is a prophecy announcing Ephraim’s destruction, and Isa 7:9 a warning, threatening Judah with destruction, if it rejects the promise with unbelief. Moreover, the style of Isa 7:8 is quite in accordance with that of Isaiah (on בּעוד, see Isa 21:16 and Isa 16:14; and on מעם, “away from being a people,” in the sense of “so that it shall be no longer a nation,” Isa 17:1; Isa 25:2, and Jer 48:2, Jer 48:42). And the doctrinal objection, that the prophecy is too minute, and therefore taken ex eventu, has no force whatever, since the Old Testament prophecy furnishes an abundance of examples of the same kind (vid., Isa 20:3-4; Isa 38:5; Isa 16:14; Isa 21:16; Eze 4:5., Isa 24:1., etc.). The only objection that can well be raised is, that the time given in Isa 7:8 is wrong, and is not in harmony with Isa 7:16. Now, undoubtedly the sixty-five years do not come out if we suppose the prophecy to refer to what was done by Tiglath-pileser after the Syro-Ephraimitish war, and to what was also done to Ephraim by Shalmanassar in the sixth year of Hezekiah’s reign, to which Isa 7:16 unquestionably refers, and more especially to the former. But there is another event still, through which the existence of Ephraim, not only as a kingdom, but also as a people, was broken up - namely, the carrying away of the last remnant of the Ephraimitish population, and the planting of colonies from Eastern Asia by Esarhaddon.The meaning of this king’s name is Assur fratrem dedit (Asuṙacḣyiddin): vid., Oppert, Expedition, t. ii. p. 354. on Ephraimitish soil (2Ki 17:24; Ezr 4:2). Whereas the land of Judah was left desolate after the Chaldean deportation, and a new generation grew up there, and those who were in captivity were once more enabled to return; the land of Ephraim was occupied by heathen settlers, and the few who were left behind were melted up with these into the mixed people of the Samaritans, and those in captivity were lost among the heathen. We have only to assume that what was done to Ephraim by Esarhaddon, as related in the historical books, took place in the twenty-second and twenty-third years of Manasseh (the sixth year of Esarhaddon), which is very probable, since it must have been under Esarhaddon that Manasseh was carried away to Babylon about the middle of his reign (2Ch 33:11); and we get exactly sixty-five years from the second year of the reign of Ahaz to the termination of Ephraim’s existence as a nation (viz., Ahaz, 14; Hezekiah, 29; Manasseh, 22; in all, 65). It was then that the unconditional prediction, “Ephraim as a people will be broken in pieces,” was fulfilled (yēchath mē‛âm; it is certainly not the 3rd pers. fut. kal, but the niphal, Mal 2:5), just as the conditional threat “ye shall not remain” was fulfilled upon Judah in the Babylonian captivity. נאמן signifies to have a fast hold, and האמין to prove fast-holding. If Judah did not hold fast to its God, it would lose its fast hold by losing its country, the ground beneath its feet. We have the same play upon words in 2Ch 20:20. The suggestion of Geiger is a very improbable one, viz., that the original reading was בי תאמינו לא אם, but that בי appeared objectionable, and was altered into כּי. Why should it be objectionable, when the words form the conclusion to a direct address of Jehovah Himself, which is introduced with all solemnity? For this כּי, passing over from a confirmative into an affirmative sense, and employed, as it is here, to introduce the apodosis of the hypothetical clause, see 1Sa 14:39, and (in the formula עתּה כּי) Gen 31:42; Gen 43:10; Num 22:29, Num 22:33; 1Sa 14:30 : their continued existence would depend upon their faith, as this chi emphatically declares.

Isa 7:10-12

Thus spake Isaiah, and Jehovah through him, to the king of Judah. Whether he replied, or what reply he made, we are not informed. He was probably silent, because he carried a secret in his heart which afforded him more consolation than the words of the prophet. The invisible help of Jehovah, and the remote prospect of the fall of Ephraim, were not enough for him. His trust was in Asshur, with whose help he would have far greater superiority over the kingdom of Israel, than Israel had over the kingdom of Judah through the help of Damascene Syria. The pious, theocratic policy of the prophet did not come in time. He therefore let the enthusiast talk on, and had his own thoughts about the matter. Nevertheless the grace of God did not give up the unhappy son of David for lost. “And Jehovah continued speaking to Ahaz as follows: Ask thee a sign of Jehovah thy God, going deep down into Hades, or high up to the height above.” Jehovah continued: what a deep and firm consciousness of the identity of the word of Jehovah and the word of the prophet is expressed in these words! According to a very marvellous interchange of idioms (Communicatio idiomatum) which runs through the prophetic books of the Old Testament, at one time the prophet speaks as if he were Jehovah, and at another, as in the case before us, Jehovah speaks as if He were the prophet. Ahaz was to ask for a sign from Jehovah his God. Jehovah did not scorn to call Himself the God of this son of David, who had so hardened his heart. Possibly the holy love with which the expression “thy God” burned, might kindle a flame in his dark heart; or possibly he might think of the covenant promises and covenant duties which the words “thy God” recalled to his mind. From this, his God, he was to ask for a sign. A sign ('oth, from 'uth, to make an incision or dent) was something, some occurrence, or some action, which served as a pledge of the divine certainty of something else. This was secured sometimes by visible miracles performed at once (Exo 4:8-9), or by appointed symbols of future events (Isa 8:18; Isa 20:3); sometimes by predicted occurrences, which, whether miraculous or natural, could not possibly be foreseen by human capacities, and therefore, if they actually took place, were a proof either retrospectively of the divine causality of other events (Exo 3:12), or prospectively of their divine certainty (Isa 37:30; Jer 44:29-30). The thing to be confirmed on the present occasion was what the prophet had just predicted in so definite a manner, viz., the maintenance of Judah with its monarchy, and the failure of the wicked enterprise of the two allied kingdoms. If this was to be attested to Ahaz in such a way as to demolish his unbelief, it could only be effected by a miraculous sign. And just as Hezekiah asked for a sign when Isaiah foretold his recovery, and promised him the prolongation of his life for fifteen years, and the prophet gave him the sign he asked, by causing the shadow upon the royal sun-dial to go backwards instead of forwards (chapter 38); so here Isaiah meets Ahaz with the offer of such a supernatural sign, and offers him the choice of heaven, earth, and Hades as the scene of the miracle. העמּק and הגבּהּ are either in the infinitive absolute or in the imperative; and שאלה is either the imperative שׁאל with the He of challenge, which is written in this form in half pause instead of שׁאלה (for the two similar forms with pashtah and zakeph, vid., Dan 9:19), “Only ask, going deep down, or ascending to the height,” without there being any reason for reading שׁאלה with the tone upon the last syllable, as Hupfeld proposes, in the sense of profundam fac (or faciendo) precationem (i.e., go deep down with thy petition); or else it is the pausal subordinate form for שׁאלה, which is quite allowable in itself (cf., yechpâtz, the constant form in pause for yachpōtz, and other examples, Gen 43:14; Gen 49:3, Gen 49:27), and is apparently preferred here on account of its consonance with למעלה (Ewald, §93, 3). We follow the Targum, with the Sept., Syr., and Vulgate, in giving the preference to the latter of the two possibilities. It answers to the antithesis; and if we had the words before us without points, this would be the first to suggest itself. Accordingly the words would read, Go deep down (in thy desire) to Hades, or go high up to the height; or more probably, taking העמק and הגבה in the sense of gerundives, “Going deep down to Hades, or (או from אוה, like vel from velle = si velis, malis) going high up to the height.” This offer of the prophet to perform any kind of miracle, either in the world above or in the lower world, has thrown rationalistic commentators into very great perplexity. The prophet, says Hitzig, was playing a very dangerous game here; and if Ahaz had closed with his offer, Jehovah would probably have left him in the lurch. And Meier observes, that “it can never have entered the mind of an Isaiah to perform an actual miracle:” probably because no miracles were ever performed by Göthe, to whose high poetic consecration Meier compares the consecration of the prophet as described in Isa 6:1-13. Knobel answers the question, “What kind of sign from heaven would Isaiah have given in case it had been asked for?” by saying, “Probably a very simple matter.” But even granting that an extraordinary heavenly phenomenon could be a “simple matter,” it was open to king Ahaz not to be so moderate in his demands upon the venturesome prophet, as Knobel with his magnanimity might possibly have been. Dazzled by the glory of the Old Testament prophecy, a rationalistic exegesis falls prostrate upon the ground; and it is with such frivolous, coarse, and common words as these that it tries to escape from its difficulties. It cannot acknowledge the miraculous power of the prophet, because it believes in no miracles at all. But Ahaz had no doubt about his miraculous power, though he would not be constrained by any miracle to renounce his own plans and believe in Jehovah. “But Ahaz replied, I dare not ask, and dare not tempt Jehovah.” What a pious sound this has! And yet his self-hardening reached its culminating point in these well-sounding words. He hid himself hypocritically under the mask of Deu 6:16, to avoid being disturbed in his Assyrian policy, and was infatuated enough to designate the acceptance of what Jehovah Himself had offered as tempting God. He studiously brought down upon himself the fate denounced in Isa 6:1-13, and indeed not upon himself only, but upon all Judah as well. For after a few years the forces of Asshur would stand upon the same fuller’s field (Isa 36:2) and demand the surrender of Jerusalem. In that very hour, in which Isaiah was standing before Ahaz, the fate of Jerusalem was decided for more than two thousand years.

Isa 7:13

The prophet might have ceased speaking now; but in accordance with the command in Isa 6:1-13 he was obliged to speak, even though his word should be a savour of death unto death. “And he spake, Hear ye now, O house of David! Is it too little to you to weary men, that ye weary my God also?” “He spake.” Who spake? According to Isa 7:10 the speaker was Jehovah; yet what follows is given as the word of the prophet. Here again it is assumed that the word of the prophet was the word of God, and that the prophet was the organ of God even when he expressly distinguished between himself and God. The words were addressed to the “house of David,” i.e., to Ahaz, including all the members of the royal family. Ahaz himself was not yet thirty years old. The prophet could very well have borne that the members of the house of David should thus frustrate all his own faithful, zealous human efforts. But they were not content with this (on the expression minus quam vos = quam ut vobis sufficiat, see Num 16; 9; Job 15:11): they also wearied out the long-suffering of his God, by letting Him exhaust all His means of correcting them without effect. They would not believe without seeing; and when signs were offered them to see, in order that they might believe, they would not even look. Jehovah would therefore give them, against their will, a sign of His own choosing.

