When King Hezekiah received the blasphemous message from Rabshakeh, he showed deep distress by tearing his clothes and donning sackcloth before seeking refuge in the temple for prayer. He understood the grave threat posed by the Assyrian army and the dire state of Jerusalem, acknowledging his reliance on God for deliverance rather than on military might or alliances. Ultimately, this event leads to a significant miraculous intervention by God, resulting in the destruction of the Assyrian army and securing Jerusalem's safety.

1. 2 KI GS 19 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
Jerusalem’s Deliverance Foretold
1 When King Hezekiah heard this, he tore his
clothes and put on sackcloth and went into the
temple of the Lord.
BAR ES, "Hezekiah, like his officers, probably rent his clothes on account of Rab-
shakeh’s blasphemies: and he put on sackcloth in self-humiliation and in grief. The only
hope left was in Yahweh, for Egypt could not be trusted to effect anything of importance.
Rab-shakeh’s boldness had told upon Hezekiah. He was dispirited and dejected. He
perhaps began to doubt whether he had done right in yielding to the bolder counsels of
Eliakim and Isaiah. He had not lost his faith in God; but his faith was being severely
tried. He wisely went and strove by prayer to strengthen it.
GILL 1-37, "And it came to pass, when King Hezekiah heard it,.... The report of
Rabshakeh's speech, recorded in the preceding chapter:
that he rent his clothes, and covered himself with sackcloth; rent his clothes
because of the blasphemy in the speech; and he put on sackcloth, in token of mourning,
for the calamities he feared were coming on him and his people: and he went into the
house of the Lord; the temple, to pray unto him. The message he sent to Isaiah, with his
answer, and the threatening letter of the king of Assyria, Hezekiah's prayer upon it, and
the encouraging answer he had from the Lord, with the account of the destruction of the
Assyrian army, and the death of Sennacherib, are the same "verbatim" as in Isa_37:1
throughout; and therefore the reader is referred thither for the exposition of them; only
would add what Rauwolff (t) observes, that still to this day (1575) there are two great
holes to be seen, wherein they flung the dead bodies (of the Assyrian army), one whereof
is close by the road towards Bethlehem, the other towards the right hand against old
Bethel.
HE RY, "The contents of Rabshakeh's speech being brought to Hezekiah, one would
have expected (and it is likely Rabshakeh did expect) that he would call a council of war
and it would be debated whether it was best to capitulate or no. Before the siege, he had
taken counsel with his princes and his mighty men, 2Ch_32:3. But that would not do
now; his greatest relief is that he has a God to go to, and what passed between him and
his God on this occasion we have here an account of.

2. I. Hezekiah discovered a deep concern at the dishonour done to God by Rabshakeh's
blasphemy. When he heard it, though at second hand, he rent his clothes and covered
himself with sackcloth, 2Ki_19:1. Good men were wont to do so when they heard of any
reproach cast on God's name; and great men must not think it any disparagement to
them to sympathize with the injured honour of the great God. Royal robes are not too
good to be rent, nor royal flesh too good to be clothed with sackcloth, in humiliation for
indignities done to God and for the perils and terrors of his Jerusalem. To this God now
called, and was displeased with those who were not thus affected. Isa_22:12-14, Behold
joy and gladness, slaying oxen and killing sheep, though it was a day of trouble and
perplexity in the valley of vision (2Ki_19:5), which refers to this very event. The king
was in sackcloth, but many of his subjects were in soft clothing.
II. He went up to the house of the Lord, according to the example of the psalmist, who,
when he was grieved at the pride and prosperity of the wicked, went into the sanctuary
of God and there understood their end, Psa_73:17. He went to the house of God, to
meditate and pray, and get his spirit into a sedate composed frame, after this agitation.
He was not considering what answer to return to Rabshakeh, but refers the matter to
God. “Thou shalt answer, Lord, for me.” - Herbert. In the house of the Lord he found a
place both of rest and refuge, a treasury, a magazine, a council-chamber, and all he
needed, all in God. Note, When the church's enemies are very daring and threatening it
is the wisdom and duty of the church's friends to apply to God, appeal to him, and leave
their cause with him.
JAMISO , "2Ki_19:1-5. Hezekiah in deep affliction.
when king Hezekiah heard it, he rent his clothes — The rending of his clothes
was a mode of expressing horror at the daring blasphemy - the assumption of sackcloth a
sign of his mental distress - his entrance into the temple to pray the refuge of a pious
man in affliction - and the forwarding an account of the Assyrian’s speech to Isaiah was
to obtain the prophet’s counsel and comfort. The expression in which the message was
conveyed described, by a strong figure, the desperate condition of the kingdom, together
with their own inability to help themselves; and it intimated also a hope, that the
blasphemous defiance of Jehovah’s power by the impious Assyrian might lead to some
direct interposition for the vindication of His honor and supremacy to all heathen gods.
K&D, "When Hezekiah had heard from his counsellors the report of Rabshakeh's
words, he rent his clothes with horror at his daring mockery of the living God (2Ki_
19:4), put on mourning clothes as a sign of the trouble of his soul and went into the
temple, and at the same time sent Eliakim and Shebna with the oldest of the priests in
mourning costume to the prophet Isaiah, to entreat him to intercede with the Lord in
these desperate circumstances.
(Note: “But the most wise king did not meet his blasphemies with weapons, but
with prayer, and tears, and sackcloth, and entreated the prophet Isaiah to be his
ambassador.” - Theodoret.)
The order of the words: Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, is unusual (cf. 2Ki_14:25;
2Ki_20:1; 1Ki_16:7, etc.), and is therefore altered in Isaiah into Isaiah the son of Amoz,
the prophet.

3. BE SO , "2 Kings 19:1. When Hezekiah heard it, he rent his clothes — Good men
were wont to do so, when they heard of any reproach cast on God’s name; and great
men must not think it any disparagement to them to sympathize with the injured
honour of the great God.
COFFMA , "THE DESTRUCTIO OF THE ASSYRIA ARMY BEFORE
JERUSALEM
The gargantuan dimensions of the prodigious miracle described in this chapter
compel its ranking among the most astounding wonders ever performed by
Almighty God upon behalf of his Chosen People. o one can deny that
SOMETHI G happened. As should have been expected, the Assyrians never
mentioned it in their inscriptions and monuments, but Herodotus records, "An
Egyptian tradition that, `The mice ate up the quivers' of Sennacherib's army."[1]
"He also reported that this resulted in causing their flight, and that many died."[2]
Thus, pagan history bears witness that something dreadful indeed overcame the
Assyrian army.
This wonder ranks with the Crossing of the Red Sea and with the victory over
Sisera. As in those two wonders, this one also might have resulted from God's
employment of natural forces in its accomplishment. The bubonic plague, suggested
by the mice mentioned by Herodotus, or a mighty thunderstorm with a great
downpour of killing hail, such as that in one of plagues of Egypt, come to mind as
possibilities. Of course, God did not reveal to us HOW the death angel did it.
Those who do not believe in the supernatural confront a genuine nemesis in this
chapter. There is no other possible explanation of why Sennacherib failed to capture
Jerusalem. Without any doubt whatever, the supernatural deliverance of the city
must be accepted as fact. The subsequent unbounded confidence of the Jewish
people themselves that Jerusalem would never fall was directly derived from that
deliverance.
HEZEKIAH RECEIVED THE REPORT OF THE RABSHAKEH'S DEMA D
"And it came to pass, when Hezekiah heard it, that he rent his clothes, and covered
himself with sackcloth, and went into the house of Jehovah. And he sent Eliakim
who is over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and the elders of the priests,
covered with sackcloth, unto Isaiah the prophet son of Amoz. And they said unto
him, Thus saith Hezekiah, This day is a day of trouble, and of rebuke, and of
contumely; for the children are come to the birth, and there is not strength to bring
forth. It may be Jehovah thy God will hear all the words of Rabshakeh, whom the
king of Assyria his master hath sent to defy the living God, and will rebuke the
words which Jehovah thy God hath heard: wherefore lift up thy prayer for the
remnant that is left."
In his earlier years, Hezekiah had favored an alliance with Egypt, in spite of Isaiah's

4. continual warnings that God alone was the source of Judah's protection, but in the
extremity of this situation, Hezekiah turned to Isaiah. His reference to Jehovah as
"thy God" was not a denial of Hezekiah's faith, but a confession that he had not
been as faithful as had Isaiah.
Although this is the first mention of Isaiah in Kings, we learn from Isaiah himself
that he had prophesied even in the days of Hezekiah's father Ahaz (Isaiah 7:10-17),
but that ruler had despised Isaiah's warnings.
"He rent his clothes and covered himself with sackcloth" (2 Kings 19:1). "He well
knew how largely he himself had been responsible for the terrible situation."[3]
"The children are come to birth, and there is not strength to bring forth" (2 Kings
19:3). "This was a common proverb that meant a dangerous crisis was approaching,
and that the nation has no strength to carry it through the peril."[4]
"Lift up thy prayer for the remnant that is left" (2 Kings 19:4). There are two
things that Hezekiah might have meant here: (1) Sennacherib had already captured
and destroyed 46 cities of Judah; and in one sense, Jerusalem itself was a remnant
(though hardly a righteous remnant). (2) Isaiah had long prophesied the destruction
of Judah with the proviso that afterward "a remnant" would return. As an
authentication of that prophecy, Isaiah even named one of his sons Shear-Jashub,
with the meaning, "a remnant shall return."[5] That event had taken place more
than thirty years earlier in the times of Ahaz. Hezekiah might have had that fact in
mind also.
Isaiah did not need to be invited to pray for Jerusalem; he had already been doing
so, and was ready with encouragement.
EBC, "THE GREAT DELIVERA CE
B.C. 701
2 Kings 19:1-37
"There brake He the arrows of the bow, the shield, the sword, and the battle."
- Psalms 76:3.
"And the might of the Gentile, unsmote by the sword Hath melted like snow at the
glance of the Lord."
- BYRO .
"Vuolsi cosi cola dove si puote Cio che si vuole: e piu non dimandare."

