Commentari biblici

This chapter is an occasional sermon, in which the prophet sings both of mercy and judgment to those that did not perceive or understand either; he piped unto them, but they danced not, mourned unto them, but they wept not. Here is, I. The consternation that Ahaz was in upon an attempt of the confederate forces of Syria and Israel against Jerusalem, Isa 7:1,2. II. The assurance which God, by the prophet, sent him for his encouragement, that the attempt should be defeated and Jerusalem should be preserved, Isa 7:3-9. III. The confirmation of this by a sign which God gave to Ahaz, when he refused to ask one, referring to Christ, and our redemption by him, Isa 7:10-16. IV. A threatening of the great desolation that God would bring upon Ahaz and his kingdom by the Assyrians, notwithstanding their escape from this present storm, because they went on still in their wickedness, Isa 7:17-25. And this is written both for our comfort and for our admonition.

Probably no portion of the Bible has been regarded as so difficult of interpretation, and has given rise to so great a variety of expositions, as the prophecy which is commenced in this chapter, and which is closed in Isaiah 9:7. The importance of the prophecy respecting the Messiah (Isaiah 7:14 ff; Isaiah 8:7; Isaiah 9:1-7), is one reason why interpreters have been so anxious to ascertain the genuine sense; and the difficulties attending the supposition that there is reference to the Messiah, have been among the causes why so much anxiety has been felt to ascertain its true sense.

The prophecy which commences at the beginning of this chapter, is continued to Isaiah 9:7. An this was evidently delivered at the same time, and constitutes a single vision, or oracle. This should have been indicated in the division of the chapters. Great obscurity arises from the arbitrary, and, in many instances, absurd mode of division into chapters which has been adopted in the Bible.

This chapter, for convenience of illustration, may be regarded as divided into four parts:

I. The historical statement with which the whole account is introduced in Isaiah 7:1-2. The principal occurrences referred to in the chapter took place in the time of Ahaz. For an account of his character and reign, see the Introduction, Section 3. He was an idolater and erected the images, and altars, and groves of idolatry everywhere. He sacrificed to Baalim, and burned his children in the valley of Hinnom in honor of Moloch, and ruled Jerusalem everywhere with abominations, 2 Kings 16:2-4; 2 Chronicles 28:1-4. For these abominations, he was delivered into the hand of the king of Syria, and was subjected to calamities from the threatened invasion of the united armies of Syria and Samaria. At this time Rezin was king of Syria, of which Damascus was the capital; and Pekah was king of Israel or Sumaria. These kings, during the concluding part of the reign of Jotham, the predecessor of Ahaz, had formed an alliance and had gone up toward Jerusalem to make war upon it, but had not been able to take it.

The formation of this confederacy in the time of Jotham is distinctly declared in 2 Kings 15:37. To this confederacy Isaiah refers in Isaiah 7:1, where he says that it occurred in the days of Jotham. The statement is made by Isaiah here, doubtless, in order to trace the important matter to which he alludes to its commencement, though what he subsequently says had particular relation to Ahaz. Though the confederacy was formed in the time of Jotham, yet the consequences were of long continuance, and were not terminated until the defeat of Sennacherib in the time of Hezekiah; see Isaiah 37. Isaiah, here, in general, says Isaiah 7:1 that they went up against Jerusalem, and could not take it. He may refer here to an expedition which they made in the time of Jotham, or he may design this as a "general" statement, intricating the result of "all" their efforts, that they could not take Jerusalem. If the latter is the proper interpretation, then the statement in Isaiah 7:1, was made by Isaiah at a subsequent period, and is designed to state "all" that occurred.