Isa 7:14-15 “Therefore the Lord, He will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin conceives, and bears a son, and calls his name Immanuel. Butter and honey will he eat, at the time that he knows to refuse the evil and choose the good.” In its form the prophecy reminds one of Gen 16:11, “Behold, thou art with child, and wilt bear a son, and call his name Ishmael.” Here, however, the words are not addressed to the person about to bear the child, although Matthew gives this interpretation to the prophecy;Jerome discusses this diversity in a very impartial and intelligent manner, in his ep. ad Pammachium de optimo genere interpretandi. for קראת is not the second person, but the third, and is synonymous with קראה (according to Ges. §74. Anm. 1), another form which is also met with in Gen 33:11; Lev 25:21; Deu 31:29, and Psa 118:23.The pointing makes a distinction between קראת (she calls) and קראת, as Gen 16:11 should be pointed (thou callest); and Olshausen (§35, b) is wrong in pronouncing the latter a mistake.

Moreover, the condition of pregnancy, which is here designated by the participial adjective הרה (cf., 2Sa 11:5), was not an already existing one in this instance, but (as in all probability also in Jdg 13:5, cf., Jdg 13:4) something future, as well as the act of bearing, since hinnēh is always used by Isaiah to introduce a future occurrence. This use of hinneh in Isaiah is a sufficient answer to Gesenius, Knobel, and others, who understand hâ‛almâh as referring to the young wife of the prophet himself, who was at that very time with child. But it is altogether improbable that the wife of the prophet himself should be intended. For if it were to her that he referred, he could hardly have expressed himself in a more ambiguous and unintelligible manner; and we cannot see why he should not much rather have said אשׁתּי or הנּביאה, to say nothing of the fact that there is no further allusion made to any son of the prophet of that name, and that a sign of this kind founded upon the prophet’s own family affairs would have been one of a very precarious nature.

And the meaning and use of the word ‛almâh are also at variance with this. For whilst bethulâh (from bâtthal, related to bâdal, to separate, sejungere) signifies a maiden living in seclusion in her parents’ house and still a long way from matrimony, ‛almâh (from ‛âlam, related to Châlam, and possibly also to אלם, to be strong, full of vigour, or arrived at the age of puberty) is applied to one fully mature, and approaching the time of her marriage.On the development of the meanings of ‛âlam and Châlam, see Ges. Thes., and my Psychol. p. 282 (see also the commentary on Job 39:4). According to Jerome, alma was Punic also. In Arabic and Aramaean the diminutive form guleime, ‛alleimtah, was the favourite one, but in Syriac ‛alı̄mto (the ripened).

The two terms could both be applied to persons who were betrothed, and even to such as were married (Joe 2:16; Pro 30:19 : see Hitzig on these passages). It is also admitted that the idea of spotless virginity was not necessarily connected with ‛almâh (as in Gen 24:43, cf., Gen 24:16), since there are passages - such, for example, as Sol 6:8 - where it can hardly be distinguished from the Arabic surrı̄je; and a person who had a very young-looking wife might be said to have an ‛almah for his wife. But it is inconceivable that in a well-considered style, and one of religious earnestness, a woman who had been long married, like the prophet’s own wife, could be called hâ‛almâh without any reserve.A young and newly-married wife might be called Callâh (as in Homer νύμφη = nubilis and nupta; Eng. bride); and even in Homer a married woman, if young, is sometimes called κουριδίη ἄλοχος, but neither κούρη nor νεῆνις.

On the other hand, the expression itself warrants the assumption that by hâ‛almâh the prophet meant one of the ‛alâmoth of the king’s harem (Luzzatto); and if we consider that the birth of the child was to take place, as the prophet foresaw, in the immediate future, his thoughts might very well have been fixed upon Abijah (Abi) bath-Zechariah (2Ki 18:2; 2Ch 29:1), who became the mother of king Hezekiah, to whom apparently the virtues of the mother descended, in marked contrast with the vices of his father. This is certainly possible. At the same time, it is also certain that the child who was to be born was the Messiah, and not a new Israel (Hofmann, Schriftbeweis, ii. 1, 87, 88); that is to say, that he was no other than that “wonderful” heir of the throne of David, whose birth is hailed with joy in chapter 9, where even commentators like Knobel are obliged to admit that the Messiah is meant. It was the Messiah whom the prophet saw here as about to be born, then again in chapter 9 as actually born, and again in chapter 11 as reigning - an indivisible triad of consolatory images in three distinct states, interwoven with the three stages into which the future history of the nation unfolded itself in the prophet’s view. If, therefore, his eye was directed towards the Abijah mentioned, he must have regarded her as the future mother of the Messiah, and her son as the future Messiah. Now it is no doubt true, that in the course of the sacred history Messianic expectations were often associated with individuals who did not answer to them, so that the Messianic prospect was moved further into the future; and it is not only possible, but even probable, and according to many indications an actual fact, that the believing portion of the nation did concentrate their Messianic wishes and hopes for a long time upon Hezekiah; but even if Isaiah’s prophecy may have evoked such human conjectures and expectations, through the measure of time which it laid down, it would not be a prophecy at all, if it rested upon no better foundation than this, which would be the case if Isaiah had a particular maiden of his own day in his mind at the time.

Are we to conclude, then, that the prophet did not refer to any one individual, but that the “virgin” was a personification of the house of David? This view, which Hofmann propounded, and Stier appropriated, and which Ebrard has revived, notwithstanding the fact that Hofmann relinquished it, does not help us over the difficulty; for we should expect in that case to find “daughter of Zion,” or something of the kind, since the term “virgin” is altogether unknown in a personification of this kind, and the house of David, as the prophet knew it, was by no means worthy of such an epithet.

No other course is left, therefore, than to assume that whilst, on the one hand, the prophet meant by “the virgin” a maiden belonging to the house of David, which the Messianic character of the prophecy requires; on the other hand, he neither thought of any particular maiden, nor associated the promised conception with any human father, who could not have been any other than Ahaz. The reference is the same as in Mic 5:3 (“she which travaileth,” yōlēdah). The objection that hâ‛almâh (the virgin) cannot be a person belonging to the future, on account of the article (Hofmann, p. 86), does not affect the true explanation: it was the virgin whom the spirit of prophecy brought before the prophet’s mind, and who, although he could not give her name, stood before him as singled out for an extraordinary end (compare the article in hanna‛ar in Num 11:27 etc.). With what exalted dignity this mother appeared to him to be invested, is evident from the fact that it is she who gives the name to her son, and that the name Immanuel. This name sounds full of promise. But if we look at the expression “therefore,” and the circumstance which occasioned it, the sign cannot have been intended as a pure or simple promise. We naturally expect, first, that it will be an extraordinary fact which the prophet foretells; and secondly, that it will be a fact with a threatening front. Now a humiliation of the house of David was indeed involved in the fact that the God of whom it would know nothing would nevertheless mould its future history, as the emphatic הוּא implies, He (αὐτός, the Lord Himself), by His own impulse and unfettered choice. Moreover, this moulding of the future could not possibly be such an one as was desired, but would of necessity be as full of threatening to the unbelieving house of David as it was full of promise to the believers in Israel. And the threatening character of the “sign” is not to be sought for exclusively in Isa 7:15, since both the expressions “therefore” (lâcēn) and “behold” (hinnēh) place the main point of the sign in Isa 7:14, whilst the introduction of Isa 7:15 without any external connection is a clear proof that what is stated in Isa 7:14 is the chief thing, and not the reverse. But the only thing in Isa 7:14 which indicated any threatening element in the sign in question, must have been the fact that it would not be by Ahaz, or by a son of Ahaz, or by the house of David generally, which at that time had hardened itself against God, that God would save His people, but that a nameless maiden of low rank, whom God had singled out and now showed to the prophet in the mirror of His counsel, would give birth to the divine deliverer of His people in the midst of the approaching tribulations, which was a sufficient intimation that He who was to be the pledge of Judah’s continuance would not arrive without the present degenerate house of David, which had brought Judah to the brink of ruin, being altogether set aside.

But the further question arises here, What constituted the extraordinary character of the fact here announced? It consisted in the fact, that, according to Isa 9:5, Immanuel Himself was to be a פּלא (wonder or wonderful). He would be God in corporeal self-manifestation, and therefore a “wonder” as being a superhuman person. We should not venture to assert this if it went beyond the line of Old Testament revelation, but the prophet asserts it himself in Isa 9:5 (cf., Isa 10:21): his words are as clear as possible; and we must not make them obscure, to favour any preconceived notions as to the development of history. The incarnation of Deity was unquestionably a secret that was not clearly unveiled in the Old Testament, but the veil was not so thick but that some rays could pass through. Such a ray, directed by the spirit of prophecy into the mind of the prophet, was the prediction of Immanuel. But if the Messiah was to be Immanuel in this sense, that He would Himself be El (God), as the prophet expressly affirms, His birth must also of necessity be a wonderful or miraculous one. The prophet does not affirm, indeed, that the “‛almâh,” who had as yet known no man, would give birth to Immanuel without this taking place, so that he could not be born of the house of David as well as into it, but be a gift of Heaven itself; but this “‛almâh” or virgin continued throughout an enigma in the Old Testament, stimulating “inquiry” (1Pe 1:10-12), and waiting for the historical solution. Thus the sign in question was, on the one hand, a mystery glaring in the most threatening manner upon the house of David; and, on the other hand, a mystery smiling with which consolation upon the prophet and all believers, and couched in these enigmatical terms, in order that those who hardened themselves might not understand it, and that believers might increasingly long to comprehend its meaning.

In Isa 7:15 the threatening element of Isa 7:14 becomes the predominant one. It would not be so, indeed, if “butter (thickened milk) and honey” were mentioned here as the ordinary food of the tenderest age of childhood (as Gesenius, Hengstenberg, and others suppose). But the reason afterwards assigned in Isa 7:16, Isa 7:17, teaches the very opposite. Thickened milk and honey, the food of the desert, would be the only provisions furnished by the land at the time in which the ripening youth of Immanuel would fall. חמאה (from המא, to be thick) is a kind of butter which is still prepared by nomads by shaking milk in skins. It may probably include the cream, as the Arabic semen signifies both, but not the curds or cheese, the name of which (at least the more accurate name) if gebı̄nâh. The object to ידע is expressed in Isa 7:15, Isa 7:16 by infinitive absolutes (compare the more usual mode of expression in Isa 8:4). The Lamed prefixed to the verb does not mean “until” (Ges. §131, 1), for Lamed is never used as so definite an indication of the terminus ad quem; the meaning is either “towards the time when he understands” (Amo 4:7, cf., Lev 24:12, “to the end that”), or about the time, at the time when he understands (Isa 10:3; Gen 8:11; Job 24:14). This kind of food would coincide in time with his understanding, that is to say, would run parallel to it. Incapacity to distinguish between good and bad is characteristic of early childhood (Deu 1:39, etc.), and also of old age when it relapses into childish ways (2Sa 19:36). The commencement of the capacity to understand is equivalent to entering into the so-called years of discretion - the riper age of free and conscious self-determination. By the time that Immanuel reached this age, all the blessings of the land would have been so far reduced, that from a land full of luxuriant corn-fields and vineyards, it would have become a large wooded pasture-ground, supplying milk and honey, and nothing more. A thorough devastation of the land is therefore the reason for this limitation to the simplest, and, when compared with the fat of wheat and the cheering influence of wine, most meagre and miserable food. And this is the ground assigned in Isa 7:16, Isa 7:17. Two successive and closely connected events would occasion this universal desolation.