5. - DA TE.
"Through love, through hope, through faith’s transcendent dower, We feel that we
are greater than we know."
- WORDSWORTH.
"God shall help her, and that when the morning dawns."
Psalms 46:5
I spite of the humble submission of Hezekiah, it is a surprise to learn from Isaiah
that Sennacherib-after he had accepted the huge fine and fixed the tribute, and
departed to subdue Lachish-broke his covenant. {Isaiah 33:8} He sent his three chief
officers-the Turtan, or commander-in-chief, whose name seems to have been
Belemurani; {Isaiah 20:1} the Rabsaris, or chief eunuch; and the Rabshakeh, or
chief captain-from Lachish to Hezekiah, with a command of absolute, unconditional
surrender, to be followed by deportation. By this conduct Sennacherib violated his
own boast that he was "a keeper of treaties." Yet it is not difficult to conjecture the
reason for his change of plan. He had found it no easy matter to subdue even the
very minor fortress of Lachish; how unwise, then, would it be for him to leave in his
rear an uncaptured city so well fortified as Jerusalem! He was advancing towards
Egypt. It was obviously a strategic error to spare on his route a hostile and almost
impregnable stronghold as a nucleus for the plans of his enemies. Moreover, he had
heard rumors that Tirhakah, the third and last Ethiopian king of Egypt, was
advancing against him, and it was most important to prevent any junction between
his forces and those of Hezekiah. He could not come in person to Jerusalem, for the
siege of Lachish was on his hands; but he detached from his army a large contingent
under his Turtan, to win the Jews by seductive promises, or to subdue Jerusalem by
force. Once more, therefore, the Holy City saw beneath her often-captured walls the
vast beleaguering host, and "governors and rulers clothed most gorgeously,
horsemen riding upon horses, all of them desirable young men." Isaiah describes to
us how the people crowded to the house-tops, half dead with fear, weeping and
despairing, and crying to the hills to cover them, and bereft of their rulers, who had
been bound by the archers of the enemy in their attempt to escape. They gazed on
the quiver bearing warriors of Elam in their chariots, and the serried ranks of the
shields of Kir, and the cavalry round the gates. And he tells us how, as so often
occurs at moments of mad hopelessness, many who ought to have been crying to
God in sackcloth and ashes gave themselves up, on the contrary, to riot and revelry,
eating flesh, and drinking wine, and saying: "Let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we
die." {Isaiah 22:1-13} The king alone had shown patience, calmness, and active
foresight; and he alone, by his energy and faith, had restored some confidence to the
spirits of his fainting people. Although the city had been refortified by the king, and
supplied with water, the hearts of the inhabitants must have sunk within them when
they saw the Assyrian army investing the walls, and when the three commissioners-
taking their station "by the conduit of the upper pool which is in the highway of the
fuller’s field"-summoned the king to hear the ultimatum of Sennacherib. The king

6. did not in person obey the summons; but he, too, sent out his three chief officers.
They were Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah, who, as the chamberlain (al-hab-baith), was
a great prince (nagid); Shebna, who had been degraded, perhaps at the instance of
Isaiah, from the higher post, and was now secretary (sopher); and Joah, son of
Asaph, the chronicler (mazkir), to whom we probably owe the minute report of the
memorable scene. o doubt they went forth in the pomp of office-Eliakim with his
robe, and girdle, and key. The Rabshakeh proved himself, indeed, "an affluent
orator," and evinced such familiarity with the religious politics of Judah and
Jerusalem, that this, in conjunction with his perfect mastery of Hebrew, gives color
to the belief that he was an apostate Jew. He began by challenging the idle
confidence of Hezekiah, and his vain words that he had counsel and strength for the
war. Upon what did he rely? On the broken and dangerous bulrush of Egypt? It
would out pierce his hand! On Jehovah? But Hezekiah had forfeited his protection
by sweeping away His bamoth and His altars! Why, let Hezekiah make a wager; and
if Sennacherib furnished him with two thousand horses, he would be unable to find
riders for them! How, then, could he drive back even the lowest of the Assyrian
captains? And was not Jehovah on their side? It was He who had bidden them
destroy Jerusalem!
That last bold assertion, appealing as it did to all that was erroneous and abject in
the minds of the superstitious, and backed, as it was, by the undeniable force of the
envoy’s argument, smote so bitterly on the ear of Hezekiah’s courtiers that they
feared it would render negotiation impossible. They humbly entreated the orator to
speak to "his servants" in the Aramaic language of Assyria, which they understood,
and not in Hebrew, which was the language of all the Jews who stood in crowds on
the walls. Surely this was a diplomatic embassy to their king, not an incitement to
popular sedition!
The answer of the Rabshakeh was truly Assyrian in its utterly brutal and ruthless
coarseness. Taking up his position directly in front of the wall, and ostentatiously
addressing the multitude, he ignored the representatives of Hezekiah. Who were
they? asked he. His master had not sent him to speak to them, or to their poor little
puppet of a king, but to the people on the wall, the foul garbage of whose sufferings
of thirst and famine they should share. And to all the multitude the great king’s
message was:-Do not be deceived. Hezekiah cannot save you. Jehovah will not save
you. Come to terms with me, and give me hostages and pledges and a present, and
then live in happy peace and plenty until I come and deport you to a land as fair and
fruitful as this. How should Jehovah deliver them? Had any of the gods of the
nations delivered them out of the hands of the King of Assyria? "Where are the
gods of Hamath, and of Arpad? Where are the gods of Sepharvaim, Hena, and
Ivvah? Have the gods of Samaria delivered Samaria out of my hand, that Jehovah
should deliver Jerusalem out of my hand?"
It was a very powerful oration, but the orator must have been a little disconcerted to
find that it was listened to in absolute silence. He had disgracefully violated the
comity of international intercourse by appealing to subjects against their lawful
king; yet from the starving people there came not a murmur of reply. Faithful to the

7. behest of their king in the midst of their misery and terror, they answered not a
word. Agamemnon is silent before the coarse jeers of Thersites. "The sulfurous flash
dies in its own smoke, only leaving a hateful stench behind it!" And in this attitude
of the people there was something very sublime and very instructive. Dumb,
stricken, starving, the wretched Jews did not answer the envoy’s taunts or menaces,
because they would not. They were not even in those extremities to be seduced from
their allegiance to the king whom they honored, though the speaker had
contemptuously ignored his existence. And though the Rabshakeh had cut them to
the heart with his specious appeals and braggart vaunts, yet "this clever, self-
confident, persuasive personage, with two languages on his tongue, and an army at
his back," could not shake the confidence in God, which, however unreasonable it
might seem, had been elevated into a conviction by their king and their prophet. The
Rabsak had tried to seduce the people into rebellion, but he had failed. They were
ready to die for Hezekiah with the fidelity of despair. The mirage of sensual comfort
in exiled servitude should not tempt them from the scorched wilderness from which
they could still cry out for the living God.
Yet the Assyrian’s words had struck home into the hearts of his greatest hearers,
and therefore how much more into those of the ignorant multitudes! Eliakim and
Shebna and Joah came to Hezekiah with their clothes rent, and told him the words
of the Rabshakeh. And when the king. heard it, when he found that even his
submission had been utterly in vain, he too rent his clothes, and put on sackcloth, {1
Kings 20:32; 2 Kings 6:30} and went into the only place where he could hope to find
comfort, even into the house of the Lord, which he had cleansed and restored to
beauty, although afterwards he had been driven to despoil it. eeding an earthly
counselor, he sent Eliakim and Shebna and the elders of the priests to Isaiah. They
were to tell him the outcome of this day of trouble, rebuke, and contumely; and
since the Rabshakeh had insulted and despised Jehovah, they were to urge the
prophet to make his appeal to Him, and to pray for the remnant which the
Assyrians had left.
The answer of Isaiah was a dauntless defiance. If others were in despair, he was not
in the least dismayed. "Be not afraid"-such was his message-"of the mere words
with which the boastful boys of the King of Assyria have blasphemed Me. Behold, I
will put a spirit in him, and he shall hear a rumor, and shall return to his own land;
and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land."
Much crestfallen at the total and unexpected failure of the embassy, and of his own
heart-shaking appeals, the Rabshakeh returned. But meanwhile Sennacherib had
taken Lachish, and marched to Libnah (Tel-es-Safia), which he was now besieging.
There it was that he heard the "rumor" of which Isaiah had spoken-the report,
namely, that Tirhakah, the third king of the Ethiopian dynasty of Pharaohs, was
advancing in person to meet him. This was B.C. 701, and it is perhaps only by
anticipation that Tirhakah is called "King" of Ethiopia. He was only the general
and representative of his father Shabatok, if (as some think) he did not succeed to
the throne till 698.

8. It was impossible for Sennacherib under these circumstances to return northwards
to Jerusalem, of which the siege would inevitably occupy some time. But he sent a
menacing letter, reminding Hezekiah that neither king nor god had ever yet saved
any city from the hands of the Assyrian destroyers. Where were the kings, he asked
again, of Hamath, Arpad, Sepharvaim, Hena, Ivvah? What had the gods of Gozan,
Haran, Rezeph, and the children of Eden in Telassar done to save their countries
from Sennacherib’s ancestors, when they had laid them under the ban?
Again the pious king found comfort in God’s Temple. Taking with him the scornful
and blasphemous letter, he spread it out before Jehovah in the Temple with
childlike simplicity, that Jehovah might read its insults and be moved by this dumb
appeals Then both he and Isaiah cried mightily to God, "who sitteth above the
cherubim," admitting the truth of what Sennacherib had said, and that the kings of
Assyria had destroyed the nations, and burnt their vain gods in the fire. But of what
significance was that? Those were but gods of wood and stone, the works of men’s
hands. But Jehovah was the One, the True, the Living God. Would He not manifest
among the nations His eternal supremacy?
And as the king prayed the word of Jehovah came to Isaiah, and he sent to Hezekiah
this glorious message about Sennacherib:
"The virgin, the daughter of Zion, hath despised thee, and laughed thee to scorn.
The daughter of Jerusalem hath shaken her head at thee."
The blasphemies, the vaunts, the menacing self-confidence of Sennacherib, were his
surest condemnation. Did he count God a cypher? It was to God alone that he owed
the fearful power which had made the nations like grass upon the housetops, like
blasted corn, before him. And because God knew his rage and tumult, God would
treat him as Sargon his father had treated conquered kings:-
"I will put My hook in thy nose, and My bridle in thy lips. And I will turn thee back
by the way by which thou earnest."
He had thought to conquer Egypt: instead of that he should be driven back in
confusion to Assyria.
It was but a plainer enunciation of the truths which Isaiah had again and again
intimated in enigma and parable. It was the fearless security of Judah’s lion; the
safety of the rock amid the deluge; the safety of the poor brood under the wings of
the Divine protection from "the great Birds" nester of the world; the crashing
downfall of the lopped Lebanonian cedar, while the green shoot and tender branch
out of the withered stump of Jesse should take root downward and bear fruit
upward.
And the sign was given to Hezekiah that this should be so. This year there should be
no harvest, except such as was spontaneous; for in the stress of Assyrian invasion
sowing and reaping had been impossible. The next year the harvest should only be

