He said, “Listen now, house of David. Is it not enough for you to try the patience of men, that you will try the patience of my God also?
Parallel Translations
-
He said, “Listen now, house of David. Is it not enough for you to try the patience of men, that you will try the patience of my God also?
-
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?
-
And he said: 'Hear ye now, O house of David: Is it a small thing for you to weary men, that ye will weary my God also?
Cross-references (21)
Passages linked to Isaiah 7:13 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Isaiah 43:24 You have bought me no sweet cane with money, nor have you filled me with the fat of your sacrifices, but you have burdened me with your sins. You have wearied me with your iniquities.
- Isaiah 7:2 David’s house was told, “Syria is allied with Ephraim.” His heart trembled, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the forest tremble with the wind.
- Isaiah 63:10 But they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. Therefore he turned and became their enemy, and he himself fought against them.
- Ezekiel 16:47 Yet you have not walked in their ways, nor done their abominations; but soon you were more corrupt than they in all your ways.
- Ezekiel 34:18 Does it seem a small thing to you to have fed on the good pasture, but you must tread down with your feet the residue of your pasture? And to have drunk of the clear waters, but must you foul the residue with your feet?
- Amos 3:13 “Listen, and testify against the house of Jacob,” says the Lord Yahweh, the God of Armies.
- Malachi 2:17 You have wearied Yahweh with your words. Yet you say, ‘How have we wearied him?’ In that you say, ‘Everyone who does evil is good in Yahweh’s sight, and he delights in them;’ or ‘Where is the God of justice?’
- Genesis 30:15 Leah said to her, “Is it a small matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s mandrakes, also?” Rachel said, “Therefore he will lie with you tonight for your son’s mandrakes.”
- Numbers 16:9 Is it a small thing to you that the God of Israel has separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to himself, to do the service of Yahweh’s tabernacle, and to stand before the congregation to minister to them;
- Numbers 16:13 Is it a small thing that you have brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey, to kill us in the wilderness, but you must also make yourself a prince over us?
- 2 Chronicles 21:7 However Yahweh would not destroy David’s house, because of the covenant that he had made with David, and as he promised to give a lamp to him and to his children always.
- 2 Chronicles 36:15-16 Yahweh, the God of their fathers, sent to them by his messengers, rising up early and sending, because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place; but they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and scoffed at his prophets, until Yahweh’s wrath arose against his people, until there was no remedy.
- Isaiah 1:24 Therefore the Lord, Yahweh of Armies, the Mighty One of Israel, says: “Ah, I will get relief from my adversaries, and avenge myself on my enemies.
- Isaiah 25:1 Yahweh, you are my God. I will exalt you! I will praise your name, for you have done wonderful things, things planned long ago, in complete faithfulness and truth.
- Isaiah 65:3-5 a people who provoke me to my face continually, sacrificing in gardens, and burning incense on bricks; who sit among the graves, and spend nights in secret places; who eat pig’s meat, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels; who say, ‘Stay by yourself, don’t come near to me, for I am holier than you.’ These are smoke in my nose, a fire that burns all day.
- Jeremiah 6:11 Therefore I am full of Yahweh’s wrath. I am weary with holding it in. “Pour it out on the children in the street, and on the assembly of young men together; for even the husband with the wife will be taken, the aged with him who is full of days.
- Jeremiah 21:12 House of David, Yahweh says, ‘Execute justice in the morning, and deliver him who is robbed out of the hand of the oppressor, lest my wrath go out like fire, and burn so that no one can quench it, because of the evil of your doings.
- Ezekiel 16:20 “ ‘ “Moreover you have taken your sons and your daughters, whom you have borne to me, and you have sacrificed these to them to be devoured. Was your prostitution a small matter,
- Hebrews 3:10 Therefore I was displeased with that generation, and said, ‘They always err in their heart, but they didn’t know my ways.’
- Luke 1:69 and has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David
- Acts 7:51 “You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit! As your fathers did, so you do.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (17 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain You think you have to do with men, when…
You think you have to do with men, when ye contemn God’s messengers: but it is God against whom you bend yourselves.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Isa 7:13 And he said, Hear ye now, O…
Isa 7:13 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?
Ver. 13. Hear ye now, O house of David.] But shamefully degenerate from your thrice worthy progenitors, and strangely forgetful of God’s promises for a perpetual succession; which if ye remembered and believed, ye would not be so causelessly terrified.
Read full note →
Is it a small thing for you.] How heartily angry is the prophet, how blessedly blown up in this case to so great dishonour done to God! We should be so too.
To weary men.] To vex and molest. The Septuagint have it, "to strive," or "wrestle {a} a fall with men." By men he meaneth himself and his fellow prophets, whom Ahaz and his courtiers slighted and misused. Let this comfort God’s faithful ministers under the world’s indignities and injuries. See Mat 5:11-12.
But will ye weary, my God?] Whom I serve in my spirit, and now no more thy God {b} {as Isa 7:11} since thou hast refused to be ruled by him; and that after manifest conviction and greatest importunity to bring thee to a better temper.
{a} Agonem redditis.