Isa 7:16-17 “For before the boy shall understand to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land will be desolate, of whose two kings thou art afraid. Jehovah will bring upon thee, and upon thy people, and upon thy father’s house, days such as have not come since the day when Ephraim broke away from Judah - the king of Asshur.” The land of the two kings, Syria and Israel, was first of all laid waste by the Assyrians, whom Ahaz called to his assistance. Tiglath-pileser conquered Damascus and a portion of the kingdom of Israel, and led a large part of the inhabitants of the two countries into captivity (2Ki 15:29; 2Ki 16:9). Judah was then also laid waste by the Assyrians, as a punishment for having refused the help of Jehovah, and preferred the help of man. Days of adversity would come upon the royal house and people of Judah, such as ('asher, quales, as in Exo 10:6) had not come upon them since the calamitous day (l'miyyōm, inde a die; in other places we find l'min-hayyom, Exo 9:18; Deu 4:32; Deu 9:7, etc.) of the falling away of the ten tribes. The appeal to Asshur laid the foundation for the overthrow of the kingdom of Judah, quite as much as for that of the kingdom of Israel. Ahaz became the tributary vassal of the king of Assyria in consequence; and although Hezekiah was set free from Asshur through the miraculous assistance of Jehovah, what Nebuchadnezzar afterwards performed was only the accomplishment of the frustrated attempt of Sennacherib. It is with piercing force that the words “the king of Assyria” ('eth melek Asshur) are introduced at the close of the two verses. The particle 'eth is used frequently where an indefinite object is followed by the more precise and definite one (Gen 6:10; Gen 26:34). The point of the v. would be broken by eliminating the words as a gloss, as Knobel proposes. The very king to whom Ahaz had appealed in his terror, would bring Judah to the brink of destruction. The absence of any link of connection between Isa 7:16 and Isa 7:17 is also very effective. The hopes raised in the mind of Ahaz by Isa 7:16 are suddenly turned into bitter disappointment. In the face of such catastrophes as these, Isaiah predicts the birth of Immanuel. His eating only thickened milk and honey, at a time when he knew very well what was good and what was not, would arise from the desolation of the whole of the ancient territory of the Davidic kingdom that had preceded the riper years of his youth, when he would certainly have chosen other kinds of food, if they could possibly have been found. Consequently the birth of Immanuel apparently falls between the time then present and the Assyrian calamities, and his earliest childhood appears to run parallel to the Assyrian oppression. In any case, their consequences would be still felt at the time of his riper youth. In what way the truth of the prophecy was maintained notwithstanding, we shall see presently. What follows in Isa 7:18-25, is only a further expansion of Isa 7:17. The promising side of the “sign” remains in the background, because this was not for Ahaz. When Ewald expresses the opinion that a promising strophe has fallen out after Isa 7:17, he completely mistakes the circumstances under which the prophet uttered these predictions. In the presence of Ahaz he must keep silence as to the promises. But he pours out with all the greater fluency his threatening of judgment.

Isa 7:18-19 “And it comes to pass in that day, Jehovah will hiss for the fly which is at the end of the Nile-arms of Egypt, and the bees that are in the land of Asshur; and they come and settle all of them in the valleys of the slopes, and in the clefts of the rocks, and in all the thorn-hedges, and upon all grass-plats.” The prophet has already stated, in Isa 5:26, that Jehovah would hiss for distant nations; and how he is able to describe them by name. The Egyptian nation, with its vast and unparalleled numbers, is compared to the swarming fly; and the Assyrian nation, with its love of war and conquest, to the stinging bee which is so hard to keep off (Deu 1:44; Psa 118:12). The emblems also correspond to the nature of the two countries: the fly to slimy Egypt with its swarms of insects (see Isa 18:1),Egypt abounds in gnats, etc., more especially in flies (m uscariae), including a species of small fly (nemâth), which is a great plague to men throughout all the country of the Nile (see Hartmann, Natur-geschichtlich-medicinische Skizze der Nilländer, 1865, pp. 204- 5). and the bee to the more mountainous and woody Assyria, where the keeping of bees is still one of the principal branches of trade. יאר, pl. יארים, is an Egyptian name (yaro, with the article phiaro, pl. yarōu) for the Nile and its several arms. The end of the Nile-arms of Egypt, from a Palestinian point of view, was the extreme corner of the land. The military force of Egypt would march out of the whole compass of the land, and meet the Assyrian force in the Holy Land; and both together would cover the land in such a way that the valleys of steep precipitous heights (nachalee habbattoth), and clefts of the rocks (nekikē hasselâ‛im), and all the thorn-hedges (nâ‛azūzı̄m) and pastures (nahalolim, from nihēl, to lead to pasture), would be covered with these swarms. The fact that just such places are named, as afforded a suitable shelter and abundance of food for flies and bees, is a filling up of the figure in simple truthfulness to nature. And if we look at the historical fulfilment, it does not answer even in this respect to the actual letter of the prophecy; for in the time of Hezekiah no collision really took place between the Assyrian and Egyptian forces; and it was not till the days of Josiah that a collision took place between the Chaldean and Egyptian powers in the eventful battle fought between Pharaoh-Necho and Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish (Circesium), which decided the fate of Judah. That the spirit of prophecy points to this eventful occurrence is evident from Isa 7:20, where no further allusion is made to Egypt, because of its having succumbed to the imperial power of Eastern Asia.

Isa 7:20 “In that day will the Lord shave with a razor, the thing for hire on the shore of the river, with the king of Assyria, the head and the hair of the feet; and even the beard it will take away.” Knobel takes the hair to be a figurative representation of the produce of the land; but the only thing which at all favours the idea that the flora is ever regarded by biblical writers as the hairy covering of the soil, is the use of the term nâzir as the name of an uncultivated vine left to itself (Lev 25:5). The nation of Judah is regarded here, as in Isa 1:6, as a man stript naked, and not only with all the hair of his head and feet shaved off (raglaim, a euphemism), but what was regarded as the most shameful of all, with the hair of his beard shaved off as well. To this end the Almighty would make use of a razor, which is more distinctly defined as hired on the shore of the Euphrates (Conductitia in litoribus Euphratis: nâhâr stands here for hannâhâr), and still more precisely as the king of Asshur (the latter is again pronounced a gloss by Knobel and others). “The thing for hire:” hassecı̄râh might be an abstract term (hiring, Conductio), but it may also be the feminine of sâcı̄r, which indicates an emphatic advance from the indefinite to the more definite; in the sense of “with a razor, namely, that which was standing ready to be hired in the lands on both sides of the Euphrates, the king of Assyria.” In hassecı̄râh (the thing for hire) there was involved the bitterest sarcasm for Ahaz. The sharp knife, which it had hired for the deliverance of Judah, was hired by the Lord, to shave Judah most thoroughly, and in the most disgraceful manner. Thus shaved, Judah would be a depopulated and desert land, in which men would no longer live by growing corn and vines, or by trade and commerce, but by grazing alone.

Isa 7:21-22 “And it will come to pass in that day, that a man will keep a small cow and a couple of sheep; and it comes to pass, for the abundance of the milk they give he will eat cream: for butter and honey will every one eat that is left within the land.” The former prosperity would be reduced to the most miserable housekeeping. One man would keep a milch cow and two head of sheep (or goats) alive with the greatest care, the strongest and finest full-grown cattle having fallen into the hands of the foe (היּה, like החיה in other places: shtē, not shnē, because two female sheep or goats are meant). But this would be quite enough, for there would be only a few men left in the land; and as all the land would be pasture, the small number of animals would yield milk in abundance. Bread and wine would be unattainable. Whoever had escaped the Assyrian razor, would eat thickened milk and honey, that and nothing but that, without variation, ad nauseam. The reason for this would be, that the hills, which at other times were full of vines and corn-fields, would be overgrown with briers.

Isa 7:23-25

The prophet repeats this three times in Isa 7:23-25 : “And it will come to pass in that day, every place, where a thousand vines stood at a thousand silverlings, will have become thorns and thistles. With arrows and with bows will men go, for the whole land will have become thorns and thistles. And all the hills that were accustomed to be hoed with the hoe, thou wilt not go to them for fear of thorns and thistles; and it has become a gathering-place for oxen, and a treading-place for sheep.” The “thousand silverlings” ('eleph ceseph, i.e., a thousand shekels of silver) recall to mind Sol 8:11, though there it is the value of the yearly produce, whereas here the thousand shekels are the value of a thousand vines, the sign of a peculiarly valuable piece of a vineyard. At the present time they reckon the worth of a vineyard in Lebanon and Syria according to the value of the separate vines, and generally take the vines at one piastre (from 2nd to 3rd) each; just as in Germany a Johannisberg vine is reckoned at a ducat. Every piece of ground, where such valuable vines were standing, would have fallen a prey to the briers. People would go there with bow and arrow, because the whole land had become thorns and thistles (see at Isa 5:12), and therefore wild animals had made their homes there. And thou (the prophet addresses the countryman thus) comest not to all the hills, which were formerly cultivated in the most careful manner; thou comest not thither to make them arable again, because thorns and thistles deter thee from reclaiming such a fallow. They would therefore give the oxen freedom to rove where they would, and let sheep and goats tread down whatever grew there. The description is intentionally thoroughly tautological and pleonastic, heavy and slow in movement. The writer’s intention is to produce the impression of a waste heath, or tedious monotony. Hence the repetitions of hâyâh and yihyeh. Observe how great the variations are in the use of the future and perfect, and how the meaning is always determined by the context. In Isa 7:21, Isa 7:22, the futures have a really future sense; in Isa 7:23 the first and third yihyeh signify “will have become” (factus erit omnis locus), and the second “was” (erat); in Isa 7:24 יבוא means “will come” (veniet), and tihyeh “will have become” (facta erit terra); in Isa 7:25 we must render yē‛âdērūn, sarciebantur (they used to be hoed). And in Isa 7:21, Isa 7:22, and Isa 7:23, hâyâh is equivalent to fiet (it will become); whilst in Isa 7:25 it means factum est (it has become). Looked at from a western point of view, therefore, the future tense is sometimes a simple future, sometimes a future perfect, and sometimes an imperfect or synchronistic preterite; and the perfect sometimes a prophetic preterite, sometimes an actual preterite, but the sphere of an ideal past, or what is the same thing, of a predicted future.