9. from this accidental produce. But in the third year, secure at last, they should sow
and reap, and plant vineyards and eat the fruit thereof. And though but a remnant
of the people was left out of the recent captivity, they should grow and flourish, and
Jerusalem should see the besieging host of Assyria no more forever; for Jehovah
would defend the city for His own sake, and for His servant David’s sake.
Thereafter occurred the great deliverance. In some way-we know not and never
shall know how-by a blast of the simoom, or sudden outburst of plague, or furious
panic, or sudden assault, or by some other calamity, the host of Assyria was smitten
in the camp, and one hundred and eighty-five thousand, including their chief
leaders, perished. The historian, in a manner habitual to pious Semitic writers,
attributes the devastation to the direct action of "the angel of the Lord"; {Comp 2
Samuel 24:15-16} but as Dr. Johnson said long ago, "We are certainly not to
suppose that the angel went about with a sword in his hand, striking them one by
one, but that some powerful natural agent was employed."
The Forty-Sixth Psalm is generally regarded as the Te Deum sung in the Temple
over this deliverance, and its opening words, "God is our refuge and strength," are
inscribed over the cathedral of St. Sophia at Constantinople.
It is usually supposed that this overwhelming disaster happened to the host of
Assyria before Jerusalem. This, however, is not stated; and as the capture of
Lachish was an argent necessity, it is probable that the Turtan led back the forces
which had accompanied him, and took them afterwards to Libnah. Yet, since
Libnah was but ten miles from Jerusalem, the Jews could not feel safe for a day
until the mighty news came that the
"Angel of God spread his wings on the blast,
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed,
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed heavy and chill,
And their breasts but once heaved, and forever grew still."
When the catastrophe which had happened to the main army and the flight of
Sennacherib became known, the scattered forces would melt away.
All the Assyrians who escaped were now hurrying back to ineveh with their foiled
king. Sennacherib seems to have occupied himself in the north, except so far as he
was forced to fight fiercely against his own rebel subjects. He never recovered this
complete humiliation, he never again came southwards. He survived the catastrophe
for seventeen or twenty years, and fought five or six campaigns; but at the end of
that period, while he was worshipping in the house of isroch or Assarac (Assur),
his god, he was murdered by his two sons Adrammelech (Adar-malik-"Adar is
king") and Sharezer ( ergal-sarussar-" ergal protect the king"), who envied him
his throne. They escaped into the land of Ararat, but were defeated and killed by

10. their younger brother Esarhaddon (Assur-akh-iddin-Assur bestowed a "brother")
at the battle of Hani-Rabbat, on the Upper Euphrates. He succeeded Sennacherib,
and ultimately avenged on Egypt his father’s overwhelming disaster. He is perhaps
the "cruel lord" Isaiah 19:4, and it is not unnatural that he should have prevailed
against his parricidal brothers, for we are told that in a previous battle at Melitene
he had shown such prowess that the troops then and there proclaimed him King of
Assyria with shouts of "This is our king." He reigned from B.C. 681-668, and in his
reign Assyria culminated before her last decline. He was the builder of the temple at
imrod, and erected thirty other temples. Babylon and ineveh were both his
capitals, {2 Chronicles 33:11} and he had previously been viceroy of the former.
The glorious deliverance in which the faith and courage of the King of Judah had
had their share naturally increased the prosperity and prestige of Hezekiah, and
lifted the authority of Isaiah to an unprecedented height. Hezekiah probably did not
long survive the uplifting of this dark cloud, but during the remainder of his life "he
was magnified in the sight of all nations." {2 Chronicles 32:23} When he died, all
Judah and Jerusalem did him honor, and gave him a splendid burial. Apparently
the old tombs of the kings-the catacomb constructed by David and Solomon-had in
the course of two and a half centuries become full, so that he had to be buried "in
the ascent of the sepulchers," perhaps some niche higher than the other graves of
the catacomb, which was henceforth disused for the burial of the kings of Judah.
We have had occasion to observe the many particulars in which his reign was
memorable, and to his other services must be added the literary activity to which we
owe the collection and editing, by his scribes, of the Proverbs of Solomon. His reign
had practically witnessed the institution of the faithful Jewish Church under the
influence of his great prophetic guide.
The question whether the portent of the destruction of the Assyrian was identical
with that related by Herodotus has never been finally answered. Herodotus places
the scene of the disaster at Pelusium, and tells this story:-Sennacherib, King of the
Arabs and Assyrians, invaded Egypt. Its king, Sethos, of the Tanite dynasty, in
despair entered the temple of his god Pthah (or Vulcan), and wept. The god
appeared to him with promises of deliverance, and Sethos marched to meet
Sennacherib with an army of poor artisans, since he was a priest, and the caste of
warriors was ill-affected to him. In the night the god Pthah sent hosts of field-mice,
which gnawed the quivers, bow-strings, and shield-straps of the Assyrians, who
consequently fled and were massacred. An image of the priest-king with a mouse in
his hand stood in the temple of Pthah, and on its pedestal the inscription, which
might also point the moral of the Biblical narrative, ("Let him who looks on me be
pious"). Josephus seems so far to accept this version that he refers to Herodotus,
and says that Sennacherib’s failure was the result of a frustration in Egypt. The
mouse in the hand of the statue probably originated the details of the legend; but
according to Horapollion it was the hieroglyphic sign of destruction by plague. Bahr
says that it was also the symbol of Mars. Readers of Homer will remember the title
Apollo Smintheus ("the destroyer of mice"), and the story that mice were
worshipped in the Troas because they gnawed the bow-strings of the enemy.

11. But whatever may have been the mode of the retribution, or the scene in which it
took place, it is certainly historical. The outlines of the narrative in the sacred
historian are identical with those in the Assyrian records. The annals of
Sennacherib tell us the four initial stages of the great campaign in the conquest of
Phoenicia, of Askelon, and of Ekron, the defeat of the Egyptians at Altaqu, and the
earlier hostilities against Hezekiah. The Book of Kings concentrates our attention on
the details of the close of the invasion. On this point, whether from accident, or
because Sennacherib did not choose to register his own calamity, and the frustration
of the gods of whose protection he boasted, the Assyrian records are silent. Baffled
conquerors rarely dwell on their own disasters. It is not in the dispatches of
apoleon that we shall find the true story of his abandonment of Syria, of the
defeats of his forces in Spain, or of his retreat from Moscow.
The great lesson of the whole story is the reward and the triumph of indomitable
faith. Faith may still burn with a steady flame when the difficulties around it seem
insuperable, when all refutation of the attacks of its enemies seems to be impossible,
when Hope itself has sunk into white ashes in which scarcely a gleam of heat
remains. Isaiah had nothing to rely upon; he had no argument wherewith to furnish
Hezekiah beyond the bare and apparently unmeaning promise, "Jehovah is our
Judge; Jehovah is our Lawgiver; Jehovah is our King. He will save us." It was a
magnificent vindication of his inspired conviction, when all turned out-not indeed in
minute details, but in every essential fact-exactly as he had prophesied from the
first. Even in B.C. 740 he had declared that the sins of Judah deserved and would
receive condign punishment, though a remnant should be saved. {Isaiah 6:11-13}
That the retribution would come from some foreign enemy-Assyria or Egypt, or
both-he felt sure. Jehovah would hiss for the fly in the uttermost canals of Egypt,
and for the bee that is in the land of Assyria, and both should swarm in the crevices
of the rocks, and over the pastures. {Isaiah 5:26-30} Later on in 732, in the reign of
Ahaz, he pointed to Assyria, {Isaiah 7:18} as the destined scourge, and he realized
this still more clearly in 725 and 721, when Shalmaneser and Sargon were tearing
Samaria to pieces. {Isaiah 8:1-22, Isaiah 28:1-15, Isaiah 10:28-34} Contrary, indeed,
to his expectation, the Assyrians did not then destroy Jerusalem, or even formally
besiege it. The revolt from Assyria, the reliance on Egypt, did not for a moment
blind his judgment or alter his conviction; and in 701 it came true when
Sennacherib was on the march for Palestine. {Isaiah 14:29-32; Isaiah 14:29-30} Yet
he never wavered in the apparently impossible conclusion, that, in spite of all, in
spite even of his own darker prophecies, {Isaiah 32:14} Jerusalem shall in some
Divine manner be saved. {Isaiah 1:19-20} The deliverance would be, as he declared
from first to last, the work of Jehovah, not the work of man, {Isaiah 10:33; Isaiah
29:5-8; Isaiah 30:20-26; Isaiah 30:30-33} and because of it Sennacherib would
return to his own land and perish there. The details might be dim and wavering; the
result was certain. Isaiah was no thaumaturge, no peeping wizard, no muttering
necromancer, no monthly prognosticator. {Isaiah 47:13} He was a prophet-that is,
an inspired moral and spiritual teacher who was able to foresee and to foretell, not
in their details, but in their broad outlines, the events yet future, because he was
enabled to read them by the eye of faith ere they had yet occurred. His faith
convinced him that predictions founded on eternal principles have all the certainty

12. of a law, and that God’s dealings with men and nations in the future can be seen in
the light of experience derived from the history of the past. Courage, zeal,
unquenchable hope, indomitable resolution, spring from that perfect confidence in
God which is the natural reward of innocence and faithfulness. Isaiah trusted in
God, and he knew that they who put their trust in Him can never be confounded.
o event produced a deeper impression on the minds of the Jews, though that
impression was soon afterwards, for a time, obliterated. aturally, it elevated the
authority of Isaiah into unquestioned pre-eminence during the reign of Hezekiah. It
has left its echo, not only in his own triumphant paeans, but also in the Forty-Sixth
Psalm, which the Septuagint calls "An ode to the Assyrian," and perhaps also in the
Seventy-Fifth and Seventy-Sixth Psalms. In the minds of all faithful Israelites it
established forever the conviction that God had chosen Judah for Himself, and
Israel for His own possession; that God was in the midst of Zion, and she should not
be confounded: "God shall help her, and that right early." And it contains a noble
and inspiring lesson for all time. "It is not without reason," says Dean Stanley, "that
in the Churches of Moscow the exultation over the fall of Sennacherib is still read on
the anniversary of the retreat of the French from Russia, or that Arnold, in his
lectures on Modern History, in the impressive passage in which he dwells on that
great catastrophe, declared that for the memorable night of the frost in which
twenty-thousand horses perished, and the strength of the French army was utterly
broken, he knew of no language so well fitted to describe it as the words in which
Isaiah described the advance and destruction of the hosts of Sennacherib."
They had been brought face to face, the two kings-Sennacherib and Hezekiah. One
was the impious boaster who relied on his own strength, and on the mighty host
which dried up rivers with their trampling march-the worldling who thought to lord
it over the affrighted globe; the other was the poor kinglet of the Chosen People,
with his one city and his enfeebled people, and his dominion not so large as one of
the smallest English counties. But "one with God is irresistible," "one with God is
always in a majority." The poor, weak prince triumphs over the terrific conqueror,
because he trusts in Him to whom world-desolating tyrants are but as the small dust
of the balance, and who "taketh up the isles as a very little thing." As {Isaiah 11:15}
Assyria now vanishes almost entirely from the history of the Chosen People, we may
here recall with delight one large and loving prophecy, to show that the Hebrews
were sometimes uplifted by the power of inspiration above the narrowness of a
bigoted and exclusive spirit. Desperately as Israel had suffered, both from Egypt
and Assyria, Isaiah could still utter the glowing Messianic Prophecy which included
the Gentiles in the privileges of the Golden Age to come. He foretold that-
"In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and Assyria, as a blessing in the
midst of the land: whom the Lord of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt My
people, and Assyria the work of My hands, and Israel Mine inheritance." {Isaiah
19:24-25}
"That strain I heard was of a higher mood!"