It is more natural, however, to suppose that they made an attempt in the time of Jotham to take Jerusalem, but that they were unsuccessful. When Ahaz came to the throne, the alliance was continued, and the effort was renewed to take Jerusalem. Formidable preparations were made for the war, and an invading army came up upon the land. Many of the subjects of Ahaz were taken captive and carried to Damascus. Pekah killed in one day 120,000 people, and took two hundred thousand captives, and carried them toward Samaria. They were released from bondage by the solicitation of Oded, a prophet, who represented to them the impropriety of taking their brethren captive, and they were re-conveyed to Jericho; 2 Chronicles 28:5-15. At about the same time, the Assyrians took Elath, and retained it as a city belonging to them; 2 Kings 16:6. From the report of this strong alliance and from the ravages which were committed by their united forces, Ahaz was alarmed, and trembled for the safety of Jerusalem itself, Isaiah 7:3.

But instead of looking to God for aid, he formed the purpose of securing the alliance of the king of "Assyria," and for this purpose sent messengers to Tigiath-pileser with professions of deep regard, and with the most costly presents which could be procured by exhausting the treasury 2 Kings 16:7-8, to secure his friendship and cooperation. To this the king of Assyria agreed, and entered into the war by making an assault on Damascus; 2 Kings 16:9. It was this alliance, and the confidence which Ahaz had in it, that produced his answer to Isaiah Isa 7:12, and his refusal to ask a sign of the Lord; and it was this alliance which subsequently involved Jerusalem in so much difficulty from the invasion of the Assyrians. The Assyrians, as might have been foreseen, consulted their own advantage, and not the benefit of Ahaz. They meant to avail themselves of the opportunity of subduing, if possible, Judea itself; and, consequently, the land was subsequently invaded by them, and Jerusalem itself put in jeopardy. This consequence was distinctly foretold by Isaiah, Isaiah 7:17-25; Isaiah 8:7-8. Yet before the alliance was secured, Ahaz was in deep consternation and alarm, and it was at this point of time that Isaiah was sent to him, Isaiah 7:2-3.

II. At this time of consternation and alarm, Isaiah was sent to Ahaz to assure him that Jerusalem would be safe, and that there was no real cause of alarm, Isaiah 7:3-9. His main object was to induce the monarch to repose confidence in Yahweh, and to believe that his kingdom, protected by God, could not be overthrown. Isaiah was directed to take with him his son, whose name (Shear-jashub - "the remnant shall return") was itself a sign or pledge that the nation should not be "utterly" destroyed, and that, consequently, it could not become permanently subject to Syria or Sumaria, Isaiah 7:3. He went to meet Ahaz at the upper pool, where, probably, Ahaz had gone, attended by many of the court, to see whether it was practicable to stop the water, so as to prevent an enemy from procuring it; compare 2 Chronicles 32:4. He directed him not to be afraid of the enemies that were coming, for they were like smoking, half-extinguished brands that could do little injury, Isaiah 7:4. He assured him that the purpose of the confederated kings should not be accomplished; that Yahweh had said that their design could not be established; and that the limits of their respective kingdoms should be the same that they were then, and should not be enlarged by the conquest and accession of Jerusalem - for that Damascus should still remain the capital of Syria, and Samaria of Ephraim, and that within sixty-five years the kingdom of Ephraim should be totally destroyed, and of course Jerusalem and Judah could not be permanently added to it. So far from having Jerusalem as a tributary and dependent province, as Renraliah had anticipated, his own kingdom was to be completely and finally destroyed, Isaiah 7:4-9. The desire of all this; as to allay the fears of Ahaz, and to induce him to put confidence in God.

III. A sign is promised - a proof or demonstration of the truth of what the prophet had spoken, Isaiah 7:10-17. To the assurance which Isaiah Isa 7:4-9 had given of the safety of Jerusalem, Ahaz makes no reply. His whole conduct, however, shows that he is wholly unimpressed and unaffected by what he had said, and that he put no confidence in the assuranccs of the prophet. He was not looking to God for aid, but to the king of Assyria; and he, doubtless, felt that if his aid was not obtained, his kingdom would be destroyed. He evidently had no belief in God, and no confidence in the prophet. His mind was in a restless, uneasy condition from the impending danger, and from uncertainty whether the aid of the king of Assyria could be procured. In order to induce him to turn his attention to God, the only Protector, and to calm his fears, Ahaz is commanded to ask of Yahweh any sign or miracle which he might desire, in order to confirm what the prophet had spoken, Isaiah 7:10-11.