This ends Isaiah’s address to king Ahaz. He does not expressly say when Immanuel is to be born, but only what will take place before he has reached the riper age of boyhood - namely, first, the devastation of Israel and Syria, and then the devastation of Judah itself, by the Assyrians. From the fact that the prophet says no more than this, we may see that his spirit and his tongue were under the direction of the Spirit of God, who does not descend within the historical and temporal range of vision, without at the same time remaining exalted above it. On the other hand, however, we may see from what he says, that the prophecy has its human side as well. When Isaiah speaks of Immanuel as eating thickened milk and honey, like all who survived the Assyrian troubles in the Holy Land; he evidently looks upon and thinks of the childhood of Immanuel as connected with the time of the Assyrian calamities. And it was in such a perspective combination of events lying far apart, that the complex character of prophecy consisted. The reason for this complex character was a double one, viz., the human limits associated with the prophet’s telescopic view of distant times, and the pedagogical wisdom of God, in accordance with which He entered into these limits instead of removing them. If, therefore, we adhere to the letter of prophecy, we may easily throw doubt upon its veracity; but if we look at the substance of the prophecy, we soon find that the complex character by no means invalidates its truth. For the things which the prophet saw in combination were essentially connected, even though chronologically separated. When, for example, in the case before us (chapters 7-12), Isaiah saw Asshur only, standing out as the imperial kingdom; this was so far true, that the four imperial kingdoms from the Babylonian to the Roman were really nothing more than the full development of the commencement made in Assyria. And when he spoke of the son of the virgin (chapter 7) as growing up in the midst of the Assyrian oppressions; this also was so far true, that Jesus was really born at a time when the Holy Land, deprived of its previous abundance, was under the dominion of the imperial power, and in a condition whose primary cause was to be traced to the unbelief of Ahaz. Moreover, He who became flesh in the fulness of time, did really lead an ideal life in the Old Testament history. He was in the midst of it in a pre-existent presence, moving on towards the covenant goal. The fact that the house and nation of David did not perish in the Assyrian calamities, was actually to be attributed, as chapter 8 presupposes, to His real though not His bodily presence. In this way the apparent discrepancy between the prophecy and the history of the fulfilment may be solved. We do not require the solution proposed by Vitringa, and recently appropriate by Haneberg - namely, that the prophet takes the stages of the Messiah’s life out of the distant future, to make them the measure of events about to take place in the immediate future; nor that of Bengel, Schegg, Schmieder, and others - namely, that the sign consisted in an event belonging to the immediate future, which pointed typically to the birth of the true Immanuel; nor that of Hofmann, who regards the words of the prophet as an emblematical prediction of the rise of a new Israel, which would come to the possession of spiritual intelligence in the midst of troublous times, occasioned by the want of intelligence in the Israel of his own time. The prophecy, as will be more fully confirmed as we proceed, is directly Messianic; it is a divine prophecy within human limits.

The Distress of Ahaz; Comfort Administered to Ahaz. (b. c. 740.)

1 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it. 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. 3 Then said the Lord unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller's field; 4 And say unto him, Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither be fainthearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah. 5 Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah, have taken evil counsel against thee, saying, 6 Let us go up against Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal: 7 Thus saith the Lord God , It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass. 8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people. 9 And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah's son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.

The prophet Isaiah had his commission renewed in the year that king Uzziah died, ch. vi. 1. Jotham his son reigned, and reigned well, sixteen years. All that time, no doubt, Isaiah prophesied as he was commanded, and yet we have not in this book any of his prophecies dated in the reign of Jotham; but this, which is put first, was in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham. Many excellent useful sermons he preached which were not published and left upon record; for, if all that was memorable had been written, the world could not have contained the books, John xxi. 25. Perhaps in the reign of Ahaz, a wicked king, he had not opportunity to preach so much at court as in Jotham's time, and therefore then he wrote the more, for a testimony against them. Here is,

I. A very formidable design laid against Jerusalem by Rezin king of Syria and Pekah king of Israel, two neighbouring potentates, who had of late made descents upon Judah severally. At the end of the reign of Jotham, the Lord began to send against Judah Rezin and Pekah, 2 Kings xv. 37. But now, in the second or third year of the reign of Ahaz, encouraged by their former successes, they entered into an alliance against Judah. Because Ahaz, though he found the sword over his head, began his reign with idolatry, God delivered him into the hand of the king of Syria and of the king of Israel (2 Chron. xxviii. 5), and a great slaughter they made in his kingdom, v. 6, 7. Flushed with this victory, they went up towards Jerusalem, the royal city, to war against it, to besiege it, and make themselves masters of it; but it proved in the issue that they could not gain their point. Note, The sin of a land brings foreign invasions upon it and betrays the most advantageous posts and passes to the enemy; and God sometimes makes one wicked nation a scourge to another; but judgment, ordinarily, begins at the house of God.

II. The great distress that Ahaz and his court were in when they received advice of this design: It was told the house of David that Syria and Ephraim had signed a league against Judah, v. 2. This degenerate royal family is called the house of David, to put us in mind of that article of God's covenant with David (Ps. lxxxix. 30-33), If his children forsake my law, I will chasten their transgression with the rod; but my loving-kindness will I not utterly take away, which is remarkably fulfilled in this chapter. News being brought that the two armies of Syria and Israel were joined, and had taken the field, the court, the city, and the country, were thrown into consternation; The heart of Ahaz was moved with fear, and then no wonder that the heart of his people was so, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind. They were tossed and shaken, and put into a great disorder and confusion, were wavering and uncertain in their counsels, hurried hither and thither, and could not fix in any steady resolution. They yielded to the storm, and gave up all for gone, concluding it in vain to make any resistance. Now that which caused this fright was the sense of guilt and the weakness of their faith. They had made God their enemy, and knew not how to make him their friend, and therefore their fears tyrannised over them; while those whose consciences are kept void of offence, and whose hearts are fixed, trusting in God, need not be afraid of evil tidings; though the earth be removed, yet will not they fear; but the wicked flee at the shaking of a leaf, Lev. xxvi. 36.

III. The orders and directions given to Isaiah to go and encourage Ahaz in his distress; not for his own sake (he deserved to hear nothing from God but words of terror, which might add affliction to his grief), but because he was a son of David and king of Judah. God had kindness for him for his father's sake, who must not be forgotten, and for his people's sake, who must not be abandoned, but would be encouraged if Ahaz were. Observe,

1. God appointed the prophet to meet Ahaz, though he did not send to the prophet to speak with him, nor desire him to enquire of the Lord for him (v. 3): Go to meet Ahaz. Note, God is often found of those who seek him not, much more will he be found of those who seek him diligently. He speaks comfort to many who not only are not worthy of it, but do not so much as enquire after it.

2. He ordered him to take his little son with him, because he carried a sermon in his name, Shear-jashub—A remnant shall return. The prophets sometimes recorded what they preached in the significant names of their children (as Hos. i. 4, 6, 9); therefore Isaiah's children are said to be for signs, ch. viii. 18. This son was so called for the encouragement of those of God's people who were carried captive, assuring them that they should return, at least a remnant of them, which was more than they could pretend to merit; yet at this time God was better than his word; for he took care not only that a remnant should return, but the whole number of those whom the confederate forces of Syria and Israel had taken prisoners, 2 Chron. xxviii. 15.

3. He directed him where he should find Ahaz. He was to meet with him not in the temple, or the synagogue, or royal chapel, but at the end of the conduit of the upper pool, where he was, probably with many of his servants about him, contriving how to order the water-works, so as to secure them to the city, or deprive the enemy of the benefits of them (ch. xxii. 9-11; 2 Chron. xxxii. 3, 4), or giving some necessary directions for the fortifying of the city as well as they could; and perhaps finding every thing in a bad posture or defence, the conduit out of repair, as well as other things gone to decay, his fears increased, and he was now in greater perplexity than ever; therefore, Go, meet him there. Note, God sometimes sends comforts to his people very seasonably, and, what time they are most afraid, encourages them to trust in him.

4. He put words in his mouth, else the prophet would not have known how to bring a message of good to such a bad man, a sinner in Zion, that ought to be afraid; but God intended it for the support of faithful Israelites.

(1.) The prophet must rebuke their fears, and advise them by no means to yield to them, but keep their temper, and preserve the possession of their own souls (v. 4): Take heed, and be quiet. Note, In order to comfort there is need of caution; that we may be quiet, it is necessary that we take heed and watch against those things that threaten to disquiet us. "Fear not with this amazement, this fear, that weakens, and has torment; neither let thy heart be tender, so as to melt and fail within thee; but pluck up thy spirits, have a good heart on it, and be courageous; let not fear betray the succours which reason and religion offer for thy support." Note, Those who expect God should help them must help themselves, Ps. xxvii. 14.

(2.) He must teach them to despise their enemies, not in pride, or security, or incogitancy (nothing more dangerous than so to despise an enemy), but in faith and dependence upon God. Ahaz's fear called them two powerful politic princes, for either of whom he was an unequal match, but, if united, he durst not look them in the face, nor make head against them. "No," says the prophet, "they are two tails of smoking firebrands; they are angry, they are fierce, they are furious, as firebrands, as fireballs; and they make one another worse by being in a confederacy, as sticks of fire put together burn the more violently. But they are only smoking firebrands: and where there is smoke there is some fire, but it may be not so much as was feared. Their threatenings will vanish into smoke. Pharaoh king of Egypt is but a noise (Jer. xlvi. 17), and Rezin king of Syria but a smoke; and such are all the enemies of God's church, smoking flax, that will soon be quenched. Nay, they are but tails of smoking firebrands, in a manner burnt out already; their force is spent; they have consumed themselves with the heat of their own anger; you may put your foot on them, and tread them out." The two kingdoms of Syria and Israel were now near expiring. Note, The more we have an eye to God as a consuming fire the less reason we shall have to fear men, though they are ever so furious, nay, we shall be able to despise them as smoking firebrands.