13. "King Hezekiah can have no finer panegyric than that of the son of Sirach: Even the
kings of Judah failed, for they forsook the law of the Most High: all except David,
and Ezekias, and Josias failed." (Sirach 49:4)
GUZIK, "A. Hezekiah’s prayers and Sennacherib’s threats.
1. (2 Kings 19:1-5) Hezekiah seeks Isaiah in the time of great distress
And so it was, when King Hezekiah heard it, that he tore his clothes, covered himself
with sackcloth, and went into the house of the LORD. Then he sent Eliakim, who
was over the household, Shebna the scribe, and the elders of the priests, covered
with sackcloth, to Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz. And they said to him, “Thus
says Hezekiah: ‘This day is a day of trouble, and rebuke, and blasphemy; for the
children have come to birth, but there is no strength to bring them forth. It may be
that the LORD your God will hear all the words of the Rabshakeh, whom his
master the king of Assyria has sent to reproach the living God, and will rebuke the
words which the LORD your God has heard. Therefore lift up your prayer for the
remnant that is left.’ “ So the servants of King Hezekiah came to Isaiah.
a. When King Hezekiah heard it, that he tore his clothes, covered himself with
sackcloth: The tearing of clothes and the wearing of sackcloth (a rough, burlap-type
material) were expressions of deep mourning, usually for the death of a loved one.
Hezekiah received this report regarding Rabshakeh seriously, knowing how
dedicated this enemy was to completely conquering Jerusalem.
i. Hezekiah’s initial reaction was good. He saw the situation for what it really was.
Often, when we are in some kind of trial or difficulty, we handle it poorly because
we never see the situation accurately. Jerusalem’s situation was desperate and
Hezekiah knew it.
ii. There was good reason for Hezekiah to be so humble before the LORD. “City
after city has fallen to Sennacherib and long lines of deportees are already snaking
their bitter way into exile - and it is all Hezekiah’s fault! He followed the lunatic
policy of rebellion and was bewitched by Egyptian promises. He might as well have
sold his people himself. But even when a matter is our own fault we can still pray
about it. And the Lord can always be trusted to put his people.” (Meyer,
commentary on Isaiah)
b. And went into the house of the LORD: Hezekiah’s second reaction was even
better. He did not allow his mourning and grief spin him into a rejection of the
LORD’s power and help. He knew this was a more necessary time than ever to seek
the LORD.
i. “The impudent blasphemy of this speech is without parallel. Hezekiah treated it as
he ought: it was not properly against him, but against the LORD therefore he refers
the matter to Jehovah himself, who punishes this blasphemy in the most signal

14. manner.” (Clarke)
ii. When it says, went into the house of the LORD, we should not think that it means
that King Hezekiah went into the holy place itself, which was forbidden for all
except priests. It simply means that Hezekiah went to the courts of the house of the
LORD, to seek God in the place which was open to him as a man of Israel.
iii. A previous king of Judah, King Uzziah, saw his reign tragically ended when he
broke this command of the LORD to stay out of the holy place of the temple. 2
Chronicles 26:16 says, But when he was strong his heart was lifted up, to his
destruction, for he transgressed against the LORD his God by entering the temple of
the LORD to burn incense on the altar of incense. In response, God struck Uzziah
with leprosy and he was an isolated leper until his death.
c. Then he sent Eliakim . . . Shebna . . . and the elders of the priests . . . to Isaiah the
prophet: The third thing Hezekiah did was also good. The king sought out the word
of the LORD, given through the prophet of the LORD.
d. The children have come to birth, but there is no strength to bring them forth:
Hezekiah put these words in the mouth of his messengers to Isaiah to express the
total calamity of the situation. This was a proverbial expression for a disaster - a
woman so exhausted by labor that she could not complete the birth, so it is likely
that both mother and child with die.
e. It may be that the LORD your God will hear the words of the Rabshakeh:
Hezekiah knew that their only hope was that God would take offense at the
blasphemies of Rabshakeh and rise up against him.
i. “The impudent blasphemy of this speech is without parallel. Hezekiah treated it as
he ought: it was not properly against him, but against the LORD therefore he refers
the matter to Jehovah himself, who punishes this blasphemy in the most signal
manner.” (Clarke)
f. Therefore lift up your prayer for the remnant that is left: “Isaiah, pray for us.
Our nation is devastated by this Assyrian invasion, and Jerusalem alone is left
standing. Pray for the remnant that is left.”
ISBET, "HELP FROM THE SA CTUARY
‘When king Hezekiah heard it … he … went into the house of the Lord.’
2 Kings 19:1
The first thing is that we should accept the Mastery of Jesus. It is to His disciples
that He brings peace. Are we disciples?
And the second thing is the resolution to live one day at a time. ‘Be not anxious for
the morrow,’ for, after all, it is only to-day that we have to live. We look forward
and try and think out how we will act, and to-morrow it is all so different, and

15. meanwhile we have exhausted the nerve and we have used the energy which God
intended to give us anew for the fresh day’s work. There was no gathering of the
manna for more than one day at a time. The Word of Christ comes back to the
disciple, and it is a question whether we will be loyal. It comes echoing down to us
from the Eucharist, ‘Lift up your hearts’ from the burden and the heat, from the
misery and the uncertainty of trusting in your own selves. Let us have courage to
answer: ‘We lift them up unto the Lord.’
I. The reign of Hezekiah falls like a bright beam of light across the darkest path of
Jewish history.— ow Hezekiah was a type of Christ. Look, first, at the destruction
of the brazen serpent, as told us in this morning’s lesson. Try to realise all that it
meant. This serpent had a wonderful history and sacred associations. For many
generations it had been one of the objects which most stirred the hearts of the Jews.
But it had lost its power completely; it had become an object of superstitious
worship, and so Hezekiah broke it in pieces. I wonder what the scribes and
Pharisees of that day thought of this act? Hezekiah was a type of Him Who
centuries later scandalised the scribes and Pharisees by breaking the Sabbath.
When the trial moment comes, when temptation is strong and help seems far away,
the question will be, not whether we have learnt to hold the tenets of Christianity as
historical facts, but whether they have taught us the power of prayer, and the evil
hold dropped, and the call of duty accepted. Whether, in one word, we have learnt
to live our faith, so that Christ lives in our hearts and through our lives.
II. Let us turn to another scene in Hezekiah’s life: the revival of the Passover, as
narrated in the Second Book of Chronicles. It was not confined to Judah. Again
Hezekiah’s greatness is seen. He had grasped the idea of the Passover—that it set
forth the unity of the nation. There was nothing political in his aim. There was no
thought of the winning back of Judah. His aim was to teach the people that,
wherever their lot was cast, they were all one people, and doubtless this, too,
scandalised the scribes and Pharisees of the day. And, says the chronicler, many of
those that accepted the invitation came without having undergone the purification
ordained by the Lord. ow mark Hezekiah on that occasion. He prayed the Lord to
pardon every one who had prepared his heart to seek the Lord God of his fathers.
One more type of Him Who centuries after welcomed the outcasts. Is there not a
lesson here for us? Think of all those well meaning, religious people who cannot see
the deeper unity which underlies differences of creed between us. But let us beware
of confounding the idea of unity and uniformity. The Divine ideal seems to be not
uniformity, but a grand symphony played on a thousand instruments.
III. Let us look at one more scene in Hezekiah’s life—his bearing towards the King
of Assyria, as told in the lesson of this morning and this evening. Hezekiah was lying
helpless before the power of the King of Assyria, but in him we see no bravado and
no fear, only a simple faith and trust in God. He met the insulting messages of
Sennacherib in silence; the king’s command was, ‘Answer him not.’ Once more he is
a type of Him Who, centuries later, when He was accused of the chief priests and
elders, answered nothing, and when He received the blasphemous message was
silent. Hezekiah’s first thought was God. He went to the Temple and spread his

16. trouble before the Lord. It is in this instant reference, this turning to God at once,
without fear and without hesitation, that Hezekiah is so valuable an example to
ourselves. For we, too, like Hezekiah, are besieged with enemies. Which of us has
not some sin of temper, it may be, or selfishness, or pride, or lust—some sin which
he is tempted to commit frequently, and we have learned its power, and we long to
cast it off and be rid of it for ever, but again and again the temptation comes? We
fight against it, but we finally yield to it, and we feel as though this sin were
poisoning our whole life. Have we said, ‘My help cometh from the Lord’?
Dean Furneaux.
Illustration
‘Here is a good man’s victory in anticipation and advance over his enemies.
I do not think that Hezekiah needed to wait for his assurance of triumph, until
The might of the Gentile, unsmote by the sword,
Had melted like snow in the glance of the Lord.
When he came out of God’s Temple, it was with a look of calmness and confidence
on his face. He had shaken off his care and sorrow. He had laid his necessities in
God’s mighty hands, and he left them there. If I do really make over my distresses to
Him, the poison goes out of them. If I share my tasks with Him, their irksomeness
disappears. If I breathe my trouble into His strong and tranquil heart, He gives me
the tranquillity and the strength instead. The moment of actual deliverance may not
arrive for days or weeks. But it is as if it had arrived. I am persuaded that it is
coming. I look forward to it undoubtingly. I wait for it. ay, it is better than if it had
arrived. There is something supernatural, unearthly, Divine, in being sustained,
kept in peace, filled with joy, when tribulations abound, and when the Assyrians are
still at Libnah.’
PULPIT, "And it came to pass, when King Hezekiah heard it, that he rent his
clothes—following the example of his chief officers, who came into his presence
"with their clothes rent" (see 2 Kings 18:37)—and covered himself with sackcloth. A
sign of grief and self-humiliation (comp. Genesis 37:34; 2 Samuel 3:31; 2 Samuel
21:10; 1 Kings 20:31, 1 Kings 21:27; 2 Kings 6:30, etc.). It was natural that the king
should be even more strongly affected than his ministers. And went into the house of
the Lord; to open his griefs, ask counsel, and beg for aid.
BI 1-37, "And it came to pass when King Hezekiah heard it, he rent his clothes.
A nation’s calamities, counsellor, and God
I. The exposure of a nation to an overwhelming calamity.
1. The nature of the threatened calamity. It was the invasion of the king of Assyria.
This was announced in startling terms and in a haughty and ruthless spirit by Rab-
shakeh.