{b} Non autem tuum, O rex Ahase. - Piscat.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain House of David; of which see above, Isa 7:2.…
House of David; of which see above, Isa 7:2. He reproveth them all, because they were the king’s counsellors, and promoted the design of sending for the Assyrian succours.
Is it a small thing for you? is not that wickedness more than enough? must you add more to it?
Read full note →
To weary men; to vex God’s prophets and people, and the generality of your subjects, with your oppressions and horrid impieties.
Will ye weary my God also, 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 Exo 16:8.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain And he said,.... That is, the Prophet Isaiah; which…
And he said,.... That is, the Prophet Isaiah; which shows that it was by him the Lord spoke the foregoing words:
hear ye now, O house of David; for not only Ahaz, but his family, courtiers, and counsellors, were all of the same mind with him, not to ask a sign of God, nor to depend upon, his promise of safety, but to seek out for help, and provide against the worst themselves. Some think that Ahaz's name is not mentioned, and that this phrase is used by way of contempt, and as expressive of indignation and resentment:
Read full note →
is it a small thing for you to weary man; meaning such as himself, the prophets of the Lord; so the Targum,
"is it a small thing that ye are troublesome to the prophets;''
disturb, grieve, and vex them, by obstinacy and unbelief:
but will ye weary my God also? the Targum is,
"for ye are troublesome to the words of my God;''
or injurious to them, by not believing them; or to God himself, by rejecting such an offer of a sign as was made to them.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain David - He reproves them all, because they were…
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.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain Isa 7:13-14. And he said, Hear now, O house…
Isa 7:13-14. And he said, Hear now, O house of David — The prophet no longer addresses himself to Ahaz singly, who would not regard his words, but to the whole royal family, all of whom he reproves, as being the king’s counsellors, and promoting the design of sending for the Assyrian succours. Is it a small thing for you — Is it not wickedness enough; to weary men? — To vex God’s prophets and people with your oppressions and horrid impieties? But will ye weary my God also? — By your ingratitude, unbelief, and disobedience to his commands? Therefore — Because you despise me, and the sign which I now offer you, God, of his own free grace, will send you a more honourable messenger, and give you a nobler sign. Or, Nevertheless, (as the particle לכןoften signifies,) the Lord will give you a sign — Although you deserve no sign nor favour, yet for the comfort of those few believers who are among you, and to leave you without excuse, I shall remind you of another and greater sign, namely, of your deliverance and preservation; which God hath promised, and will in his due time perform. Behold, a virgin shall conceive, &c. — One, in the strictest sense, a virgin, as the Hebrew word, עלמה, almah, here used, properly signifies, and is translated by all the ancient interpreters, being never once used in Scripture in any other sense, as several learned men have proved, against the pretensions of the modern Jews. See particularly Bishop Kidder’s Demonstration of the Messias, part 2. chap. 5., and Dr. Whitby on Mat 1:23. Indeed, independent of the term rendered virgin, the text implies it. For, as the last-mentioned writer observes, “this promise is made as a sign, or miracle, to confirm the house of David in God’s promise made to him of the perpetuity of his kingdom. Now what sign or miracle could it be, that a woman should be with child, after the ordinary manner? Where is the sign or wonder in this? Had no more been intended, what need was there of these words, The Lord himself shall give you a sign? What need of that solemn notice, Behold! there being nothing new or strange in all this.” Add to this, that the original expressions are very emphatical, and are literally rendered by Bishop Lowth, Behold, the virgin conceiveth, and beareth a son, namely, that only woman, who ever was, or should be a mother, while she was still a virgin: and whose offspring, being conceived and born without the concurrence of man, was, therefore, with peculiar propriety, denominated and characterized, the seed of the woman, being her seed exclusively.
But it is inquired, how this birth from a virgin, which was not to happen till many ages after, could be a sign to Ahaz and the Jews, of their deliverance from present danger; and it is urged, that “this promise, being made to Ahaz as a sign, must have relation to a child born in his time, and therefore not to our Jesus, born above seven hundred years after his death.” To this, Dr. Whitby answers, “This objection is founded on a mistake: this promise, or sign, being not given to Ahaz, who, we have just seen, refused to ask a sign; but to the house of David, according to Isa 7:13. Now the house of David being then in great danger of being cut off and extinguished, by the kings of Israel and Syria, the promise of a Messiah, who was to be of the seed of David, and to sit upon his throne, was a great security that that house should not be extinguished, and so was a proper remedy against those fears.” To this may be added, that this promised birth of the Messiah supposed not only the preservation of the house of David, but also the preservation of that city, and nation, and tribe, in and of which he was to be born: therefore there was no cause to fear that ruin which their enemies now threatened. This argument is greatly strengthened by the following clause: And shall call — That is, his virgin mother shall call; his name Immanuel — The mother usually giving the name to the child, and this mother having a peculiar right to do it, the child having no human father. To be called, in Scripture language, is the same thing as to be: the meaning is, He shall be Immanuel, that is, God with us; God dwelling among us in our nature, the Word made flesh, Joh 1:14. God and man meeting in one person, and being a mediator between God and men. Now to whom but the Messiah was this applicable? Or waiving the import of the name; supposing the being called by this name did not imply that the child or person should be what his name signified, namely God with us, what other person, save the Messiah can be pointed out, that was called by this name? To what other event can this passage of the prophecy be made to accord? What woman, then a virgin, and afterward marrying, and bearing a son, called that son Immanuel? Surely they who contend for this sense of the prophet’s words, should point out the person so called. None have done this, and none can do it. No such person ever existed. As to what some have suggested, that Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz, might be meant, and be said to be called by that name, because he was the future governor of the land, (see chap. 8:8,) and God was with him, it must be observed, that he was born at least nine years before this prophecy was delivered, even before Ahaz came to the throne, and therefore his birth could not be intended by the prophet here. But not to pursue the argument further, which certainly is not necessary in so clear a case; we will only add, that even if it could be supposed that the prophet did first and immediately refer to some child to be then born, yet, as Bishop Lowth observes, (in words hardly consistent with what he had said, as quoted above, of the primary sense of the passage,) “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. 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.”