This Ahaz refuses, Isaiah 7:12. He does it under the semblance of piety, and an unwillingness to appear to tempt Yahweh. But the "real" cause was, doubtless, that he had no confidence in Yahweh; he had no belief in what he had spoken; and he was secretly depending on the aid of the king of Assyria. His reply was couched in respectful terms, and had the appearance of piety, and was even expressed in language borrowed from the law, Deuteronomy 5:16. Yet important purposes were to be answered, by there being a sign or proof that what the prophet had said should take place. It was important that Ahaz, as the king of Judah, and as the head of the people, should have evidence that what was said was true. It was important that a suitable impression should be made on those who were present, and on the mass of the people, inducing them to put confidence in Yahweh. It was important that they should look to future times; to the certain security of the nation, and to the evidence that the nation "must" be preserved until the great Deliverer should come.

A sign is, therefore, forced upon the attention of Ahaz. The prophet tells him that however reluctant he may be to seek a sign, or however incredulous he might be, yet that Yahweh would give a token, proof, or demonstration, which would be a full confirmation of all that he had said. "That would be done which could be done only by Yahweh, and which could be known only by him;" and "that" would be the demonstration that Jerusalem would be safe from this impending invasion. A virgin should bear a son, and before he should arrive at years of discretion, or be able to discern the difference between good and evil - that is in a short space of time, the land would be forsaken of both its kings, Isaiah 7:14-16. Who this virgin was, and what is the precise meaning of this prediction, has given perhaps, more perplexity to commentators than almost any other portion of the Bible. The "obvious" meaning seems to be this.

Some young female, who was then a virgin, and who was unmarried at the time when the prophet spoke, would conceive, and bear a son. "To" that son a name would be given, or his birth, in the circumstances in which it occurred, would make such a name proper, as would indicate that God was with them, and would be their Protector. Maternal affection would give the child the name Immanuel. The child would be nurtured up in the usual way among the Jews Isaiah 7:15 until he would be able to discern between good and evil - that is, until he should arrive at years of discretion. Between the time which should elapse from the conception of the child, and the time when he should arrive at an age to distinguish good from evil, that is in about three years, the land should be forsaken of the hostile kings, Isaiah 7:16. This seems to be the obvious meaning of this passage; and in this way only could this be a clear and satisfactory evidence to Ahaz of the certainty that the land would be entirely and permanently free from the invasion.

God only could know this; and, therefore, this was a proof of the certainty of what Isaiah had said. But though this is the obvious meaning, and though such an event only could be a sign to Ahaz that the land would be forsaken of both the invading kings, yet there is no reason to doubt that the prophet "so couched" what he said - so expressed this by the direction of the Holy Spirit, as to be applicable also to another much more important event, which was to be "also," and in a much more important sense, a sign of the protection of God - the birth of the Messiah. He, therefore, selected words which, while they were applicable to the event immediately to occur, would also cover much larger ground, and be descriptive of more important events - and events which were "in the same line and direction" with that immediately to come to pass - the certainty of the divine protection, and of ultimate freedom from all danger.

The language, therefore, has, at the commencement of the prophecy, a fullness of meaning which is not entirely met by the immediate event which was to occur, and which can be entirely fulfilled only by the great event which Isaiah ever had in his eye - the birth of the Messiah. The mind of Isaiah would very naturally be carried forward to that future event. In accordance with the laws of what may be called "prophetic suggestion or association," see Introduction, Section 7, iii.((3), and which are constantly exemplified in Isaiah, his mind would fix on better times, and more happy events. He saw the birth of a child in a future age, of which this was but the emblem. That was to be born literally of a virgin. His "appropriate" name, from his nature, and from his being the evidence of the divine favor and presence, would be "Immanuel" - as the appropriate name of this child would be Immanuel, because he would be the pledge of the divine protection and presence. The idea is, that there is a "fulness of meaning" in the words used, which will apply to future events more appropriately than to the one immediately before the writer. That there is rapid transition - a sudden carrying the mind forward to rest on a future more important event, which has been "suggested" by the language used, and which is in the mind of the speaker or writer so much more important than that which was first mentioned, as completely to absorb the attention. The reasons for the view here given are detailed at length in the notes at Isaiah 7:14-16.