(3.) He must assure them that the present design of these high allies (so they thought themselves) against Jerusalem should certainly be defeated and come to nothing, v. 5-7. [1.] That very thing which Ahaz thought most formidable is made the ground of their defeat—and that was the depth of their designs and the height of their hopes: "Therefore they shall be baffled and sent back with shame, because they have taken evil counsel against thee, which is an offence to God. These firebrands are a smoke in his nose (ch. lxv. 5), and therefore must be extinguished." First, They are very spiteful and malicious, and, therefore they shall not prosper. Judah had done them no wrong; they had no pretence to quarrel with Ahaz; but, without any reason, they said, Let us go up against Judah, and vex it. Note, Those that are vexatious cannot expect to be prosperous, those that love to do mischief cannot expect to do well. Secondly, They are very secure, and confident of success. They will vex Judah by going up against it; yet that is not all: they do not doubt but to make a breach in the wall of Jerusalem wide enough for them to march their army in at; or they count upon dissecting or dividing the kingdom into two parts, one for the king of Israel, the other for the king of Syria, who had agreed in one viceroy—a king to be set in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal, some obscure person, it is uncertain whether a Syrian or an Israelite. So sure were they of gaining their point that they divided the prey before they had caught it. Note, Those that are most scornful are commonly least successful, for surely God scorns the scorners. [2.] God himself gives them his word that the attempt should not take effect (v. 7): "Thus saith the Lord God, the sovereign Lord of all, who brings the counsel of the heathen to naught (Ps. xxxiii. 10), It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass; their measures shall all be broken, and they shall not be able to bring to pass their enterprise." Note, Whatever stands against God, or thinks to stand without him, cannot stand long. Man purposes, but God disposes; and who is he that saith and it cometh to pass if the Lord commands it not or countermands it? Lam. iii. 37. See Prov. xix. 21.

(4.) He must give them a prospect of the destruction of these enemies, at last, that were now such a terror to them. [1.] They should neither of them enlarge their dominions, nor push their conquests any further; The head city of Syria is Damascus, and the head man of Damascus is Rezin; this he glories in, and this let him be content with, v. 8. The head city of Ephraim has long been Samaria, and the head man in Samaria is now Pekah the son of Remaliah. These shall be made to know their own, their bounds are fixed, and they shall not pass them, to make themselves masters of the cities of Judah, much less to make Jerusalem their prey. Note, As God has appointed men the bounds of their habitation (Acts xvii. 26), so he has appointed princes the bounds of their dominion, within which they ought to confine themselves, and not encroach upon their neighbours' rights. [2.] Ephraim, which perhaps was the more malicious and forward enemy of the two, should shortly be quite rooted out, and should be so far from seizing other people's lands that they should not be able to hold their own. Interpreters are much at a loss how to compute the sixty-five years within which Ephraim shall cease to be a people; for the captivity of the ten tribes was but eleven years after this: and some make it a mistake of the transcriber, and think it should be read within six and five years, just eleven. But it is hard to allow that. Others make it to be sixty-five years from the time that the prophet Amos first foretold the ruin of the kingdom of the ten tribes; and some late interpreters make it to look as far forward as the last desolation of that country by Esarhaddon, which was about sixty-five years after this; then Ephraim was so broken that it was no more a people. Now it was the greatest folly in the world for those to be ruining their neighbours who were themselves marked for ruin, and so near to it. See what a prophet told them at this time, when they were triumphing over Judah, 2 Chron. xxviii. 10. Are there not with you, even with you, sins against the Lord your God?

(5.) He must urge them to mix faith with those assurances which he had given them (v. 9): "If you will not believe what is said to you, surely you shall not be established; your shaken and disordered state shall not be established, your unquiet unsettled spirit shall not; though the things told you are very encouraging, yet they will not be so to you, unless you believe them, and be willing to take God's word." Note, The grace of faith is absolutely necessary to the quieting and composing of the mind in the midst of all the tosses of this present time, 2 Chron. xx. 20.

The Promise of Immanuel. (b. c. 740.)

10 Moreover the Lord spake again unto Ahaz, saying, 11 Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. 12 But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the Lord . 13 And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? 14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. 15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. 16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.

Here, I. God, by the prophet, makes a gracious offer to Ahaz, to confirm the foregoing predictions, and his faith in them, by such sign or miracle as he should choose (v. 10, 11): Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God; See here the divine faithfulness and veracity. God tells us nothing but what he is able and ready to prove. See his wonderful condescension to the children of men, in that he is so willing to show to the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, Heb. vi. 17. He considers our frame, and that, living in a world of sense, we are apt to require sensible proofs, which therefore he has favoured us with in sacramental signs and seals. Ahaz was a bad man, yet God is called the Lord his God, because he was a child of Abraham and David, and of the covenants made with them. See how gracious God is even to the evil and unthankful; Ahaz is bidden to choose his sign, as Gideon about the fleece (Judg. vi. 37); let him ask for a sign in the air, or earth, or water, for God's power is the same in all.

II. Ahaz rudely refuses this gracious offer, and (which is not mannerly towards any superior) kicks at the courtesy, and puts a slight upon it (v. 12): I will not ask. The true reason why he would not ask for a sign was because, having a dependence upon the Assyrians, their forces, and their gods, for help, he would not thus far be beholden to the God of Israel, or lay himself under obligations to him. He would not ask a sign for the confirming of his faith because he resolved to persist in his unbelief, and would indulge his doubts and distrusts; yet he pretends a pious reason: I will not tempt the Lord; as if it would be a tempting of God to do that which God himself invited and directed him to do. Note, A secret disaffection to God is often disguised with the specious colours of respect to him; and those who are resolved that they will not trust God yet pretend that they will not tempt him.

III. The prophet reproves him and his court, him and the house of David, the whole royal family, for their contempt of prophecy, and the little value they had for divine revelation (v. 13) "Is it a small thing for you to weary men by your oppression and tyranny, with which you make yourselves burdensome and odious to all mankind? But will you weary my God also with the affronts you put upon him?" As the unjust judge that neither feared God nor regarded man, Luke xviii. 2. You have wearied the Lord with your words, Mal. ii. 17. Nothing is more grievous to the God of heaven than to be distrusted. "Will you weary my God? Will you suppose him to be tired and unable to help you, or to be weary of doing you good? Whereas the youths may faint and be weary, you may have tired all your friends, the Creator of the ends of the earth faints not, neither is weary." ch. xl. 28-31. Or this: "In affronting the prophets, you think you put a slight only upon men like yourselves, and consider not that you affront God himself, whose messengers they are, and put a slight upon him, who will resent it accordingly." The prophet here calls God his God with a great deal of pleasure: Ahaz would not say, He is my God, though the prophet had invited him to say so (v. 11): The Lord thy God; but Isaiah will say, "He is mine." Note, Whatever others do, we must avouch the Lord for ours and abide by him.

IV. The prophet, in God's name, gives them a sign: "You will not ask a sign, but the unbelief of man shall not make the promise of God of no effect: The Lord himself shall give you a sign (v. 14), a double sign."

1. "A sign in general of his good-will to Israel and to the house of David. You may conclude it that he has mercy in store for you, and that you are not forsaken of your God, how great soever your present distress and danger are; for of your nation, of your family, the Messiah is to be born, and you cannot be destroyed while that blessing is in you, which shall be introduced," (1.) "In a glorious manner; for, whereas you have been often told that he should be born among you, I am now further to tell you that he shall be born of a virgin, which will signify both the divine power and the divine purity with which he shall be brought into the world,—that he shall be a extraordinary person, for he shall not be born by ordinary generation,—and that he shall be a holy thing, not stained with the common pollutions of the human nature, therefore incontestably fit to have the throne of his father David given him." Now this, though it was to be accomplished above 500 years after, was a most encouraging sign to the house of David (and to them, under that title, this prophecy is directed, v. 13) and an assurance that God would not cast them off. Ephraim did indeed envy Judah (ch. xi. 13) and sought the ruin of that kingdom, but could not prevail; for the sceptre should never depart from Judah till the coming of Shiloh, Gen. xlix. 10. Those whom God designs for the great salvation may take that for a sign to them that they shall not be swallowed up by any trouble they meet with in the way. (2.) The Messiah shall be introduced on a glorious errand, wrapped up in his glorious name: They shall call his name Immanuel—God with us, God in our nature, God at peace with us, in covenant with us. This was fulfilled in their calling him Jesus—a Saviour (Matt. i. 21-25), for, if he had not been Immanuel—God with us, he could not have been Jesus—a Saviour. Now this was a further sign of God's favour to the house of David and the tribe of Judah; for he that intended to work this great salvation among them no doubt would work out for them all those other salvations which were to be the types and figures of this, and as it were preludes to this. "Here is a sign for you, not in the depth nor in the height, but in the prophecy, in the promise, in the covenant made with David, which you are no strangers to. The promised seed shall be Immanuel, God with us; let that word comfort you (ch. viii. 10), that God is with us, and (v. 8) that your land is Immanuel's land. Let not the heart of the house of David be moved thus (v. 2), nor let Judah fear the setting up of the son of Tabeal (v. 6), for nothing can cut off the entail on the Son of David that shall be Immanuel." Note, The strongest consolations, in time of trouble, are those which are borrowed from Christ, our relation to him, our interest in him, and our expectations of him and from him. Of this child it is further foretold (v. 15) that though he shall not be born like other children, but of a virgin, yet he shall be really and truly man, and shall be nursed and brought up like other children: Butter and honey shall he eat, as other children do, particularly the children of that land which flowed with milk and honey. Though he be conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, yet he shall not therefore be fed with angels' food, but, as it becomes him, shall be in all things made like unto his brethren, Heb. ii. 17. Nor shall he, though born thus by extraordinary generation, be a man immediately, but, as other children, shall advance gradually through the several states of infancy, childhood, and youth, to that of manhood, and growing in wisdom and stature, shall at length wax strong in spirit, and come to maturity, so as to know how to refuse the evil and choose the good. See Luke ii. 40, 52. Note, Children are fed when they are little that they may be taught and instructed when they have grown up; they have their maintenance in order to their education.

2. Here is another sign in particular of the speedy destruction of these potent princes that were now a terror to Judah, v. 16. "Before this child (so it should be read), this child which I have now in my arms" (he means not Immanuel, but Shear-jashub his own son, whom he was ordered to take with him for a sign, v. 3), "before this child shall know how to refuse the evil and choose the good" (and those who saw what his present stature and forwardness were would easily conjecture how long that would be), "before this child be three or four years older, the land that thou abhorrest, these confederate forces of Israelites and Syrians, which thou hast such an enmity to and standest in such dread of, shall be forsaken of both their kings, both Pekah and Rezin," who were in so close an alliance that they seemed as if they were the kings of but one kingdom. This was fully accomplished; for within two or three years after this, Hoshea conspired against Pekah, and slew him (2 Kings xv. 30), and, before that, the king of Assyria took Damascus, and slew Rezin, 2 Kings xvi. 9. Nay, there was a present event, which happened immediately, and when this child carried the prediction of in his name, which was a pledge and earnest of this future event. Shear-jashub signifies The remnant shall return, which doubtless points at the wonderful return of those 200,000 captives whom Pekah and Rezin had carried away, who were brought back, not by might or power, but by the Spirit of the Lord of hosts. Read the story, 2 Chron. xxviii. 8-15. The prophetical naming of this child having thus had its accomplishment, no doubt this, which was further added concerning him, should have its accomplishment likewise, that Syria and Israel should be deprived of both their kings. One mercy from God encourages us to hope for another, if it engages us to prepare for another.