17. 2. The influence of the threatened calamity.
(1) It struck the kingdom with a crushing terror.
(2) It struck the kingdom with a helpless feebleness.
II. The blessing to a nation of a ruler who looks to heaven for help. What, in the
wretched condition of his country, does King Hezekiah do? He invokes the merciful
interposition of heaven. In this wonderful prayer
(1) He adores the God whom Sennacherib had blasphemed.
(2) He implores the Almighty for His own sake to deliver the country.
III. The advantage to a nation of a truly wise counsellor. Whether Isaiah was a Divinely
inspired man, and had a right in any especial sense to say, “Thus saith the Lord,” or not,
he may be fairly taken in this ease as the representative of a wise counsellor, and that for
two reasons:—
1. He looked to heaven rather than to earth for his wisdom.
2. What he received from heaven he communicated to men. In the communication
(1) Sennacherib is apostrophised in a highly poetic strain admirably descriptive
of the turgid vanity, haughty pretensions, and heartless impiety of this despot.
(2) Hezekiah himself is personally addressed, and a sign given him of coming
deliverance.
(3) The issue of Sennacherib’s invasion is announced. Such was the
communication which in language passionate, poetic, and powerful, Isaiah made
to this perplexed and terrified nation. It involves two things: The deliverance of
his country; the ruin of the despot.
IV. The strength of a nation that has God on its side. Who delivered the imperilled
nation? Who overwhelmed the despot? “The zeal of the Lord of hosts.”
1. How swiftly was the deliverance effected. “That night.”
2. How terrible the ruin which that deliverance effected—“An hundred fourscore and
five thousand men” destroyed. (David Thomas, D. D.)
2 He sent Eliakim the palace administrator,
Shebna the secretary and the leading priests, all
wearing sackcloth, to the prophet Isaiah son of
Amoz.

18. BAR ES, "Isaiah is here for the first time introduced into the history. His own
writings show us how active a part he had taken in it for many years previously. This was
the fourth reign since he began his prophesyings; and during two reigns at least, those of
Ahaz and Hezekiah, he had been a familiar counselor of the monarch. He had probably
counseled the revolt from Assyria, and had encouraged the king and people to persevere
in their resistance. The exact date of prophecies can seldom be fixed with any certainty;
but we can scarcely he mistaken in regarding 2 Kings 10; 30; 31 as written about the time
of Hezekiah’s second revolt.
CLARKE, "To Isaiah the prophet - His fame and influence were at this time great in
Israel; and it was well known that the word of the Lord was with him. Here both the
Church and the state unite in fervent application to, and strong dependence upon, God;
and behold how they succeed!
GILL, "And it came to pass, when King Hezekiah heard it,.... The report of
Rabshakeh's speech, recorded in the preceding chapter:
that he rent his clothes, and covered himself with sackcloth; rent his clothes
because of the blasphemy in the speech; and he put on sackcloth, in token of mourning,
for the calamities he feared were coming on him and his people: and he went into the
house of the Lord; the temple, to pray unto him. The message he sent to Isaiah, with his
answer, and the threatening letter of the king of Assyria, Hezekiah's prayer upon it, and
the encouraging answer he had from the Lord, with the account of the destruction of the
Assyrian army, and the death of Sennacherib, are the same "verbatim" as in Isa_37:1
throughout; and therefore the reader is referred thither for the exposition of them; only
would add what Rauwolff (t) observes, that still to this day (1575) there are two great
holes to be seen, wherein they flung the dead bodies (of the Assyrian army), one whereof
is close by the road towards Bethlehem, the other towards the right hand against old
Bethel.
HE RY 2-4, "III. He sent to the prophet Isaiah, by honourable messengers, in token
of the great respect he had for him, to desire his prayers, 2Ki_19:2-4. Eliakim and
Shebna were two of those that had heard the words of Rabshakeh and were the better
able both to acquaint and to affect Isaiah with the case. The elders of the priests were
themselves to pray for the people in time of trouble (Joe_2:17); but they must go to
engage Isaiah's prayers, because he could pray better and had a better interest in heaven.
The messengers were to go in sackcloth, because they were to represent the king, who
was so clothed.
1. Their errand to Isaiah was, “Lift up thy prayer for the remnant that is left, that is,
for Judah, which is but a remnant now that the ten tribes are gone - for Jerusalem,
which is but a remnant now that the defenced cities of Judah are taken.” Note, (1.) It is
very desirable, and what we should be desirous of when we are in trouble, to have the
prayers of our friends for us. In begging to have them we honour God, we honour prayer,
and we honour our brethren. (2.) When we desire the prayers of others for us we must
not think we are excused from praying for ourselves. When Hezekiah sent to Isaiah to
pray for him he himself went into the house of the Lord to offer up his own prayers. (3.)
Those who speak from God to us we should in a particular manner desire to speak to

19. God for us. He is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee, Gen_20:7. The great prophet is
the great intercessor. (4.) Those are likely to prevail with God that lift up their prayers,
that is, that lift up their hearts in prayer. (5.) When the interests of God's church are
brought very low, so that there is but a remnant left, few friends, and those weak and at a
loss, then it is time to lift up our prayer for that remnant.
ELLICOTT, "(2) And he sent Eliakim . . .—See the ote on 2 Kings 3:12; and
comp. 2 Kings 13:14; 2 Kings 22:14; Jeremiah 37:3. Knobel (on Isaiah) remarks that
this distinguished embassy speaks for the high estimation in which the prophet
stood.
The elders of the priests—i.e., the heads of the sacerdotal caste (próceres, not senes).
PETT, "Verses 2-7
King Hezekiah Sends His Representatives To Isaiah The Prophet And Receives A
Comforting Reply (2 Kings 19:2-7).
In his anguish King Hezekiah sent a message to Isaiah via his representatives,
asking what possibility there might be that YHWH would have heard what was said
and might react against it. Isaiah’s reply was that YHWH had heard the king of
Assyria’s blasphemy, and was about to react accordingly. Just as the king of Assyria
has personally confronted YHWH and had claimed to have Him on his side, so
would YHWH respond personally by putting a spirit within him and causing him to
hear tidings which would persuade him to return to his own land. It was person to
person stuff. The king of Assyria had claimed personal contact with YHWH, so he
would be suitably personally affected by it. Isaiah was emphasising that it was not
the king of Assyria who controlled YHWH, but YHWH who controlled the
movements of the king of Assyria. (To have introduced the avenging angel here
would have been to spoil the personal and intimate picture of YHWH’s total
personal control over the king of Assyria, and indeed it should be noted that Isaiah
is never portrayed as knowing what the angel of YHWH would do. All he knew was
that somehow YHWH would deliver). Meanwhile the Rabshakeh reported back the
failure of his mission to his master the king of Assyria.
Analysis.
a And he sent Eliakim, who was over the household, and Shebna the scribe,
and the elders of the priests, covered with sackcloth, to Isaiah the prophet the son of
Amoz (2 Kings 19:2).
b And they said to him, “Thus says Hezekiah, This day is a day of trouble, and
of rebuke, and of disgrace, for the children are come to the birth, and there is not
strength to bring forth” (2 Kings 19:3).
c “It may be that YHWH your God will hear all the words of Rabshakeh,
whom the king of Assyria his master has sent to defy the living God, and will rebuke
the words which YHWH your God has heard. Wherefore lift up your prayer for the

20. remnant that is left” (2 Kings 19:4).
d So the servants of king Hezekiah came to Isaiah (2 Kings 19:5).
c And Isaiah said to them, “Thus shall you say to your master, Thus says
YHWH. Do not be afraid of the words that you have heard, by which the servants of
the king of Assyria have blasphemed me” (2 Kings 19:6).
b “Behold, I will put a spirit in him, and he will hear tidings, and will return to
his own land, and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land” (2 Kings
19:7).
a So Rabshakeh returned, and found the king of Assyria warring against
Libnah, for he had heard that he was departed from Lachish (2 Kings 19:8).
ote that in ‘a’ the representatives of Hezekiah go to the prophet of YHWH, and in
the parallel the representative of the king of Assyria goes to the king of Assyria. In
‘b’ Hezekiah is troubled in spirit, and in the parallel the king of Assyria will be
troubled in spirit. In ‘c’ Hezekiah hopes that YHWH will have heard the words of
the Rabshakeh, and in the parallel Isaiah assures him that He has. Centrally in ‘d’
the servants of king Hezekiah come to Isaiah.
2 Kings 19:2
‘And he sent Eliakim, who was over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and the
elders of the priests, covered with sackcloth, to Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz.’
It is a sign of the genuineness of the narrative that Joah the recorder does not go
with the others to see Isaiah. He has to faithfully record the exchanges that have
taken place. Meanwhile Eliakim and Shebna, Judah’s two leading politicians,
together with the elders of the priests who were no doubt enlisted to add religious
authority to the deputation, covered themselves with sackcloth as the king had done,
and went to consult Isaiah, the son of Amoz, the prophet of YHWH.
PULPIT, "And he sent Eliakim, which was over the household, and Shebna the
scribe, and the elders of the priests. "The elders of the priests" are aged men
holding the priestly office, not necessarily the high priest, or the most notable or
most dignified of the priests. The king felt that his best hope, so far as man was
concerned, lay in the prophetical order. Isaiah, Hosed, Joel, Micah, and perhaps
Obadiah, were the prophets of the time; but it is not clear that any of them were
accessible except Isaiah. He had been Ahaz's counselor (Isaiah 7:4-16), and was now
certainly among the regular counselors of Hezekiah. Moreover, he was in
Jerusalem, and could readily be consulted. Hezekiah, therefore, sends to him in his
distress, and sends a most honorable and dignified embassy. It is his intention to
treat the prophet with the utmost respect and courtesy. o doubt, at this period the
prophetical order stood higher than the priestly one in general estimation; and not
unworthily. If any living man could give the king sound advice under the
circumstances, it was the son of Amoz. Covered with sackcloth. Probably by the
king's command. Hezekiah wished to emphasize his own horror and grief in the eyes
of the prophet, and could only do so by making his messengers assume the garb
which he had judged suitable for himself on the occasion. To Isaiah the prophet the
son of Amoz. othing morels known of Amoz beyond his being Isaiah's father. He is