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain O house of David - Isa 7:2. By this…
O house of David - Isa 7:2. By this is to be understood not only the king himself, but the princes and rulers. Perhaps in addressing him thus, there was implied no small irony and reproach. David confided in God. But “Ahaz,” his descendant, feared to “tempt” God! As if God could not aid him! Worthy descendant he of the pious and devoted David!
Is it a small thing - You are not satisfied with wearying people, but you would also fatigue and wear out the patience of God.
Read full note →
Weary - Exhaust their patience; oppose them; prevent their sayings and messages; try their spirits, etc.
Men - prophets; the men who are sent to instruct, and admonish.
Will ye weary my God also? - Will you refuse to keep his commands; try his patience; and exhaust his long-suffering? compare Isa 1:14. The sense of this passage seems to be this: When Ahaz refused to believe the bare prediction of the prophet, his transgression was the more excusable. He had wearied and provoked him, but Isaiah had as yet given to Ahaz no direct demonstration that he was from God; no outward proof of his divine mission; and the offence of Ahaz might be regarded as in a sense committed against man. It was true, also, that Ahaz had, by his unbelief and idolatry, greatly tried the feelings of the pious, and wearied those who were endeavoring to promote true religion. But now the case was changed. God had offered a sign, and it had been publicly rejected. It was a direct insult to God; and an offence that demanded reproof. Accordingly, the manner of Isaiah is at once changed. Soft, and gentle, and mild before, he now became bold, open, vehement. The honor of God was concerned; a direct affront had been offered to him by the sovereign of the people of God; and it was proper for the prophet to show that “that” was an offence which affected the Divine Majesty, and demanded the severest reproof.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain
CHAPTER VII.
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain Is it a small thing?--Is it not enough for…
Is it a small thing?--Is it not enough for you (Num 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.
Read full note →
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.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 13. O house of David — Wearied, truly, with…
13. O house of David — Wearied, truly, with Ahaz’s contemptuous trifling, the prophet turns from him personally, as if too far gone for further hope or notice, and addresses himself to the “house of David.” See note on Isa_7:2. The sign now to be given is not to be given to Ahaz individually, nor to him at all, except as he is part of the “house of David,” the royal stock extending to the Messiah, the Messianic kindred. And inferentially it is given for the consolation of all the faithful in Judah.
Weary men — Poor mortals like Isaiah and his adherents.
Read full note →
My God also — In Isa_7:11 the prophet had explicitly, to Ahaz, styled Jehovah “thy God,” as a reminder of his allegiance to him; he now, as it were, retracts, and styles him exclusively “my God.”
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 13. Speaking under the deepest excitement, the prophet proceeds…
13. Speaking under the deepest excitement, the prophet proceeds to unfold the consequences of such impenetrable hardness of heart.
Is it a small thing for you …] Trans. Is it too little for you to weary men (i.e. the prophet himself) that ye weary, &c. The house of David is addressed, perhaps because Isaiah had already experienced rebuffs from the royal princes, although none was so direct a defiance of God as this of Ahaz. my God] cf. thy God in Isa_7:11. Ahaz has practically renounced the religion of Jehovah.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (13) Is it a small thing for you to…
(13) Is it a small thing for you to weary men . . .—The thought that men may try the long-suffering of God till He is “weary to bear them,” is specially characteristic of Isaiah (Isa_1:14). We mark the changed note of “my God,” as compared with “the Lord thy God” in Isa_7:11. Ahaz has involved himself in a sentence of rejection. In the first part of the question Isaiah becomes the mouthpiece of a wide-spread hopeless discontent. Men also were ‘weary’ of this idolatrous and corrupt misgovernment (Isa_8:6).
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain O house of David (comp. ver. 2). It is…
O house of David (comp. ver. 2). It is not Ahaz alone, but the "house of David," which is on its trial. Men are conspiring to remove it (ver. 6). If it will not be saved in God"s way, it will have to be removed by God himself. Is it a small thing for you to weary men? i.e. "Are you not content with wearying men; with disregarding all my warnings and so wearying me? Must you go further, and weary God" (or, "wear out his patience") "by rejecting his gracious offers?" My God. In ver. 11 Isaiah had called Jehovah "thy God;" but as Ahaz, by rejecting God"s offer, had rejected God, he speaks of him now as "my God."