Judgments Announced. (b. c. 740.)

17 The Lord shall bring upon thee, and upon thy people, and upon thy father's house, days that have not come, from the day that Ephraim departed from Judah; even the king of Assyria. 18 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall hiss for the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt, and for the bee that is in the land of Assyria. 19 And they shall come, and shall rest all of them in the desolate valleys, and in the holes of the rocks, and upon all thorns, and upon all bushes. 20 In the same day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired, namely, by them beyond the river, by the king of Assyria, the head, and the hair of the feet: and it shall also consume the beard. 21 And it shall come to pass in that day, that a man shall nourish a young cow, and two sheep; 22 And it shall come to pass, for the abundance of milk that they shall give he shall eat butter: for butter and honey shall every one eat that is left in the land. 23 And it shall come to pass in that day, that every place shall be, where there were a thousand vines at a thousand silverlings, it shall even be for briers and thorns. 24 With arrows and with bows shall men come thither; because all the land shall become briers and thorns. 25 And on all hills that shall be digged with the mattock, there shall not come thither the fear of briers and thorns: but it shall be for the sending forth of oxen, and for the treading of lesser cattle.

After the comfortable promises made to Ahaz as a branch of the house of David, here follow terrible threatenings against him, as a degenerate branch of that house; for though the loving-kindness of God shall not be utterly taken away, for the sake of David and the covenant made with him, yet his iniquity shall be chastened with the rod, and his sin with stripes. Let those that will not mix faith with the promises of God expect to hear the alarms of his threatenings.

I. The judgment threatened is very great, v. 17. It is very great, for it is general; it shall be brought upon the prince himself (high as he is, he shall not be out of the reach of it), and upon the people, the whole body of the nation, and upon the royal family, upon all thy father's house; it shall be a judgment entailed on posterity, and shall go along with the royal blood. It is very great, for it shall be unprecedented—days that have not come; so dark, so gloomy, so melancholy, as never were the like since the revolt of the ten tribes, when Ephraim departed from Judah, which was indeed a sad time to the house of David. Note, The longer men continue in sin the sorer punishments they have reason to expect. It is the Lord that will bring these days upon them, for our times are in his hand, and who can resist or escape the judgments he brings?

II. The enemy that should be employed as the instrument of this judgment is the king of Assyria. Ahaz reposed great confidence in that prince for help against the confederate powers of Israel and Syria, and minded the less what God said to him by his prophet for his encouragement because he built much upon his interest in the king of Assyria, and had meanly promised to be his servant if he would send him some succours; he had also, made him a present of gold and silver, for which he drained the treasures both of church and state, 2 Kings xvi. 7, 8. Now God threatens that that king of Assyria whom he made his stay instead of God should become a scourge to him. He was so speedily; for, when he came to him, he distressed him, but strengthened him not (2 Chron. xxviii. 20), the reed not only broke under him, but ran into his hand, and pierced it, and thenceforward the kings of Assyria were, for a long time, grieving thorns to Judah, and gave them a great deal of trouble. Note, The creature that we make our hope commonly proves our hurt. The king of Assyria, not long after this, made himself master of the ten tribes, carried them captive, and laid their country waste, so as fully to answer the prediction here; and perhaps it may refer to that, as an explication of v. 8, where it is foretold that Ephraim shall be broken, that it shall not be a people; and it is easy to suppose that the prophet (at v. 17) turns his speech to the king of Israel, denouncing God's judgments against him for invading Judah. But the expositors universally understand it of Ahaz and his kingdom. Now observe, 1. Summons given to the invaders (v. 18): The Lord shall whistle for the fly and the bee. See ch. v. 26. Enemies that seem as contemptible as a fly or a bee, and are as easily crushed, shall yet, when God pleases, do his work as effectually as lions and young lions. Though they are as far distant from one another as the rivers of Egypt and the land of Assyria, yet they shall punctually meet to join in this work when God commands their attendance; for, when God has work to do, he will not be at a loss for instruments to do it with. 2. Possession taken by them, v. 19. It should seem as if the country were in no condition to make resistance. They find no difficulties in forcing their way, but come and rest all of them in the desolate valleys, which the inhabitants had deserted upon the first alarm, and left them a cheap and easy prey to the invaders. They shall come and rest in the low grounds like swarms of flies and bees, and shall render themselves impregnable by taking shelter in the holes of the rocks, as bees often do, and showing themselves formidable by appearing openly upon all thorns and all bushes; so generally shall the land be overspread with them. These bees shall knit upon the thorns and bushes, and there rest undisturbed. 3. Great desolations made, and the country generally depopulated (v. 20): The Lord shall shave the hair of the head, and beard, and feet; he shall sweep all away, as the leper, when he was cleansed, shaved off all his hair, Lev. xiv. 8, 9. This is done with a razor which is hired, either which God has hired (as if he had none of his own; but what he hires, and whom he employs in any service for him, he will pay for. See Ezek. xxix. 18, 19), or which Ahaz has hired for his assistance. God will make that to be an instrument of his destruction which he hired into his service. Note, Many are beaten with that arm of flesh which they trusted to rather than to the arm of the Lord, and which they were at a great expense upon, when by faith and prayer they might have found cheap and easy succour in God. 4. The consequences of this general depopulation. (1.) The flocks of cattle shall be all destroyed, so that a man who had herds and flocks in abundance shall be stripped of them all by the enemy, and shall with much ado save for his own use a young cow and two sheep—a poor stock (v. 21), yet he shall think himself happy in having any left. (2.) The few cattle that are left shall have such a large compass of ground to feed in that they shall give abundance of milk, and very good milk, such as shall produce butter enough, v. 22. There shall also be such want of men that the milk of one cow and two sheep shall serve a whole family, which used to keep abundance of servants and consume a great deal, but is now reduced. (3.) The breed of cattle shall be destroyed; so that those who used to eat flesh ( as the Jews commonly did) shall be necessitated to confine themselves to butter and honey, for there shall be no flesh for them; and the country shall be so depopulated that there shall be butter and honey enough for the few that are left in it. (4.) Good land, that used to be let well, shall be all overrun with briers and thorns (v. 23); where there used to be a thousand vines planted, for which the tenants used to pay a thousand shekels, or pieces of silver, yearly rent, there shall be nothing now but briers and thorns, no profit either for landlord or tenant, all being laid waste by the army of the invaders. Note, God can soon turn a fruitful land into barrenness; and it is just with him to turn vines into briers if we, instead of bringing forth grapes to him, bring forth wild grapes, ch. v. 4. (5.) The implements of husbandry shall be turned into instruments of war, v. 24. The whole land having become briers and thorns, the grounds that men used to come to with sickles and pruning-hooks to gather in the fruits they shall now come to with arrows and bows, to hunt for wild beasts in the thickets, or to defend themselves from the robbers that lurk in the bushes, seeking for prey, or to kill the serpents and venomous beasts that are hid there. This denotes a very sad change of the face of that pleasant land. But what melancholy change is there which sin will not make with a people? (6.) Where briers and thorns were wont to be of use and to do good service, even in the hedges, for the defence of the enclosed grounds, they shall be plucked up, and all laid in common. There shall be briers and thorns in abundance where they should not be, but none where they should be, v. 25. The hills that shall be digged with the mattock, for special use, from which the cattle used to be kept off with the fear of briers and thorns, shall now be thrown open, the hedges broken down for the boar out of the wood to waste it, Ps. lxxx. 12, 13. It shall be left at large for oxen to run in and less cattle. See the effect of sin and the curse; it has made the earth a forest of thorns and thistles, except as it is forced into some order by the constant care and labour of man. And see what folly it is to set our hearts upon possessions of lands, be they every so fruitful, ever so pleasant; if they lie ever so little neglected and uncultivated, or if they be abused by a wasteful careless heir or tenant, or the country be laid waste by war, they will soon become frightful deserts. Heaven is a paradise not subject to such changes.

CHAP. VII.

In Pentat.Ver. 1. ANd it came to paſs] This is not a ſuperfluous Tranſition, as Auſtin maketh it: but importeth, that the following diſcourſe is no leſs to be regarded then the foregoing.

In the dayes of Ahaz] that ſturdy-ſtigmatick, under whom Iſaiah was, as Eliah under Ahab: and for the comfort of the godly, propheſied then moſt ſweetly concerning Chriſt and his Kingdom.

The ſon of Jotham, the ſon of Uzziah] for whoſe ſake, ſay the Rabbins, this wretch was thus relieved.

King of Judah] Titularis, ſed non Tutelaris (as it was once ſaid of Culperick King of France) utpote qui Reip. defuit, non praefuit.

That Rezin the King of Syria] He is firſt named, as being Generaliſſimo. See of him, 2 King. 15.37. He was King of Damaſcene, and Caeloſyria.

And Pekah King of Iſrael] Theſe two Kings had ſeverally invaded Judah before with great ſucceſs, 2 Chron. 28.5, 8. And heartened thereby, now they joyn their forces, thinking to make a full conqueſt: but were as much deceived and diſappointed, as were the Pope and Spaniard here in Eighty-eight: and more then once in Ireland, where D. Aquila with his Spaniards being beaten out, ſaid in open Treaty, that when the Devil upon the Mount ſhewed Chriſt all the Kingdoms of the Earth and the glory of them, he did not doubt but he left out Ireland, and kept it for himſelf.

Went up] but not in Gods Name, non Dei miſſu & nutu ut ante, ſed proprio motu & ambitione.

But could not prevail againſt it] Heb. could not war, ſc. with any good ſucceſs: They came into the Countrey like Thunder and Lightning, as duo fulmina belli, but went out like a ſnuffe.

Ver. 2. And it was told the houſe of David] i. e. the King and chief Officers of the Crown and Court. Ill news flyeth ſwift, and filleth all places.