IV. The prophet had thus far directed all his efforts to convince Ahaz that from the quarter from which they had apprehended danger, nothing was to be feared. He now, however Isaiah 7:17-25, proceeds to assure them that danger would come from the quarter where they least expected it - from the very quarter where Ahaz was seeking aid and deliverance - the king of Assyria. He assures him that the king of Assyria would take advantage of the alliance, and, under pretence of aiding him, would turn everything to his own account, and would ultimately bring desolation on the land of Judah. The calamities which would follow from this unhappy alliance, the prophet proceeds to state and unfold, and with that concludes the chapter. It is evident from 2 Kings 16:7, that the discourse of Isaiah made no impression on the mind of Ahaz. He sent messengers with valuable presents to Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria. Tiglath-pileser professedly entered into the views of Ahaz, and promised his aid.

He went up against Damascus and took it 2 Kings 16:9, after Ahaz had suffered a terrible overthrow from the united armies of Rezin and Pekah. The land of Samaria was laid waste by him, and a large part of the inhabitants carried captive to Assyria, 2 Kings 15:29. Thus the prediction of Isaiah, that the land should be forsaken by two kings Isaiah 7:16, was fulfilled. But this deliverance from their invasion was purchased by Ahaz at a vast price. The real purpose of Tiglath-pileser was not to aid Ahaz, but to make him and his kingdom dependent and tributary 2 Chronicles 28:21; and this alliance was the first in the succession of calamities which came upon Judah and Jerusalem, and which ended only under Hezekiah by the entire destruction of the army of Sennacherib; see Isaiah 37. During the remainder of the reign of Ahaz he was tributary to Assyria; and when Hezekia 2 Kings 17:7 endeavored to throw off the yoke of Assyria, the attempt involved him in war; subjected his kingdom to invasion; and was attended with a loss of no small part of the cities and towns of his kingdom; see 2 Kings 18; 19; 20; Isaiah 36; 37; compare the notes at Isaiah 8; Isaiah 10:28-32. Thus the second part of this prophecy was fulfilled. The fuller statement of these important transactions will be found in the notes at the various passages which relate to these events.

The king of Judah and the royal family being in the utmost consternation on receiving accounts of the invasion of the kings of Syria and Israel, the prophet is sent to assure them that God would make good his promises to David and his house; so that, although they might be corrected, they could not be destroyed, while these prophecies remained to be accomplished, Isaiah 7:1-9. The Lord gives Ahaz a sign that the confederacy against Judah shall be broken, which sign strikingly points out the miraculous conception of the Messiah, who was to spring from the tribe of Judah, Isaiah 7:10-16. Prediction of very heavy calamities which the Assyrians would inflict upon the land of Judea, Isaiah 7:17-25.

The confederacy of Rezin, king of Syria, and Pekah, king of Israel, against the kingdom of Judah, was formed in the time of Jotham; and perhaps the effects of it were felt in the latter part of his reign; see 2 Kings 15:37, and note on Isaiah 1:7-9 (note). However, in the very beginning of the reign of Ahaz, they jointly invaded Judah with a powerful army, and threatened to destroy or to dethrone the house of David. The king and royal family being in the utmost consternation on receiving advises of their designs, Isaiah is sent to them to support and comfort them in their present distress, by assuring them that God would make good his promises to David and his house. This makes the subject of this, and the following, and the beginning of the ninth chapters, in which there are many and great difficulties.