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain Is it a small thing for you to weary…
Isa_7:13
Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary thy God also?
Read full note →
--
Wearying God
The work and experience of the prophet and the Gospel minister in dealing with men are similar.
I. IT IS NO SMALL SIN TO WEARY GODS PROPHETS AND PREACHERS. They are His ambassadors.
II. IT IS INFINITELY WORSE TO WEARY GOD, whose hand holds their life and destiny. God is patient. This is evident from Scripture and observation. Exo_34:6-7; 2Pe_3:9.) Consider also the history of nations and individuals and of our own life.
III. GODS PATIENCE MAY BE WEARIED OUT by indifference, obstinacy, procrastination, backsliding. The sinner is in present danger of doing this. Others have done it in Scripture and history. Application--The axe is laid at the root of the tree; make haste to repent. (Homiletic Review.)
Wearying God
Ahaz refused to ask a sign, probably wishing to avoid as much as possible further intercourse with Isaiah, who, he feared, would reprove him for his vices and idolatry.
1. That which seems specially to have wearied God in the instance of Ahaz was, the sinning yet more in a season of distress.
2. There is a likelihood that his offence may be copied, and that, too, not merely in the general, but even in minute particulars. God became wearied by a repetition of the sin when He had tried by calamities to produce its abandonment. It does not seem that there was ever the least pause in his wickedness. God smote him, but he went on frowardly. (H. Melvill, B. D.)
Wearying God
The house of David weary the long suffering of God by letting Him exhaust all the means of their correction without effect. (F. Delitzsch.)
Wearying God
1. The great God is pleased to consider the indignities and injuries done to His servants as done to Himself.
2. Beware then of wearying God by refusing to comply with the administrations and offers He gives you by His servants; but now, while it is called today, hearken to His voice and obey His call. (R. Macculloch.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain Isa_7:13. Will ye weary my God also?
TRIALS OF THE DIVINE PATIENCE
Isa_7:13. Will ye weary my God also?
Read full note →
In this chapter we are told under what circumstances this question came to be asked. An astonishing assumption underlies it, viz., that anything can be a weariness to God, that anything can be a trial of the Divine patience. Let us think of this.
I. It is a wonderful and glorious thing that there is a Divine patience to be tried. This is a distinctively Biblical idea. Uninstructed by the Scriptures, men naturally think of God as doing as He pleases and when He pleases,—His pleasure being always a selfish one; a Divinity of Power who permits nothing to arrest or delay His purposes, crushing every obstacle as an express train dashes through or over a flock of sheep that has strayed on to its track. Or if men seem with impunity for a time to disregard or defy Him, this is only because He is indifferent to them, caring nothing what they do, because He knows that whensoever He pleases He can destroy them. But in this Book we are taught to think of Him as profoundly interested in what men do, as grieved and provoked by what they do, and as not merely resisting the impulse to destroy them, but as feeling no such impulse; as longing over them with yearning desire that they would, by repentance and reformation, render it possible for Him righteously to abstain from dealing with them according to their deserts. The forbearance of God is a conception which we find only in this book, and that should excite our wonder, our thankfulness, our love. This forbearance of God—this marvellous Divine patience with sinful men—what is its secret and explanation? It is the love which God has for us. Love is slow to strike [799]
[799] H. E. I. 2295.
II. It is a sad and terrible thing that the Divine patience should be tried. There are some offences that are horrible, because they outrage even our imperfect sense of what is fitting, e.g., to falsely direct a blind man, so that he shall fall over a precipice; to kill a hunted creature that has fled to us for protection. But of all these outrages, the vilest are sins against love. This is the supremely loathsome thing in seduction, that it is a sin against uninstructed but trustful love. Our whole soul rises in disgust against the brutal wretch who smites to the earth the mother who bore and nursed him. But when we think of what God is, as He is presented to us in Scripture, we see that that heedlessness to His appeals, and warnings, and entreaties, of which we are apt to think so little, is really a horrible offence, because it is a sin against a love the depth and tenderness of which is but faintly imaged forth to us by the purest and most fervent human affection. Persistence in wrongdoing—we see its hatefulness even when it is maintained in spite of human love: the prodigal hardening himself against his mother’s entreaties to reform. But what must we say of it as maintained against the entreaties of a love that is more sensitive than any mother’s, and that it is rendered so wonderful by the fact that it is associated with a power that could instantly destroy? It is so startling and so horrible that it ought to be impossible. But—
III. The Divine patience is often tried. Sins against it are common. In this respect Ahaz does not stand alone. Men commit such sins without compunction. Have we not done so? With what contempt and indifference we have treated God’s expostulations with us! We have deferred the duty of repentance. Why? Very much because we know that God is patient, and will not be swift to take vengeance upon us. We have practised on His forbearance, and thus have been guilty of the basest crime that is possible; we have deliberately sinned against love. Yet we are not troubled; so possible is it to drug conscience; so delusive is peace of conscience in the impenitent. But let us look at our conduct as God must regard it, as any reasonable and holy intelligence must regard it, and let us humble ourselves before Him against whom we have sinned so basely [802]
[802] H. E. I. 2350.