Syria is confederate with Ephraim though theſe two were oft at deadly feud betwixt themſelves, yet they could combine for a miſchief to Gods people. So could Herodians and Phariſees, Herod and Pilate, &c. The Devil doubtleſs had a deſign by theſe two Champions of his to have utterly rooted out the Houſe of David (as he ſought alſo afterwards to do by Herod, Caligulae and others) and ſo to have prevented Chriſt his being made of the Seed of Abraham according to the fleſh, Rom. 1.3. but that could not be.

And his heart was moved] Concuſſum & conquaſſatum. Impiety triumpheth in proſperity: trembleth in adverſity. Tullus Hoſtilius, that godleſs King of Rome, ſet up Pavor and Pallor for Gods to himſelf. Saul and Achitophel in diſtreſs deſpaired, and diſpatcht themſelves: So did Demoſthenes, Cato, and other Heathen Sages, who were without God in the world, and therefore without comfort. Sin maketh men timorous, Lev. 26.36. but Righteouſneſs bold, Prov. 28.1. Pſalm 27.1. The Spirit of power and of a ſound mind are fitly ſet together, 2 Tim. 1.7.

Ver. 3. Then ſaid the Lord unto Iſaiah] Wicked Ahaz ſhall have a Prophet ſent him with a Promiſe, if it be but to leave him without excuſe: There was alſo a godly party in the Land, whoſe comfort was aimed at, and for whoſe ſake Shear jaſhub was alſo taken along, as carrying comfort in this very name: Portendit enim omnes pios qui divini verbi ſatu generandi ſunt ſalvos & incolumes fore, diviniſ que muneribus exornatos.

At the end of the Conduit of the upper pool] Where he is walking, and talking about ſending to Aſſyria for help. The place is pointed out for confirmation of the truth of the Propheſie. So in the Goſpel the Apoſtles are foretold where to fetch the Aſſe, where to prepare the Paſsover. This place was without the City, over againſt the Palace-Royal: the very ſame where afterwards Rabſhakah (the fugitive ſon of our Prophet Iſaiah, ſay the Rabbins; but without reaſon) railed upon the living God. This Propheſie here and now delivered,2 King. 18. might haply be ſome ſupport to good Hezekiah under that trial.

Of the Fullers field] Fullers muſt have ſtore of water, and room enough for the dreſſing and drying of their clothes, Miniſters are by an Ancient called Fullones animarum, Fullers of mens ſouls.

Ver. 4. Take heed and be quiet] Cave & quieſce: Or as others render it, Vide ut ſileas, See that thou ſay nothing: fret not, faint not, ſend no meſſage to the Aſſyrian, reſt by Faith upon the Lord of Hoſts, get a bleſſed Sabbath of Spirit, a well compoſed frame of Soul: for in quietneſs and confidence conſiſteth thy ſafety, as Chap. 30.15.

Fear not, neither be faint-hearted] See on ver. 2.

For the two tails of theſe ſmoaking fire-brands] By a moſt elegant Metaphor; he nameth not one of theſe two Potentates as not worth naming: but calleth them in contemp a couple of firebrands, ſuch as would do miſchief but cannot, becauſe but ſmoaking, and not burning; and but the tails of ſmoaking firebrands neither, ſuch as are ſmoaking their laſt, and ſhall ſhortly be utterly extinct. In a word, they have more pride then power, being a meer flaſh.

Ver. 5. Becauſe Syria, Ephraim, &c.] This was the fruit of their fury fuming out at their Noſes, ver. 4. and proving like ſmoak, which the higher it riſeth, the ſooner it vaniſheth: or like the bubbles blown up into the ayr by children, into whoſe eyes they ſoon fall back again. There is no wiſdom, nor underſtanding, nor counſel againſt the Lord, Prov. 21.30. See the Note there.

Ver. 6. Let us go up againſt Judah and vex it] So they had done ſeverally, and ſo they think much more to do joyntly. Sed aliter Deo viſum eſt. There is a Council in Heaven that daſheth the mould of all contrary Counſels upon earth, as Pſalm 2.4.

And let us make a breach therein for us] Or, let us divide it, and ſhare it betwixt us, or ſet a King over it that may be a vaſſal to us both. Thus the Pope gave away England Primo occupaturo, to him that ſhould firſt take it in Henry the eighths dayes: but he reckoned without his Hoſt, as they ſay.

Even the ſon of Tabeel] A Syrian, likely, as Tabrimmon, 1 King. 15.18. a good Rimmonite, 2 King 5.18. So Tabeel a good God. Rimmon was the Syrians God. The Chaldee expoundeth it Good or Right for us.

Ver. 7. It ſhall not ſtand] The Counſel of the Lord, that ſhall ſtand, Pſal. 33.11. when the worlds Wizzards ſhall be taken in their own craftineſs, 1 Cor. 3.19.

It ſhall not be] All their projects are daſhed by a word. Video, Rideo, ſaith He that ſitteth in Heaven, Pſalm 2. I look and laugh: and wherein they dealt proudly, I am above them, Exod. 18.11.

Ver. 8. For the head of Syria is Damaſcus] Not Jeruſalem, as they haply had contrived it: looking upon Jeruſalem as a City fatally founded to bear Rule, as One ſaith of Conſtantinople.

And the head of Damaſcus is Rezin] Let him ſet his heart at reſt, and not reach after the Dominion of Judah: leſt falling from his high hopes, he loſe that he hath already, and cry out with that Ambitioniſt, Sic mea fata ſequor.

And within threeſcore and five years] ſc. from the time that Amos foretold it, Chap. 5.27. & 7.8. that is, from the twenty fourth year of Ʋzziah to the ſixth of Hezekiah, when as the ten Tribes were carried away by Salmaneſer, 2 King. 17. Thus Hierom out of Seder-Olam. But I like better Piſcators computation, which is thus within 65. years, that is, from the fourth year of Ahaz now current to the 23. of Manaſſeh, when Ephraim ceaſed indeed to be a people by the command of Eſarhaddon Son of Senacherib: whereof ſee Ezra 4.2.

Ver. 9. And the head of Samariah, Remaliah's ſon] In contempt he hath neither his Name nor Title of a King given him, but is fairly warned to keep within his bounds: he is not like to hold long that he hath. It is dangerous medling with Jeruſalem, Zech. 12.2, 3, 6.

Valde brevis ſententia eſt, ſed gravis admodum. Oecolamp. If ye will not believe, ſurely ye ſhall not be eſtabliſhed] Jehoſaphat ſaid as much, 2 Chron. 20.20. and our Saviour ſomewhat like, John 8.20. Iſaiah ſaw the King and people ſtill fluctuating and trembling, notwithſtanding the divine Promiſe: and telleth them what to truſt to; unleſs they will truſt in God, they will never be ſoundly ſettled: Faith quelleth and killeth diſtruſtful fear, and maketh a man walk about the world like a Conquerour. There is an Elegancy here in the Original that cannot be Engliſhed.

Ver. 10. Moreover the Lord ſpake again unto Ahaz] Wicked though he were, and under the power of unbelief, yet he ſhall ſee that he hath to do with a very gracious and long-ſuffering God, who, by a wonderful condeſcenſion, will needs give him a ſign; Inauditum vero, dari ſignum incredulo. Chriſt would not ſo far gratifie the unbelieving Phariſees, but calleth them an evil and baſtardly brood for ſeeking a ſign from Heaven, Mat. 12.39.

Ver. 11. Ask the ſign of the Lord] not of any other God, to whom thou art addicted.

Thy God] From whom thou haſt deeply revolted: but of whom thou mighteſt upon thy return be graciouſly re-accepted.

Ask it either in the depth] This was a fair offer to ſo foul a ſinner: but all would not do; no though he ſhould have had a ſight of Heaven or of Hell for a ſign; And yet Bellarmine thinketh, that one glimpſe of Hell were enough to work upon the moſt hard-hearted ſinner in the world, and to make him yield to any thing.

Ver. 12. I will not ask] Ah lewd loſel! I will not ask; what a baſe anſwer was this of a Bedlam Belialiſt? what a wretched entertainment of ſuch an over-bounding Mercy? He doth upon the matter ſay, Ile ask no Asks, Ile try no ſigns, I know a trick worth two of that: God ſhall for me, keep his ſigns to himſelf: I crave no ſuch curteſie at his hands: I can otherwiſe help my ſelf, viz. by ſending to the Aſſyrian. If the Lord could and would have helped, how happeth it that ſo lately no leſs then an hundred and twenty thouſand of my Subjects were cut off in one day by this Remaliah's ſon, as you contemptuouſly call him?

Neither will I tempt the Lord] Or, neither w[illegible: 1 letter]ll I make tryal of the Lord, as in the former Note. Ambroſe was miſtaken who thought that Ahaz refuſed to ask or try the Lord, out of modeſty and humility: rather it was out of pervicacy, or (at beſt) Hypocriſie. Hic deſcendamus in noſtras conſcientias, ſaith good Oecolampadius. Here let us each deſcend and dive into his own conſcience, to ſee whether we alſo have not matched Ahaz in his madneſs, or at leaſt wiſe, coaſted too near upon his unkind uſage of the Lord, by rejecting his ſweet offers of Grace and motions of Mercy: by ſlighting his holy Sacraments, thoſe Signs and Seals of the Righteouſneſs that is by Faith. Adſit fides, & aberit periculum.

Ver. 13. Hear ye now ye Houſe of David] But ſhamefully degenerate from your thrice-worthy Progenitours; and ſtrangely forgetful of Gods Promiſes for a perpetual Succeſſion: which if ye remembred and believed, ye would not be ſo cauſleſly terrified.

Is it a ſmall thing for you] How heartily angry is the Prophet, how bleſſedly blown up in this caſe of ſo great diſhonour done to God? we ſhould be ſo too.

To weary men] to vex and moleſt: the Septuagint have it, to ſtrive, Agoneus redditis. or wreſtle a fall with men; By men he meaneth himſelf and his fellow-Prophets, whom Ahaz and his Courtiers ſlighted and miſuſed. Let this comfort Gods faithful Miniſters under the worlds indignities and injuries. See Matth. 5.11, 12.

But will ye weary my God] whom I ſerve in my spirit; and now no more thy God, as ver. 11. ſith thou haſt refuſed to be Ruled by him,Non autem tuum, ô rex Ahaſe. Piſcat. and that after manifeſt conviction, and greateſt importunity to bring thee to a better temper.

Ver. 14. Therefore the Lord himſelf ſhall give you a ſign] Give it you, ingratiis veſtris, without your leave, of his own proffer. If we believe not, yet God remaineth faithful, 2 Tim. 2.13. Rom. 3.3. The Houſe of David was as it were great with child with Chriſt, and with Gods promiſes in him; therefore (to be ſure) it could not be rooted out (as theſe two Kings deſigned) before Chriſt were come into the world. Hence his wonderfull Conception and Birth is made here a Sign of his peoples Safety here, and Salvation hereafter. And had Ahaz and his people believed this latter, they would not have much doubted of the former; but rather argued with St. Paul, Having given us his Son, Rom. 8.32. how ſhall he not with him give us all things alſo?