Chap. 7 begins with an historical account of the occasion of this prophecy; and then follows, Isaiah 7:4-16, a prediction of the ill success of the designs of the Israelites and Syrians against Judah; and from thence to the end of the chapter, a denunciation of the calamities to be brought upon the king and people of Judah by the Assyrians, whom they had now hired to assist them. Chap. 8 has a pretty close connection with the foregoing; it contains a confirmation of the prophecy before given of the approaching destruction of the kingdoms of Israel and Syria by the Assyrians, of the denunciation of the invasion of Judah by the same Assyrians. Isaiah 8:9, Isaiah 8:10, give a repeated general assurance, that all the designs of the enemies of God's people shall be in the end disappointed and brought to naught; Isaiah 8:11, etc., admonitions and threatenings, (I do not attempt a more particular explanation of this very difficult part), concluding with an illustrious prophecy Isaiah 9:1-6, of the manifestation of Messiah, the transcendent dignity of his character, and the universality and eternal duration of his kingdom.

INTRODUCTION TO Isaiah 7

This chapter contains a prophecy of the preservation of the kingdom of Judah, from its enemies; a confirmation of it by a sign; and a prediction of various calamities that should come upon it, antecedent to the accomplishment of that sign. The enemies of Judea are named, and the besieging of Jerusalem by them, and the date of it, which was without effect, are mentioned, Isaiah 7:1 the fear and dread which seized the house of David upon the news of this confederacy, Isaiah 7:2 the orders given by the Lord to the Prophet Isaiah, to take with him his son, and meet Ahaz, at a certain place pointed at, Isaiah 7:3 whose errand was to comfort him, and exhort him to be quiet and easy; since the conspiracy formed against him should be fruitless, and the kingdom of Israel should be broken to pieces, Isaiah 7:4 after which the king is put upon asking a sign of the Lord, for the confirmation of it; which he refusing to do, under a pretence of tempting the Lord, is reproved; and a sign nevertheless is given; which is that of the birth of the Messiah of a virgin, who would be truly God, as his name Immanuel shows, and truly man, as his birth, his food, and gradual knowledge of good and evil, prove, Isaiah 7:10 yea, it is suggested that the deliverance of Judea from the two kings of Syria and Israel should be very speedy; even before the young child Isaiah had with him was capable of knowing to refuse evil, and chose good, Isaiah 7:16 but as a chastisement of the house of David for their incredulity in this matter, and slight of the divine goodness, various things are threatened to befall them, before the birth of the Messiah; even such as had not been since the revolt of the ten tribes; as that their enemies, the Assyrians and others, should come upon them in great numbers, and fill all places, so that they would be in the utmost distress, and not be able to escape, Isaiah 7:17 there would be a great consumption of men of all sorts, high and low, signified by shaving off the hair of the head, beard, and feet; so that the few that remained would enjoy plenty, Isaiah 7:20 and for want of men to till the land, it would be covered with thorns and briers; and because of wild beasts, the few men in it would be obliged to defend themselves with bows and arrows, Isaiah 7:23 and yet, after this, the land should become fruitful again, before the Messiah's coming, Isaiah 7:25, as some interpret it.

Chapters Isaiah 7:1 to Isaiah 9:7A collection of prophecies belonging to the reign of Ahaz. Two important events in Isaiah’s career are here chronicled. (1) The first is his début as a practical statesman, seeking to shape the destinies of his country by a definite policy urged on the king and his advisers. (2) The second is the formation of a band of disciples, accompanied apparently by the prophet’s temporary withdrawal from public life (Isaiah 8:16-18). Hence we obtain an obvious division of the section into two parts, which may have been separated by a considerable interval of time, although there is no great reason to doubt that the whole was written before the death of Ahaz. (1) Ch. Isaiah 7:1 to Isaiah 8:15 is a summary of Isaiah’s activity during the crisis of the Syro-Ephraimitish invasion; (2) Isaiah 8:19 to Isaiah 9:7 probably represents the instruction communicated by the prophet to the inner circle of his believing adherents. In both parts the chapters exhibit the working out in history of the principles revealed in the latter part of ch. 6. The “great refusal” of Ahaz (Isaiah 7:12), approved as it seems to have been by public opinion, was a signal illustration of the judicial hardening produced by the overwhelming clearness of the divine revelation; and the gathering of a small religious fellowship round the person and family of the prophet shews how the doctrine of the remnant or the “holy seed” became from this time a practical ideal in his ministry.