21. not to be confounded with the Prophet Amos, whose name is spelt quite differently:
‫ָמוֹס‬‫ע‬, not ‫אמוֹץ‬ .
3 They told him, “This is what Hezekiah says:
This day is a day of distress and rebuke and
disgrace, as when children come to the moment of
birth and there is no strength to deliver them.
BAR ES, "The “trouble” consisted in rebuke” (rather, “chastisement,”) for sins at the
hand of God, and “blasphemy” (rather, “reproach,”) at the hands of man.
The children ... - i. e., “we are in a fearful extremity - at the last gasp - and lack the
strength that might carry us through the danger.”
CLARKE, "The children are come to the birth - The Jewish state is here
represented under the emblem of a woman in travail, who has been so long in the pangs
of parturition, that her strength is now entirely exhausted, and her deliverance is
hopeless, without a miracle. The image is very fine and highly appropriate.
A similar image is employed by Homer, when he represents the agonies which
Agamemnon suffers from his wound: -
Οφρα οᅷ αᅷµ’ ετι θερµον ανηνοθεν εξ ωτειλης·
Λυταρ επει το µεν ᅛλκος ετερσετο παυσατο δ’ αᅷµα,
Οξειαι οδυναι δυνον µενος Ατρειδαο·
ς δ’ ᆇταν ωδινουσαν εχᇽ βελος οξυ γυναικα,
∆ριµυ, το τε προιʷεισι µογοστοκοι Ειλειθυιαι
ᅯρης θυγατερες πικ ρας ωδινας εχουσαι·
ᆦς οξει’ οδυναι δυνον µενος Ατρειδαο.
Il. xi., ver. 266.
This, while yet warm, distill’d the purple flood;
But when the wound grew stiff with clotted blood,
Then grinding tortures his strong bosom rend.
Less keen those darts the fierce Ilythiae send,

22. The powers that cause the teeming matron’s throes,
Sad mothers of unutterable woes.
Pope
Better translated by Macpherson; but in neither well:
“So long as from the gaping wound gushed forth, in its warmth, the
blood; but when the wound became dry, when ceased the blood to flow
amain, sharp pains pervade the strength of Atrides. Racking pangs glide
through his frame; as when the Ilythiae, who preside over births, the
daughters of white armed Juno, fierce dealers of bitter pains, throw all
their darts on hapless women, that travail with child. Such pains pervade
the strength of Atrides.”
HE RY 3-4, "2. Two things are urged to Isaiah, to engage his prayers for them: - (1.)
Their fears of the enemy (2Ki_19:3): “He is insolent and haughty; it is a day of rebuke
and blasphemy. We are despised. God is dishonoured. Upon this account it is a day of
trouble. Never were such a king and kingdom so trampled on and abused as we are: our
soul is exceedingly filled with the contempt of the proud, and it is a sword in our bones
to hear them reproach our confidence in God, and say, Where is now your God? and,
which is worst of all, we see not which way we can help ourselves and get clear of the
reproach. Our cause is good, our people are faithful; but we are quite overpowered with
numbers. The children are brought to the birth; now is the time, the critical moment,
when, if ever, we must be relieved. One successful blow given to the enemy would
accomplish our wishes. But, alas! we are not able to give it: There is not strength to
bring forth. Our case is as deplorable, and calls for as speedy help, as that of a woman in
travail, that is quite spent with her throes, so that she has not strength to bear the child.
Compare with this Hos_13:13. We are ready to perish; if thou canst do any thing, have
compassion upon us and help us.” (2.) Their hopes in God. To him they look, on him
they depend, to appear for them. One word from him will turn the scale, and save the
sinking remnant. If he but reprove the words of Rabshakeh (that is, disprove them, 2Ki_
19:4) - if he undertake to convince and confound the blasphemer - all will be well. And
this they trust he will do, not for their merit's sake, but for his own honour's sake,
because he has reproached the living God, by levelling him with deaf and dumb idols.
They have reason to think the issue will be good, for they can interest God in the quarrel.
Psa_74:22, Arise O God! plead thy own cause. “He is the Lord thy God,” say they to
Isaiah - “thine, whose glory thou art concerned for, and whose favour thou art interested
in. He has heard and known the blasphemous words of Rabshakeh, and therefore, it may
be, he will hear and rebuke them. We hope he will. Help us with thy prayers to bring the
cause before him, and then we are content to leave it with him.”
K&D, "“A day of distress, and of chastisement, and of rejection is this day.” ‫ה‬ ָ‫ח‬ ֵ‫ּוכ‬ : the
divine chastisement. ‫ה‬ ָ‫צ‬ፎְ‫:נ‬ contemptuous treatment, or rejection of the people on the
part of God (compare ‫ץ‬ፍָ‫,נ‬ Deu_32:19; Jer_14:21; Lam_2:6). “For children have come to
the birth, and there is not strength to bring forth.” A figure denoting extreme danger, the
most desperate circumstances. If the woman in travail has not strength to bring forth the
child which has come to the mouth of the womb, both the life of the child and that of the

23. mother are exposed to the greatest danger; and this was the condition of the people here
(see the similar figure in Hos_13:13). For ‫ה‬ ָ‫ד‬ ֵ‫ל‬ instead of ‫ת‬ ֶ‫ד‬ ֶ‫,ל‬ see Ges. §69, 2 Anm.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:3. This is a day of rebuke and blasphemy — From the
Assyrian, who reviles and reproaches us. For the children, &c. — We are like a poor
travailing woman in great extremity, having no strength left to help herself, and to
bring forth her infant into the world. We have attempted to deliver ourselves from
the Assyrian yoke, and carried on that work to some maturity, and, as we thought,
brought it to the birth; but now we have no might to finish. We have begun a happy
reformation, and are hindered by this insolent Assyrian from bringing it to
perfection.
ELLICOTT, "(3) Rebuke.—Rather, chastisement (Hosea 5:9). The verb means to
give judgment, punish, &c. It occurs in the next verse, “will reprove the words,” or
rather, punish for the words.
Blasphemy.—Comp. Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 5:24, where the cognate verb is used; and
ehemiah 9:18; ehemiah 9:26, where the noun “provocations” is almost identical.
The children are come . . .—With this proverb, expressive of the utter collapse of all
human resources, comp. the similar language of Hosea (Hosea 13:13).
PETT, "‘And they said to him, “Thus says Hezekiah, This day is a day of trouble,
and of rebuke, and of disgrace, for the children are come to the birth, and there is
not strength to bring forth.” ’
ote the dropping of ‘king’ again after 2 Kings 19:1. His address to Isaiah is not in
ostentation but in humility. The true prophets in Judah were approached differently
from those in other nations where they were at the king’s command. In Judah they
were at YHWH’s command, as Hezekiah was recognising. In his message to Isaiah
Hezekiah likens the situation of the anguished nation to that of a woman having
great difficulties in bringing forth a child that was overdue, something that all
would understand. She was continuing to suffer the anguish of her labour, but she
was so weak after what she had already suffered that the child just would not be
born. Many would see such a situation as an indication that YHWH was rebuking
her, and that in some way she was in disgrace. She herself would certainly feel the
disgrace of it.
His point was that in the same way Judah was undergoing its own ‘labour pains’. It
was in anguish, it was in great trouble, it was aware that it was under the judgment
of YHWH, it was aware of its own disgrace. But it was too weak to produce
anything. (It is when God’s judgments are in the earth that the inhabitants of the
world learn righteousness - Isaiah 26:9).

24. PULPIT, "And they said unto him, Thus saith Hezekiah, This day is a day of
trouble, and of rebuke, and of Blasphemy. Of "trouble," or "distress," manifestly—
a day on which the whole nation is troubled, grieved, alarmed, distressed, made
miserable. It is also a day of "rebuke," or rather of "chastisement"—a day on
which God's hand lies heavy upon us and chastises us for our sins. And it is a day,
not of "blasphemy," but of "abhorrence" or of "contumely"—a day on which God
contumeliously rejects his people, and allows them to be insulted by their enemies
(see the comments of Keil and Bahr). For the children are come to the birth, and
there is not strength to bring forth. A proverbial expression, probably meaning that
a dangerous crisis approaches, and that the nation has no strength to carry it
through the peril.
4 It may be that the Lord your God will hear all
the words of the field commander, whom his
master, the king of Assyria, has sent to ridicule
the living God, and that he will rebuke him for the
words the Lord your God has heard. Therefore
pray for the remnant that still survives.”
BAR ES, "Will hear - i. e., “will show that he has heard - will notice and punish.”
The living God - See 1Sa_17:26 note.
And will reprove the words - Rather, “will reprove him for the words.”
The remnant - i. e., for the kingdom of Judah, the only remnant of God’s people that
was now left, after Galilee and Gilead and Samaria had all been carried away captive.
CLARKE, "The remnant that are left - That is, the Jews; the ten tribes having been
already carried away captive by the kings of Assyria.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:4. It may be, &c. — He speaks doubtfully, because he knew
not whether God would not deliver them all up into the hands of the Assyrians, as
he knew he and his people deserved. That the Lord thy God — To whom thou art
dear and precious, and who will regard thy petitions: will hear all the words of Rab-
shakeh — Will show by his actions that he hath heard them with just indignation.
Hezekiah does not say our God, because God seemed to have forsaken and rejected