A ſign] A ſingular ſign, a ſign both from above and from beneath: for he joyned lumen ſuae aeternitatis limo tuae mortalitatis, Bern. the light of his Eternity to the mud of thy mortality, as a Father hath it, Joh. 1.14. Phil. 2.6.7.

Behold] A Note of attention and admiration. One compareth it to the ſounding of a Trumpet before ſome notable Proclamation: Another to a hand in the Margent, pointing to ſome remarkable matter: ſo doth this Ecce to Chriſts incarnation as a thing in Gods Decree, and to his peoples Faith already preſent.

A Virgin] Hagnalmah that famous Virgin, ſo long ſince ſpoken of,Haec ſimul eſt genitrix, filia, ſponſa Dei. Tot tibi ſunt dotes Virgo, quot ſidera caelo. Gen. 3.15. that female glory, the Virgin Mary, with whom the Angel ſpake concerning mans ſalvation, Matth. 1.18, 23. Luke 1.27, 35. as the Devil before had done with the firſt woman, concerning the means of his deſtruction. Of this Virgin-Mother the Sibulls are ſaid thus to have propheſied alſo, Virginis in corpus voluit dimittere caelo Ipſe Deus prolem, cum nuntiat Angelus almae Matri, quae miſeros contractâ ſorde levabit.

See more in Virgils 4th. Eclog. and Aug. de civ. Dei, lib. 10. cap. 27. Some tell us that when this bleſſed Virgin brought forth, there was ſeen at Rome about the Sun, the likeneſs of a woman carrying a child in her arms, and a voyce heard, ſaying, Pan the great God is born into the world.

Shall conceive and bear a ſen] Shiloh, the ſon of her ſecundine, Gen. 49.10. the true Melchiſedeck; as man without father, and as God without mother, Heb. 7.5. See Luke 1.35. But how blank were the Jews when they ſaw the iſſue of their late Jewiſh Virgin turned to a Daughter? and how ſilly is that ſaying of theirs in their Talmud, For our ſins which are many, the coming of the Meſſiah is deferred?Sanhed. cap. 11. Jachiades upon thoſe words, Dan. 12.4. would have us believe that God ſealed up the time of Chriſts coming, revealing it to Daniel only. But why take they not notice that the very time of Meſſiah the Prince his coming is ſet down by Daniel, chap. 9. and ſith that time is long ſince paſt, let them either condemn the Prophet of vanity, or elſe confeſs with us that Chriſt is come already.

And ſhall call] Or, Thou (Virgin) ſhalt call; as having the right of nomination.

His Name Immanuel] That is, God with us, as Matth. 1.23. See the Note there. Cujus nomen illius numen facile declarabit. Chriſt indeed was not called by this name Immanuel, that we anywhere read of (as neither was Solomon by the name of Jedediah, 2 Sam. 12.25, 26.) unleſs it be chap. 8.8. but the import of this name is moſt truly affirmed and acknowledged to be fully made good in him.

Ver. 15. Butter and Honey ſhall he eat] i. e. He ſhall be fed with Childrens meat, after the manner of other Infants; for as he ſhall take upon him our nature,Noematica periphraſis. ſo ſhall he alſo partake with us in our natural infirmities: feeding as other Children there did, on butter and honey, not able to diſcern good from evil through want of judgement, till he came to be of diſcretion, Luke 2.52. with Deut. 1.39. that he might be in all things like unto us, and that we might once come unto the meaſure of the ſtature of the fulneſs of Chriſt, Eph. 4.13. that we might become ſtrong in the Lord, and in the power of his might, able to do all things through Chriſt that ſtrengtheneth us, Phil. 4. Stumble not at his weakneſs, but gather aſſurance of his Love, who ſo ſweetly joyned his Majeſty to our meanneſs, his might to our weakneſs: abaſing himſelf to the ſhape and ſtate of a feeble weak and helpleſs child.

Ver. 16. For before the child] Hannagnar, this child Shear Jaſhub here preſent, ver. 3. the proper ſign of this preſent deliverance, as Iſa. 8.4. made ſo by occaſion of the mention of Immanuel that was to be born many years after, of a Virgin.

The land that thou abhorreſt] Or, by which thou art vexed, as ver 6. Confer Exod. 1.12. Num. 22.3. So the Danes were abhorred by the Engliſh, the French by the Sicilians, as appeared by thoſe bloody Veſpers.

Shall be left of both her Kings] Who ſhall be cut off by a ſeaſonable vengeance: See this fulfilled, 2 King. 15.30. and 16.9. within a year or two of this prophecy.

Ver. 17. The Lord ſhall bring upon thee, &c.] ſc. in caſe thou believe not. Thou and thine ſhall periſh, notwithſtanding this preſent deliverance; the Lord will deſtroy thee after that he hath done thee good, as Joſh. 24.20. Et cujus verbis credere noluiſti, ejus verberibus fidem habebis. Thou ſhalt ſoon have enough of the Aſſyrian, in whom thou wilt needs truſt, and not in Me. Him thou ſhalt call in for help againſt others: but he, having taken a taſte of ſo fertile a ſoil and wealthy a ſtate, ſhall at length over-run all: Like as afterwards alſo the old Gawls did Italy, and the Saracens the Greek Empire.

Ver. 18. The Lord will hiſs for the flye, &c.] Out of Egypt and the confines. The people of which parts are fitly called flyes, ſay Expoſitors, for their numeroſity, ſwiftneſs, ſtench, impudency, harſh language, ob vocis abſonae ſtridorem. The countrey being hot, and lying low aboundeth with flyes and gnats, ſuch as proud Pharaoh was vexed with.

And for the bee that is in Aſſyria] That countrey is full of woods, and ſo of bees: to which alſo the Aſſyrians are fitly compared, as for their numerouſneſs, their military skill and comely marſhalling of their forces, their golden armour, their induſtry and conſtancy in battle; ſo for their force and fury eſpecially. Virgil ſpeaking of bees ſaith, Illis ira modum ſuperat, laefaeque venenum Inſpirant ſtimulis, & vitam in vulnere linquunt. See the Babylonical fierceneſs and cruelty graphically deſcribed, Jer. 51.34. It was ſo much the greater, becauſe ſent for and ſet on they were by Gods hiſs or whiſtle.

Ver. 19. And they ſhall come and ſhall reſt all of them] As flyes do upon fleſh, and as bees upon trees: they ſhall ſeiſe all.

In the deſolate vallies, &c.] Hereby is ſet forth, ſaith Calvin, that in no lurking place any of the Jews ſhould be ſecreted or ſecured from their enemies, but that they ſhall range about and rage everywhere thoroughout the whole land. And becauſe all this is done at an hiſs, the backwardneſs of Chriſtians is condemned, ſaith Muſculus, who cannot by moſt earneſt preaching of long continuance be brought to do as God requireth them.

Ver. 20. In the ſame day ſhall the Lord ſhave] Not ſhear but ſhave, with a razor, to ſet forth the calamity of war which waſteth and taketh away all, and maketh clean work, as we uſe to ſay: nihil in toto regno intactum reliquit, ſed omnia à ſummo ad imum expilavit Aſſyrius. The Aſſyrian is here called Gods razor, becauſe his inſtrument to ſhave as he pleaſeth: though haply by exceeding his commiſſion, as Zach. 1.15. he might prove a deceitful razor, as Pſal. 52.2. that inſtead of ſhaving the hair, lanceth the fleſh.

That is hired] Whether by Ahaz himſelf, but for a better purpoſe, 2 King. 16.7, 8. not to hurt but to help, though it fell out otherwiſe: or by God, who paid the Aſſyrian for his hire the Lands of Iſrael and of Syria: ſee the like Ezek. 29.18, 19. Barbers uſe not their razors but for reward.

Beyond the river] Euphrates that ran between Syria and Aſſyria, but could not keep off the Aſſyrian Deſtroyer.

The head, and the hair of the feet] Elſewhere called head and tail, that is, high and low, Prince and Peſant.

And it ſhall alſo conſume the beard] 1. the Prieſts, Pſal. 133.2. as ſome ſenſe it: or, as others, all the comelineſs and virility of the Jewiſh nation.

Ver. 21. A man ſhall nouriſh two ſheep] He that was wont to ſay,Virg. eclog. Mille meae Siculis errant in montibus agnae, ſhall now be reduced to ſo great penury as to be glad of two ſheep, and have ſcarce a yong Heifer left for his neceſſary ſubſiſtence, who was wont to have many ploughs going. They ſhall not now, as heretofore, joyn houſe to houſe, and land to land: they ſhall not keep race-horſes, or hunting dogs, &c.

Ver. 22. For the abundance of milk] yielded him by his two Cows, through the paucity of people and plenty of graſs.

He ſhall eat butter] eat his fill, ſith there are none to buy it of him; none to pull it out of his mouth.

For butter and honey ſhall every one eat] not cates and dainties, as chap. 5.12. but mean fare, ſuch as he can get: as wild-honey, ſuch as the Baptiſt fed on.

Ver. 23. Where there were a thouſand vines] Which once were to the ſenſual Jews an occaſion of drunkenneſs and forgetfulneſs of God, chap. 5.11, 12. A Lapide on chap. 5.2. telleth us that at Herbipolis in Germany there are abundance of vineyards, ſo that they have more wine there then water: and ſuch huge wine-veſſels that the vintners have doors in the ſides of them whereby they enter (as Diogenes did into his tub) to make them clean and fit for their uſe.

Shall be briars and thorns] Agri quondam vitibus conſiti, erunt obſiti vepribus, & dumetis denſiſſimis hirſuti.

Ver. 24. With arrows and with bows ſhall they come] for their neceſſary defence againſt the wild beaſts that haunt thoſe deſert places, propter denſa ferarum luſtra hominibus infeſta: This was threatened, Lev. 26.22.

Ver. 25. And on all the hills that ſhall be digged, Aſſemb. Annot. &c.] A good Tranſlation of a text is inſtead of a good Commentary: Some very learned render the words thus, And on the hills that had wont to be digged with mattock or ſpade, that no fear of bryar or thorn might come thither, ſhall a place alſo be for ſending in of oxen, and the treading of leſſer cattle: Which ſhall range and graze freely (ſay they by way of gloſs) after their wonted manner in thoſe places, from whence they and their owners had formerly been ejected and excluded by the violent oppreſſions and undue encloſures of the richer and greater ſort, chap. 5.17.