In order to understand Isaiah’s words and actions at this period it is necessary to realise as clearly as possible the salient features of the political situation created in Judah by the Syro-Ephraimitish invasion. Hostilities on the part of both Syria and Ephraim against Judah are recorded as having commenced before the death of Jotham (2 Kings 15:37), though there is no mention at that time of a formal alliance between the two powers. It was only after the accession of Ahaz that the crisis became acute; and the words of Isaiah 7:2 seem to point to the sudden development of a new and formidable danger. This consisted in the avowed object of the league to destroy the independence of Judah by the removal of the native dynasty and the establishment of a creature of the allies on the throne of David (Isaiah 7:6). It is generally supposed that the ultimate motive of the attack was to coerce Judah into a coalition to oppose the westward progress of the Assyrian arms. To allay what he perceived to be a groundless alarm on the part of the king and court was one purpose of Isaiah’s memorable interview with Ahaz. But this of itself does not explain the extraordinary vehemence and urgency of the prophet’s appeal. It becomes fully intelligible only when we understand that he wished to warn the king against the fatal step, which he afterwards took, of calling in the aid of Assyria against his two petty foes. It is only reasonable to suppose that this obvious and tempting expedient had already been discussed in the royal council and was favourably entertained by Ahaz. Isaiah was no doubt alive to the grave political dangers which would result from placing the country in a position of servitude to the Assyrian Empire. He also perceived how unnecessary it was for Judah to make any advances in that direction at this time, since it was quite certain that the ambitious schemes of Rezin and Pekah would speedily be crushed by Tiglath-pileser, whether Ahaz applied to him or not. All this must have been evident to any sagacious observer who kept his head amidst the general panic caused by the approach of the allied armies. But the prophet perceived that higher interests than the political future of the nation were at stake. He was opposed, on religious grounds, to all compacts with heathen powers as involving disloyalty to Jehovah and distrust of His power. The crisis presented itself to him as a test of the religious mind of the people, of its capacity for exercising that fearless trust in Jehovah’s word which alone could guide it safely through the complications of the immediate future to the felicity that lay beyond. Hence the great object of this encounter with Ahaz is to bring round the king to Isaiah’s own attitude of calm reliance on the help of God, and above all things to dissuade him from compromising his position by entering into direct relations with Assyria.

Chap. 7. Isaiah’s interview with Ahaz and its consequences

The chapter is divided into two well-marked sections:

i. Isaiah 7:1-17. The prophet meets Ahaz at a critical juncture of the war and holds out a promise of deliverance on the condition of faith in Jehovah. The king’s unbelief is answered by the threat of an Assyrian invasion.

(1) The historical introduction (Isaiah 7:1-3).

(2) The divine message of assurance and encouragement, ending with a warning against unbelief (Isaiah 7:4-9). (We must suppose that something in the king’s demeanour had betrayed his impatience of the prophet’s exhortation.)

(3) If any sign in heaven or earth will overcome the king’s incredulity, he has but to name it and it shall come to pass (Isaiah 7:10-11). Ahaz still remains obdurate (Isaiah 7:12).

(4) Isaiah announces the God-given sign of Immanuel, as a token (a) of deliverance from the immediate danger, and (b) of the coming Assyrian invasion (Isaiah 7:13-17).

ii. Isaiah 7:18-25. An expansion of the threat of Isaiah 7:17, but probably not spoken to Ahaz at the time. It is a picture of the desolation of the land, ravaged by Egyptian and Assyrian troops, and left destitute of all but the scantiest means of human subsistence.