Where men are bent upon wrong, there is always a strong tendency to elect a character of God that is not very just, but that is very kind—so kind that behind it they may gain some security in their wrong course. And when God’s long-suffering and patience are opened up to men they often say, “Well, if God is a being that is tender and loving, I need not be in a hurry to leave off my evil ways. He will bear with me a little longer, and I do not believe that He will account with me for my petty transgressions.” Men deliberately employ God’s mercy and goodness to violate His feelings.… That is infernal; it is inhuman, because kindness seems to lay almost every man under a debt of gratitude. A dog, even, feels itself laid under a debt of gratitude by kindness. It is only men who are corrupted that would ever think of making goodness, and kindness, and generosity towards them the ground on which to base a violation of these qualities. And yet hundreds say, “God is good, and we will go on a little while longer in sin.” Yes, He is infinitely good. He has been patient with you; He has longed for you; He has sent ten thousand invisible mercies to you, besides those visible mercies he has showered upon you; He has been long-suffering and forgiving; He has sunk in the depths of the sea thrice ten thousands of transgressions; He did it yesterday, He is doing it to-day, and He will do it to-morrow; and shall you argue with yourself that because God is so good you will go on and insult Him, and wound Him, and injure Him? Or shall the goodness of God lead you to repentance and newness of life? I beseech of you, for the sake of honour and manhood, do not tread upon God’s goodness, and generosity, and magnanimity to offend Him more.—Beecher.
IV. Those who tire out the Divine patience shall find themselves righteously confronted by the Divine justice [805] God will not be permanently mocked. He would be unworthy of His position if He permitted sin to go unpunished [808] What the punishment of sin is we do not know, because we are now living in an economy in which justice is tempered by mercy. Yet in the calamities and unspeakable woes that here and now befall obdurate transgressors, we have some faint intimation of what will be their doom when, having rejected mercy, they find themselves given over to the unmitigated rigours of justice. Of these things God has spoken, because He would save us from them. All the threatenings of Scripture are merciful warnings [811] Let us give heed to them, and return to Him who has declared with equal clearness and emphasis that He will by no means clear the guilty, and that He has no delight in the death of the sinner [814]
[805] H. E. I. 2296–2301, 2349.
[808] H. E. I. 2316, 2317.
[811] H. E. I. 604, 605.
[814] H. E. I. 2283, 2284.
THE VIRGIN’S SON
Isa_7:13-16. And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David, &c.
On this supremely difficult passage Dr. Kennicott preached a remarkable sermon before the University of Oxford, on the 19th of May 1765. As this sermon is not readily accessible, I here give some extracts from it.
Concerning these words there have been the four following opinions:—
I. That the whole passage relates only to a son of Isaiah.
II. That the whole passage relates only to CHRIST.
III. That the whole passage relates both to Isaiah’s son and to CHRIST; to the former in a primary and literal sense, and in a secondary sense to the latter.
IV. That there are here two prophecies, each literal, and each to be understood in one sense only: the first relating to CHRIST, the second to Isaiah’s son.
The first of these opinions is strenuously contended for by Jews and Deists, who, by confining this passage wholly to Isaiah’s son, have attempted to derogate from the authority of St. Matthew, who applies it as a prophecy to CHRIST. But the word here translated virgin signifies, in every other part of the Old Testament, a woman who hath not known man. And the consequence from hence is, that the words “a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,” cannot be applied properly to Isaiah’s wife. As it is here affirmed that the original word signifies a virgin in every other text, it should be just observed that the text in the book of Proverbs (Isa_30:18-19), which has been often brought to prove the contrary, is not here forgotten; and that even that text might (if the nature of this discourse would permit) be explained fairly and to satisfaction, in a manner perfectly consistent with the preceding assertion.
If it should be objected, that the original words are not future, and therefore not likely to point out an event so very distant as the birth of CHRIST, it may be answered that the words are, strictly translated, “Behold! a virgin is conceiving and bearing a son,” &c. This mode of speech is the animated but customary style of prophetic Scripture, which, in order to express the greatest certainty, describes future events as past, or paints future scenes as present to the eye. Thus the same prophet, in his most magnificent predictions of the Messiah’s birth, exultingly cries, “Unto us a child is BORN, unto us a son IS GIVEN:” and afterwards, in his pathetic description of the Messiah’s sufferings, “He is despised and rejected of men.… Surely He HATH BORNE our griefs,” &c. But though no argument can be drawn against the Christian sense of these prophetic words from their expressing the then present time, yet an argument of great weight may, and must be, formed upon this very circumstance, in proof of what is here contended for. And certainly, if the words mean “a virgin is conceiving,” a woman conceiving and yet a virgin! this wonderful circumstance was true as to the Virgin Mary, but it was true as to no other woman.
To these remarks upon the original language must be added one arising from the circumstances of the text, for we learn from thence likewise that Isaiah’s wife and the birth of a child in the common way cannot have been here intended. And an appeal may safely be made to persons of sense, though wholly unacquainted with the Hebrew language, whether it is at all probable that the prophet should address himself to the house of David so solemnly, on so interesting an occasion; should awaken their attention; should raise their wonder; should promise them in the name of GOD a sign or miracle; should mention the future son, not of a man (as usual) but of a woman, and call that woman a virgin; and should foretell the Birth of IMMANUEL, i.e., GOD WITH US—and yet that no more was meant by all this than that a son should be born of a young married woman, which is evidently no wonder, no miracle, at all.