25. them; and they, by their sins, had forfeited all their interest in him. And will reprove
the words — Or rather, will reprove him for the words, as the Syriac, Arabic, and
Chaldee render it. Wherefore lift up thy prayer for the remnant — For Judah,
which is but a remnant, now the ten tribes are gone: for Jerusalem, which is but a
remnant, now the defenced cities of Judah are taken.
ELLICOTT, "(4) It may be.—The old commentator Clericus well remarks: “ on
est dubitantis sed sperantis.”
And will reprove the words.—See ote on 2 Kings 19:3. The LXX. and Vulg. read,
“and to rebuke with the words which the Lord,” &c, but the Syriac and Targum
agree with the Authorised Version as regards the construction.
Lift up.—Heavenwards (2 Chronicles 32:2). Or we might compare the phrase “to
lift up the voice” (Genesis 27:38), and render, “to utter” ( umbers 23:7.)
Thy prayer.—A prayer.
The remnant that are left.—The existing (or, present) remnant. Sennacherib had
captured most of the strong cities of Judah, and “the daughter of Zion was left as a
hut in a vineyard” (Isaiah 1:8). (Comp. ote on 2 Chronicles 32:1.)
PETT, "“It may be that YHWH your God will hear all the words of Rabshakeh,
whom the king of Assyria his master has sent to defy the living God, and will rebuke
the words which YHWH your God has heard. Wherefore lift up your prayer for the
remnant that is left.”
And his plea was that YHWH would look with compassion on their situation, and
would hear what the Rabshakeh, the powerful representative of the king of Assyria
his master, had said in defiance of the living God. There is an echo here of David’s
words concerning Goliath. See 1 Samuel 17:26; 1 Samuel 17:36; 1 Samuel 17:45. But
here it was Assyria which was confronting YHWH. Thus he was basically calling for
YHWH to hear what had been said, to defend His own honour, and to rebuke the
king of Assyria in his turn. And he called on Isaiah to raise up his prayer of behalf
of the remnant of the people left in Judah. There is a sad reminder here of the
devastation that Judah had already suffered. But if there was anyone whose prayer
YHWH would hear, it was Isaiah. ote the emphasis on ‘YOUR God’. They
recognised the special relationship that Isaiah had with God. It contrasts with
Isaiah’s reply to ‘YOUR master’. His own master was YHWH.
‘The remnant that is left.’ He knew that Isaiah had named his firstborn Shear
Yashub (‘the remnant will return’ - Isaiah 7:3). To Hezekiah this probably
indicated ‘the remnant will return to YHWH’ and his idea was presumably that
that was what had now happened, thus indicating that YHWH should now respond.
For all had now recognised that their only hope was in YHWH, the Lord of Hosts.

26. PULPIT, "It may be the Lord thy God—still "thy God," at any rate, if he will not
condescend to be called ours, since we have so grievously offended him by our many
sins and backslidings—will hear all the words of Rabshakeh. "The words of
Rabshakeh" (Isaiah 37:4); but the expression here used is more emphatic. Hezekiah
hoped that God would "hear" Rabshakeh's words, would note them, and punish
them. Whom the King of Assyria his master hath sent to reproach the living God
(For the "reproaches" intended, see 2 Kings 18:30-35. For the expression, "the
living God," ‫ַי‬‫צ‬ ‫ִים‬‫צ‬‫ל‬ֱ‫,א‬ see Deuteronomy 5:26; Joshua 3:10; 1 Samuel 17:26; Psalms
42:2; Psalms 84:2; Hosea 1:10, etc.) A contrast is intended between the "living"
God, and the dead idols whom Rabshakeh has placed on a par with him. And will
reprove the words which the Lord thy God hath heard. The "words of Rabshakeh,"
his contemptuous words concerning Jehovah (2 Kings 18:33-35) and his lying words
(2 Kings 18:25), constituted the new feature in the situation, and, while a ground for
"distress," were also a ground for hope: would not God in some signal way
vindicate his own honor, and "reprove" them? Wherefore lift up thy prayer for the
remnant that are left. Sennacherib, in his former expedition, wherein he took forty-
six of the Judaean cities, besides killing vast numbers, had, as he himself tells us,
carried off into captivity 200,150 persons. He had also curtailed Hezekiah's
dominions, detaching from them various cities with their territories, and attaching
them to Ashdod, Gaza, and Ekron. Thus it was only a "remnant" of the Jewish
people that was left in the land (comp. Isaiah 1:7-9).
5 When King Hezekiah’s officials came to Isaiah,
HE RY 5-7, "IV. God, by Isaiah, sent to Hezekiah, to assure him that he would
glorify himself in the ruin of the Assyrians. Hezekiah sent to Isaiah, not to enquire
concerning the event, as many did that sent to the prophets (Shall I recover? or the like),
but to desire his assistance in his duty. It was this that he was solicitous about; and
therefore God let him know what the event should be, in recompence of his care to do his
duty, 2Ki_19:6, 2Ki_19:7. 1. God interested himself in the cause: They have blasphemed
me. 2. He encouraged Hezekiah, who was much dismayed: Be not afraid of the words
which thou hast heard; they are but words (though swelling and fiery words), and words
are but wind. 3. He promised to frighten the king of Assyria worse than Rabshakeh had
frightened him: “I will send a blast upon him (that pestilential breath which killed his
army), upon which terrors shall seize him and drive him into his own country, where
death shall meet him.” This short threatening from the mouth of God would do
execution, when all the impotent menaces that came from Rabshakeh's mouth would
vanish into air.

27. K&D, "Isaiah replied with this comforting promise: Hezekiah was not to be afraid of
the blasphemous words of the Assyrian king; the Lord would frighten him with a report,
so that he would return to his own land, and there would He cause him to fall by the
sword. ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ‫מ‬ ‫א‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ֲ‫ע‬ַ‫,נ‬ the servants or young men of the Assyrian king, is a derogatory epithet
applied to the officials of Assyria. “Behold, I put a spirit into him, so that he shall hear a
report and return into his own land.” ‫ה‬ ָ‫מוּע‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ does not refer to the report of the destruction
of his army (2Ki_19:35), as Thenius supposes, for Sennacherib did not hear of this
through the medium of an army, but was with the army himself at the time when it was
smitten by the angel of the Lord; it refers to the report mentioned in 2Ki_19:9. For even
if he made one last attempt to secure the surrender of Jerusalem immediately upon
hearing this report, yet after the failure of this attempt to shake the firmness of Hezekiah
his courage must have failed him, and the thought of return must have suggested itself,
so that this was only accelerated by the blow which fell upon the army. For, as O. v.
Gerlach has correctly observed, “the destruction of the army would hardly have
produced any decisive effect without the approach of Tirhakah, since the great power of
the Assyrian king, especially in relation to the small kingdom of Judah, was not broken
thereby. But at the prayer of the king the Lord added this miracle to the other, which His
providence had already brought to pass. - For the fulfilment of the prophecy of
Sennacherib's death, see 2Ki_19:37.
COFFMA , ""The servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed me" (2 Kings
19:6). Hailey tells us that, "The word here translated `servants' is a term of
disparagement, meaning `lads,' `chaps,' or `boys.'"[6] Thus, the first thing Isaiah
did was to cut the blasphemers from Sennacherib down to size, saying in effect,
"Those boys have said nothing of any importance."
"Four things the Lord said here: (1) God would put a spirit into him; (2) he would
hear a rumor; (3) he would return to his own land; and (4) in that land he would fall
by the sword."[7]
All of this came to pass exactly as the Lord had said.
PETT, "‘So the servants of king Hezekiah came to Isaiah.’
This simple statement stands at the centre of the chiasmus, and it speaks volumes.
The servants were the servants of ‘king’ Hezekiah. Here was represented all the
might and authority of the kingdom, and its appeal was to Isaiah the prophet of
YHWH. The kingdom could now do nothing. It had fought until it was on its knees.
He was their last hope. But they did not come in despair. They came because they
did believe that Isaiah, as the voice of YHWH, would tell them what to do.
6 Isaiah said to them, “Tell your master, ‘This is

28. what the Lord says: Do not be afraid of what you
have heard—those words with which the
underlings of the king of Assyria have
blasphemed me.
JAMISO , "2Ki_19:6, 2Ki_19:7. Comforted by Isaiah.
Isaiah said ... Be not afraid — The prophet’s answer was most cheering, as it held
out the prospect of a speedy deliverance from the invader. The blast, the rumor, the fall
by the sword, contained a brief prediction that was soon fulfilled in all the three
particulars - namely, the alarm that hastened his retreat, the destruction that overtook
his army, and the violent death that suddenly ended his career.
K&D, "
ELLICOTT, "(6) The servants.—Or, attendants. The word is rather more special in
sense than servant, denoting Apparently personal attendant. Delitzsch renders
“squires.”. (Comp. 2 Kings 4:12; 2 Kings 5:20; 2 Kings 8:4; Exodus 33:11; Judges
7:10; 2 Samuel 9:9; 1 Kings 20:15.)
Blasphemed.— ot the same root as in 2 Kings 19:3. (Psalms 44:16; Isaiah 51:7;
umbers 15:30.)
GUZIK, "2. (2 Kings 19:6-7) God’s word of assurance to Hezekiah.
And Isaiah said to them, “Thus you shall say to your master, ‘Thus says the LORD:
“Do not be afraid of the words which you have heard, with which the servants of the
king of Assyria have blasphemed Me. Surely I will send a spirit upon him, and he
shall hear a rumor and return to his own land; and I will cause him to fall by the
sword in his own land.”‘ “
a. Thus says the LORD: Isaiah was aware he spoke as a prophet of the LORD.
Without hesitation, he spoke as if he were speaking for the LORD God of heaven.
We can be sure that Isaiah did not take this lightly. The fate of the nation, and his
entire credibility as a prophet, was riding on what he said.
i. Isaiah, speaking for the LORD, was about to make a bold prediction. His
prophecy would be entirely “provable.” It would either happen or it would not
happen; Isaiah would be known as a true prophet or a false prophet shortly.
b. Do not be afraid of the words which you have heard: Perhaps we can sense a

29. gentle rebuke in these words from the LORD. “Hezekiah, it is good for you to seek
Me so passionately. But the words of the Rabshakeh are only words. Do not be
afraid of them.”
c. With which the servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed Me: How these
words must have cheered Hezekiah! Before, he had hoped it may be that the LORD
your God will hear the words of the Rabshakeh . . . to reproach the living God (2
Kings 19:4). ow, the LORD spoke through the prophet Isaiah, saying He had
indeed heard those words. It was evident that God took this offense personally.
i. The servants of the king of Assyria: Servants is “a deliberately belittling
expression, ‘the king of Assyria’s lads/flunkies’.” (Motyer, commentary on Isaiah)
“He calls Rabshakeh and the other officers of the army the slaves or servant boys -
we could say the errand boys - of the king of Assyria.” (Bultema, commentary on
Isaiah)
d. Surely I will send a spirit upon him, and he shall hear a rumor and return to his
own land; and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land: Here, the LORD
God assured Hezekiah that He would indeed deal with the Rabshakeh. He had
heard his blasphemy, and would bring judgment against him.
i. Significantly, in this initial word from the prophet Isaiah, there was no mention of
Jerusalem’s deliverance or the defeat of the Assyrian army. God focused this word
against the Rabshakeh personally.
ii. “The rumour was, that Tirhakah had invaded Assyria. The blast was that which
slew one hundred and eighty-five thousand of them in one night, see 2 Kings 19:35.”
(Clarke)
PETT, "2 Kings 19:6-7
‘And Isaiah said to them, “Thus shall you say to your master, Thus says YHWH. Do
not be afraid of the words that you have heard, by which the servants of the king of
Assyria have blasphemed me. Behold, I will put a spirit in him, and he will hear
tidings, and will return to his own land, and I will cause him to fall by the sword in
his own land.’
Isaiah’s reply was straightforward and unequivocal. They were to tell their master
that YHWH had spoken, and he then pronounced the reply in prophetic mode.
‘Thus says YHWH.’ YHWH has spoken and thus what He has said will be. And
what YHWH had said was that they were not to be afraid of the words with which
the king of Assyria had blasphemed YHWH, for He was about to respond by His
own word and Spirit. And He would do it by exercising His own personal control on
the mighty king of Assyria. He would be helpless in the hands of YHWH. For
YHWH would put a spirit within him that would cause him to do YHWH’s will.
Thus he would hear news that would cause him to return to his own land, leaving
Jerusalem and YHWH’s people unsubdued and unharmed. And finally (at some