Isa 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

Isa 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 Isa 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

(Isa 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).

In the days of Ahaz - Ahaz began to reign about 738 years before Christ. By a comparison of 2 Kings 16:5, ..., with 2 Chronicles 28:5, etc., it will be seen that Judea was twice invaded by Rezin and Pekah in the reign of Ahaz; see the Analysis of the chapter.

That Rezin ... - This confederacy was formed in the time of Jotham; 2 Kings 15:37. But it was not carried into execution during his reign. It is evident from this place, that it was executed in the early part of the reign of Ahaz; probably in the first or second year of his reign.

Syria - - ארם 'ărâm, so called from Aram Genesis 10:22-23, a son of Shem, and who populated its chief provinces. It comprehended the country lying between the Euphrates east, the Mediterranean west, Cilicia north, and Phenicia, Judea, and Arabia south; see the notes at Isaiah 17:1-14. Syria of the two rivers is Mesopotamia. Syria of Damascus, so called because Damascus was its capital, extended eastward along Mount Libanus, but its limits varied according to the power of the princes of Damascus. After the reign of the Seleucidae, Syria came to denote the kingdom or region of which Antioch was the capital. Here it denotes the Syria lying around Damascus, and of which Damascus was the capital. - "Calmet."

King of Israel - Of the ten tribes, called the kingdom of Israel, or Samaria; Note, Isaiah 1:1.

Went up - Jerusalem was situated on hills, and on the highest part of the land. But it is possible that this language is derived from the fact that it was the capital. The language is used even when the region from which the traveler comes does not lie lower than the city. Thus it is not uncommon to speak of "going up" to London, Paris, etc.

Could not prevail - Hebrew, 'Could not fight against it,' that is, with happy result, or with success. He was not able to take it. That the allied kings really besieged Ahaz, is evident from 2 Kings 16:5 : They 'came up to Jerusalem to war, and they besieged Ahaz, but they could not overcome him.' The reason why they could not take Jerusalem was, probably, not only because it was a strong place and well defended, but because there was intelligence that their own dominions were threatened with an invasion by the Assyrians, and they could not protract their siege of Jerusalem long enough to take it.

And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah king of Judah,.... Here begins a new prophecy under the reign of another king; who, though a wicked king, had religious ancestors; and who are mentioned, not, as the Jewish writers (u) generally say, because it was owing to their worthiness that the enemies of Ahaz could not prevail against him; but because it was under these kings the prophet had prophesied: what is contained in the first five chapters were delivered in the times of Uzziah; and the vision in the sixth was in the times of Jotham, in the beginning of his reign; and what is said here, and in some following chapters, was in the time of Ahaz; so that this is mentioned to fix and carry on the date of the prophecy:

that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah, the son of Remaliah king of Israel, went up towards Jerusalem to war against it; at the latter end of Jotham's reign, and the beginning of Ahaz's; these two separately came up against Judah, and greatly distressed and afflicted the kingdom, slew many, and carried others captive, 2 Kings 15:37 but afterwards, in the third (w) or fourth (x) year of Ahaz, as it is said, they joined together to besiege Jerusalem, which this refers to, 2 Kings 16:5,

but could not prevail against it; or "he could not"; that is, according to Aben Ezra, the king of Israel, Pekah, the son of Remaliah; but, according to Kimchi, it was Rezin king of Syria, who, he says, was the principal in the war, and brought Pekah along with him; but it may very well be understood of them both, since in 2 Kings 16:5, the plural number is used; "and they could not"; and so the Septuagint, Vulgate Latin, and Oriental versions here.

(u) Jarchi & Kimchi in loc. & Yalkut Simeoni, ex Bereshit Rabba, sect. 63. fol. 54. 4. (w) Yalkut Simeoni in loc. (x) Seder Olam Rabba, c. 23. p. 85. Jarchi in ver. 14.