If then, from the constant signification of the noun for virgin, from the expression of the words in the present tense, and from the nature of the context, a son of Isaiah by his wife cannot have been here meant; and if the first opinion be consequently proved indefensible, we may now proceed to consider the second, which is that the whole passage of the text relates only to CHRIST.
But these words cannot be wholly applied to an event distant by more than seven hundred years, because the concluding clause speaks of a child either then born, or to be born soon; and before the child so spoken of should be old enough to distinguish natural good from evil, the two kings then advancing against Jerusalem were to be themselves destroyed.
The third is the opinion of those who contend for a double completion of some prophecies, and insist that this whole passage relates both to Isaiah’s son and to CHRIST; to the former in a primary and literal sense, and in a secondary sense to the latter. But—not to enter into that extensive question, whether though some prophecies relate solely to the Messiah, others may, or may not, be doubly fulfilled—I shall only observe, that no such double completion can possibly take place here.
Wherever a secondary sense is insisted on, there we must have a primary sense also which is at least true. But the present case renders that impossible. Because, if the principal noun does everywhere else signify a virgin; and if it be here meant of the Virgin Mary, and was afterwards properly applied to her, it cannot with any truth be applied to the wife of Isaiah. And further, if it were possible for every other prophecy to admit of a double completion, yet will not this—because a child’s being conceived and born of a virgin happened in the world only once; and therefore, as this prophecy derives its force from specifying a case singular and without example, it can be fulfilled in one sense only.
There remains then the fourth opinion, which is, that the text contains two distinct prophecies, each literal, and each to be understood in one sense only; the first relating to CHRIST, the second to Isaiah’s son. This, which is the opinion of some eminent defenders of Christianity, will (I presume) appear true and satisfactory, when the end of the first prophecy, and the beginning of the second, shall have been properly considered; and when some proofs which seem absolutely necessary, but perhaps were never yet produced, shall have been added to former observations.
The genuine sense of this passage depending greatly on the circumstances of those to whom it was delivered, it is here necessary to state the history.
Ahaz became king of Judah when the people were greatly corrupted, and he himself was strongly inclined to idolatry. To correct, therefore, both king and people, God permitted a powerful confederacy to take place between Rezin, king of Syria, and Pekah, king of Israel; who, growing jealous of their formidable neighbour, invaded Judæa in the first year of Ahaz; and so successfully, that above 100,000 of the men of Ahaz were slain in one battle, and above 200,000 of his people were carried captives into the land of Israel.
Flushed with these successes, the two kings thought that Jerusalem itself would soon become an easy prey to their power; and in the second year of Ahaz marched towards it, with a resolution totally to abolish the royal succession, which had been for twelve generations in the house of David, and to establish, in the holy city, a heathen king, a Syrian, “the son of Tabeal.”
At the approach of these confederates, “the heart of Ahaz was moved, and the hearts of all his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind.” The consternation was universal, and no wonder. For the young king and the corrupt part of his people would easily be led, from the sufferings they had felt, to fear greater. And the religious part of the nation would entertain fears still more alarming, fears of the extinction of the house of David; for were that house to fail, then farewell to all their glorious hopes of a Messiah, a son of David, who was to reign for ever. These men, therefore, no doubt, “cried unto the Lord in their distresses,” and expostulated with Him concerning “the sure mercies of David:” “Lord, where are Thy old lovingkindnesses, which Thou swarest unto David in Thy truth?”
Amidst these distresses, we find Ahaz “at the end of the conduit of the upper pool,” probably surveying that chief source of their water, and contriving how to secure that water to the city, and defend it against the enemy. At this place, constantly frequented by the people, and then visited by the king, attended probably by the chiefs of his family, Isaiah is commanded to meet him, taking with him Shear-jashub, and to declare in the name of Jehovah, that the evil counsel against Jerusalem should not come to pass.
The counsel of these kings was evil, because, in opposition to God’s appointment of the royal house of David, and His promises thereto (particularly of Messiah, the Prince, to spring from thence), their compact was, probably, like Eastern conquerors, to destroy the house of David; certainly, to remove the house of David from the throne, and to fix in the holy city a heathen king.
The prophet, having declared to Ahaz that the scheme of the confederates should be frustrated, bids him, at the command of God, ask some sign or miracle, either in heaven or on earth. “But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt Jehovah.”
The king’s disobedience, however coloured over with a specious piety in his allusion to a text of Scripture, appears from the next words of the prophet to have been highly censurable. And it probably proceeded from his distrust either of the power or the favour of Jehovah, after Judæa had suffered so much from these same enemies who worshipped other gods.
Thus repulsed by the king, the prophet addresses himself at large to “the house of David;” and probably there were then present other persons of the royal family. “Hear ye now, O house of David,” &c.
The word “Therefore” (Isa_7:14) may, upon good authority, be translated “nevertheless,” a sense very applicable to this place. A sign or miracle hath been now offered at the command of God, but is refused; and can you think it of little moment to treat with such contempt both the prophet and his God? “Nevertheless, the Lord Himself will give to you the sign following: Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and call His name IMMANUEL. Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.”
Here, I presume, ends this first prophecy, and the meaning may be stated thus: “Fear not, O house of David, the fate threatened you. God is mindful of His promise to your father, and will fulfil it in a very wonderful manner. Behold, a virgin (rather, THE virgin, the only one thus circumstanced) shall conceive, and bear a son; which son shall therefore be what no other has been or shall be, the seed of the woman, here styled THE VIRGIN; and this son ‘shall be called’ (i.e., in Scripture language, He shall be) IMMANUEL, God with us. But this great Person, this GOD visible amongst men, introduced into the world thus, in a manner that is without example, shall yet be truly Man: He shall be born an infant, and as an infant shall He be brought up; for ‘butter and honey’ (rather, milk and honey) shall He eat,—He shall be fed with the common food of infants, which in the East was milk mixed with honey, till He shall know (not that He may know, as if such food were to be the cause of such knowledge, but till He shall grow up to know) how to refuse the evil and choose the good.”
Here, then, we find a comprehensive description of the Messiah, of the “Word who was made flesh and dwelt among us.” His Divinity is marked by His being GOD; His residence upon earth, by His being GOD WITH US; and His Humanity, by His being born of a woman, and fed with the usual food of infants during His infant state. How perfect is the harmony between the parts of this description and the marks of the true Messiah in other sacred passages; and also between the first prophecy in the very beginning of the Old Testament and the completion of it, first mentioned in the very beginning of the New!
For the first promise of a Messiah was, that He should be (not the seed of Adam, as He would have been called, if to descend from a human father, but) “the seed of the woman,” because He was to be born of a virgin. Therefore, the Apostle says, “When the fulness of time came, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman.” And that it was GOD, not man, who was to “prepare a body” for the Messiah, appears from the fortieth Psalm, according to the Apostle’s very remarkable quotation of it, where the Messiah is prophetically represented as saying unto God: “A body didst Thou prepare for Me; then said I, Lo, I come; as in the volume of the Book it is written concerning Me.”
Having thus endeavoured to illustrate the first prophecy contained in the text, and to defend the application of it to the Virgin Mary’s conception and birth of Jesus Christ, I shall now briefly state the second prophecy, which is thus expressed in our present translation, “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.”
Now, that this verse contains a distinct prophecy may be proved thus—
1. The words preceding have been proved to be confined to the Messiah, whose birth was then distant above seven hundred years; whereas, the words here are confined to some child who was not to arrive at years of discretion before the two kings, then advancing against Jerusalem, should be themselves cut off.
2. Some end was undoubtedly to be answered by the presence of Isaiah’s son, whom God commanded to take with him on this visit to Ahaz: and yet no use at all appears to have been made of this son, unless he be referred to here.
3. These prophecies are manifestly distinguished by their being addressed to different persons: the first being plural, and addressed to the house of David; but the second is singular, and therefore is addressed to Ahaz.
We see, then, that the prophet addressed himself at large to the “house of David,” when he foretold the birth of the Messiah; which, though the event might be very distant, would give present consolation, as it assured them of the preservation of the house of David; but that he addressed himself in particular to the king, when he foretold the speedy destruction of the two kings, his enemies. Note also, that King Ahaz is the person addressed in the very words which immediately follow, “The Lord shall bring upon thee and upon thy people, and upon thy father’s house, days.” &c.
This transition will be the more evident if we render the first word But, as the same word is rendered just before in this same passage: “Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also?” It is so rendered in this very place in our old English Bibles, printed in 1535, 1537, 1539, 1549, 1550.
The word also now rendered “the child,” should be here rendered “THIS child;” and the sense of the verse may be then clearly ascertained.
The necessity for this last rendering has been observed by more than one expositor, but perhaps no one has quoted any parallel instance, or produced proper authority for this necessary change of our translation. But, that we may not be charged with offering violence to an expression, in order to defend the Evangelists or to confute their adversaries, some authority should be produced in a point on which so much depends, and I shall mention several passages similar to the case now before us.
When Jacob blessed Joseph’s two sons, he laid his hands upon their heads, and used the very same word in the plural number which Isaiah here uses in the singular; and as that word is rendered “these children” by the authors of the Greek and other very ancient versions, we have their joint authorities for rendering the word here “this child.”
The authors of our own translation have not indeed rendered the word in the text “this child,” but they have shown that it may be so rendered, because they have themselves, in several other places, expressed the emphatic article by this and that in the singular number, and by these in the plural. Thus in Jer_23:21, “I have not sent these prophets;” in Num_11:6, “There is nothing before our eyes, but this manna;” in 1Sa_29:4, “Make this fellow to return;” and, to omit other instances, we read in Jer_28:16 (what it is impossible to translate otherwise), “This year thou shalt die.”
But besides these instances, in which similar words may and must be so rendered, agreeably to our present translation, in this same verse of Isaiah there is the authority of our old English translation for both the alterations here proposed; for the very first printed edition, and at least two others, render these words, “But or ever that child,” &c. And, to obviate any prejudice against the other alteration before proposed, it should be observed that, so far from their being now first thought of to favour any new opinions, almost all of them are the very readings in our former English Bibles, from which our present has varied in this and other instances very improperly.
The translation of the principal word here by this child being thus vindicated, it may perhaps be asked who this child was, and the answer is, A son of Isaiah, called Shear-jashub, whom God had commanded the prophet to take with him upon this occasion, but of whom no use was made, unless in the application of these words;—whom Isaiah might now hold in his arm, and to whom therefore he might point with his hand when he addressed himself to Ahaz, and said, “But before this child shall grow up to discern good from evil, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.” There is an absolute necessity of attending to this action in several other sacred passages, as in Joh_2:18-19. “What sign showest Thou?… Destroy this temple;” our Lord there pointing to His own body.
The child’s name is evidently prophetical, for it signifies a remnant, or the remainder, shall return. And probably he was so called because born the year before, when such multitudes were carried captives into the land of Israel; and this by way of prediction to the Jews that, though they had lost 100,000 men by the sword in one day, and double that number by captivity, yet those who remained alive—the remnant—certainly should return to their own country.
This prophecy was soon after fulfilled. And therefore this son, whose name had been so consolatory the year before, was with the utmost propriety brought forth now, and made the subject of a second prophecy—namely, that before that child, then in the second year of his age, should be able to distinguish natural good from evil—before he should be about four or five years old—the lands of Syria and Israel, spoken of here as one kingdom, on account of their present union and confederacy, should be “forsaken of both her kings:” which, though at the time highly improbable, came to pass about two years afterwards, when those two kings, who had in vain attempted to conquer Jerusalem, were themselves destroyed, each in his own country.
“If the miraculous birth of Christ were true, yet how could an event so very distant be properly a sign, at the time when the prophecy was delivered?”
To this natural and important question, Dr. Kennicott answers:—
The original word for a sign means also a miracle. And as God had offered Ahaz a miracle to be then performed, which had been refused, God Himself promises to the house of David a miracle which should be performed, not then, but afterwards. But the word signifies, not only something done at present, to induce a belief of something future, but also something to be done afterwards, declared beforehand in confirmation of something foretold.
Thus, when God commanded Moses to go from the wilderness into Egypt, to demand the dismission of his brethren, God assures him of success, and tells him: “This shall be a sign unto thee; when thou hast brought forth the people, ye shall serve God upon this mountain.”
And thus, when the Assyrians were marching against Jerusalem in the days of Hezekiah, Isaiah is again commanded to declare that the city shall not be taken; and after saying, “This shall be a sign unto you,” he specifies several particulars which were all future [817]
[817] Compare also our Lord’s treatment of the demand for a sign, Mat_12:38-40. In this case also, to unbelievers, was given a “sign” which they could not possibly have understood when it was given.
If then a thing, at all future, may be declared as a sign, it makes no difference whether the thing be future by three years or three hundred, provided that one circumstance he observed—which is, that the man, or body of men, to whom the fact is declared to be a sign shall exist to see the thing accomplished. This was manifestly the case here. For not only Ahaz, to whom the second prophecy was delivered, saw that fulfilled as to the two kings his enemies, but also the house of David, to whom the first prophecy was addressed, saw that fulfilled in JESUS CHRIST.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain Hear ye now
Hear ye now
The prophecy is not addressed to the faithless Ahaz, but to the whole "house of David." The objection that such a far-off event as the birth of Christ could be no "sign" to Ahaz, is, therefore, puerile. It was a continuing prophecy addressed to the Davidic family, and accounts at once for the instant assent of Mary. Luk 1:38.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 house of David
house of David
The word "house" is a metonym for the family living in the house. See how you translated this in Isaiah 7:2. AT: "King Ahaz, you and your counselors" (See: Metonymy)
Read full note →
Is it not enough for you people to test the patience of people? Must you also test the patience of my God?
These questions emphasize that the king has sinned greatly. AT: "You test the patience of people! Now you even test the patience of my God!" (See: Rhetorical Question)
the young woman will conceive
Some ancient versions and some contemporary versions translate, "the virgin will conceive," while others translate "the young woman will conceive."
his name Immanuel
Translators may add a footnote that says: "The name Immanuel means 'God with us.'" (See: How to Translate Names)
He will eat curds and honey when he knows to refuse the evil and choose the good
Possible meanings are 1) "By the time that child is old enough to eat curds and honey, he will be able to reject what is evil and choose what is good." This emphasizes that the child will be very young when he knows to choose what is right instead of wrong or 2) "By the time the child is old enough to reject what is evil and choose what is good, he will be eating curds and honey." The people of Judah considered a child to be responsible for doing what is right when he was 12 years old. This emphasizes that within twelve years the people will be able to eat much curds and honey because most of the people of Israel will be killed or taken as captives. (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
curds
milk that people have treated to make it into a soft solid
refuse the evil and choose the good
Here "the evil" and "the good" refer to evil and good things in general. AT: "refuse to do evil deeds and choose to do good deeds" (See: Nominal Adjectives)
translationWords
Isaiah
house
David
test
patient
lord
sign
honey
evil
good
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.