30. stage) YHWH would cause him to fall by the sword in his own land. Thus his whole
destiny was to be seen as in YHWH’s hands.
So this ‘great king’ with his gods would be seen to be at the beck and call of YHWH
(compare 2 Kings 19:28). Whether he liked it or not he would do all YHWH’s will.
He had claimed to be under the instruction of YHWH and so it would be. Just as
YHWH had brought him in his pride, so would YHWH send him home with his tail
between his legs. There was nothing more to fear. Both his departure and his end
were inevitable, and both were in the hands of YHWH.
As with most prophecy no time scale was laid down. That was not the point of
prophecy. The point was its inevitability. The departure of Sennacherib would
certainly happen shortly, as indeed is evidenced by the silences in the Assyrian
inscriptions themselves, but his falling by the sword in his own land would happen
at YHWH’s discretion. The point was that his death, whenever it came, was totally
in the hands of YHWH Who had even decided how and where it would take place.
It would not necessarily happen immediately, but it would necessarily happen as
YHWH had said. And as we know from the inscriptions, when the time came, that
was precisely how it happened. Thus YHWH’s power over Sennacherib was seen as
total.
We do not know what the news was that Sennacherib received which was partly the
cause of his departure for Assyria. It may have been news of internal disturbances
caused by those who were taking advantage of his long absence and hoped that the
Egyptian army would crush him. It may have been news of enemies like Babylon
threatening the borders of Assyria. But combined with the plague that would
decimate his army after his inconclusive battle with the approaching Egyptian
forces, it was enough to make him return home.
ote the contrast between ‘thus says Hezekiah’ (2 Kings 19:3) and ‘thus says
YHWH’. Hezekiah was almost in despair. He could do nothing. YHWH was about
to turn the whole situation about. Whatever He wanted He would do.
PULPIT, "And Isaiah said unto them, Thus shall ye say to your master. Isaiah
seems to have been ready with a reply. The news of the words spoken by Rabshakeh
had probably flown through the city, and reached him, and he had already laid the
matter before God, and received God's instructions concerning it. He was therefore
able to return an answer at once. Thus saith the Lord, Be not afraid of the words
which thou hast heard, with which the servants—rather, lackeys; the term used is
not the common one for "servants," viz. ‫י‬ֵ‫ְד‬‫ב‬ַ‫ע‬, but a contemptuous one, ‫י‬ ֵ‫ֲר‬‫ע‬ַ‫נ‬, "foot-
boys," or "lackeys"—of the King of Assyria have blasphemed me.
7 Listen! When he hears a certain report, I will

31. make him want to return to his own country, and
there I will have him cut down with the sword.’”
BAR ES, "Will send a blast upon him - Rather, “I will put a spirit in him “ - i. e.,
“I will take from him his present pride and will put in him a new spirit, a spirit of craven
fear.” Men shall tell him of the destruction that has come upon his host 2Ki_19:35, and
he shall straightway return, etc.
CLARKE, "Behold, I will send a blast - and he shall hear a rumor - The rumor
was, that Tirhakah had invaded Assyria. The blast was that which slew one hundred and
eighty-five thousand of them in one night, see 2Ki_19:35.
Cause him to fall by the sword - Alluding to his death by the hands of his two
sons, at Nineveh. See 2Ki_19:35-37.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:7. I will send a blast upon him — Hebrew, a wind, a storm
or tempest, by which name God’s judgments are often called: that is, a violent,
sudden, and terrible stroke; namely, that miraculous destruction of his army,
recorded 2 Kings 19:35.
ELLICOTT, "(7) Behold, I will send a blast upon him.—Behold, I am about to put a
spirit within him. “ ‘A spirit’ is probably not to be understood personally (comp. 1
Samuel 18:10; 1 Kings 22:21 seq.), but in the weaker sense of impulse, inclination.
(Comp. Isaiah 19:14; Isaiah 29:10; umbers 5:14; Hosea 4:12; Zechariah 13:2.) The
two senses are, however, very closely connected” (Cheyne, on Isaiah 37:7). In fact, it
may be doubted whether Hebrew thought was conscious of any distinction between
them. The prophets believed that all acts and events—even the ruthless barbarities
of Assyrian conquerors—were “Jehovah’s work.” The lowly wisdom of the peasant,
as well as the art of good government, was a Divine inspiration (Isaiah 28:26; Isaiah
28:29; Isaiah 11:2).
And he shall hear . . . return.—To be closely connected with the preceding words. In
consequence of the spirit of despondency or fear with which Jehovah will inspire
him, he will hastily retire upon hearing ill news. The “rumour” or report intended is
presently specified (2 Kings 19:9); “for though Sennacherib made one more attempt
to bring about the surrender of Jerusalem, his courage must have left him when it
failed, and the thought of retreat must have suggested itself, the execution of which
was only accelerated by the blow which fell upon his army” (Keil and Thenius).

32. PULPIT, "Behold, I will send a blast upon him. The meaning is doubtful. Most
modern critics translate, with the LXX; "I will put a spirit within him," and
understand "a spirit of cowardice," or "a despondent mood" (Thenius), or "an
extraordinary impulse of Divine inspiration, which is to hurry him blindly on"
(Drechsler). But the idea of our translators, that the blast ( ‫רוּה‬ ) is external, and sent
upon him, not put in him—that, in fact, the destruction of his army is referred to,
seems defensible by such passages as Exodus 15:8 and Isaiah 25:4. The prophecy
was, no doubt, intentionally vague—enough for its immediate purpose, which was to
comfort and strengthen Hezekiah—but not intended to gratify man's curiosity by
revealing the exact mode in which God would work. And he shall hear a rumor;
literally, he shall hear a hearsay; i.e. he shall be told something, which shall
determine him on a hasty retreat. It is best, I think, to understand, not news of
Tirhakah's advance (Knobel, Keil, Bahr), much less news of an insurrection in some
other part of the empire (Cheyne), but information of the disaster to his army. It is
no objection to this that Sennacherib was "with his army." o doubt he was. But he
would learn the catastrophe from the mouth of some one who came into his tent and
told him—he would "hear a hearsay" And shall return to his own land (see verse
36), and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land. (On Sennacherib's
murder, see the comment upon verse 37.)
8 When the field commander heard that the king
of Assyria had left Lachish, he withdrew and
found the king fighting against Libnah.
BAR ES, "On Lachish and Libnah, see Jos_10:3, note; Jos_10:29, note. The phrase,
“he was departed from Lachish” is suggestive of successful resistance.
CLARKE, "Libnah - Lachish - These two places were not very distant from each
other; they were in the mountains of Judah, southward of Jerusalem.
HE RY, "Rabshakeh, having delivered his message and received no answer (whether
he took this silence for a consent or a slight does not appear), left his army before
Jerusalem, under the command of the other generals, and went himself to attend the
king his master for further orders. He found him besieging Libnah, a city that had
revolted from Judah, 2Ki_8:22. Whether he had taken Lachish or no is not certain;
some think he departed from it because he found the taking of it impracticable, 2Ki_
19:8. However, he was now alarmed with the rumour that the king of the Cushites, who

33. bordered upon the Arabians, was coming out against him with a great army, 2Ki_19:9.
This made him very desirous to gain Jerusalem with all speed. To take it by force would
cost him more time and men than he could well spare, and therefore he renewed his
attack upon Hezekiah to persuade him tamely to surrender it. Having found him an easy
man once (2Ki_18:14), when he said, That which thou puttest on me I will bear, he
hoped again to frighten him into a submission, but in vain. Here,
JAMISO , "2Ki_19:8-13. Sennacherib sends a blasphemous letter to Hezekiah.
So Rab-shakeh ... found the king of Assyria warring against Libnah —
Whether Lachish had fallen or not, is not said. But Sennacherib had transferred his
battering-rams against the apparently neighboring fortress of Libnah (Jos_10:29;
compare Jos_10:31; Jos_15:42), where the chief-cup-bearer reported the execution of
his mission.
K&D, "In the meantime Rabshakeh had returned to his king at Libnah (see at 2Ki_
8:22), to which he had gone from Lachish, probably after having taken that fortress.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:8. Rab-shakeh returned — To the king, to give him an
account of what had been done, and to receive further orders; leaving behind him
the army under the other commanders, mentioned 2 Kings 18:17. For it seems most
probable, from the other threatening message here following, that the siege was not
raised. He was departed from Lachish — ot being able to take it.
COFFMA , "A letter accompanied this second demand (2 Kings 19:14); but there
was nothing new in it except three things. (1) Several more places that Assyria had
devastated were mentioned; (2) and God was called "a deceiver" (2 Kings 19:10);
also (3) Assyria's prior rulers were mentioned.
"(He) found the king of Assyria warring at Libnah" (2 Kings 19:8). "The location of
Libnab relatively to Lachish is uncertain."[8]
"When he heard say of Tirhakah king of Ethiopia" (2 Kings 19:9). This bad news of
an Ethiopian (Egyptian) excursion against Sennacherib might have been the rumor
that God said he would hear. The age of Tirhakah is disputed, and largely on that
basis, some have erroneously moved this campaign of Assyria to the year 688 B.C.,
but there is no need whatever for this. People do not even know whether Tirhakah
was the name of a ruler or the title of a dynasty. All arguments against what is
written here which are based on Egyptian history are extremely untrustworthy.
LaSor noted that, "The reign of Tirhakah is dated from 688 to 670 B.C., leaving the
impression that Tirhakah was only ten years of age, and much too young to have led
an expedition against Sennacherib in 701 B.C.. However, the Assyrian records
declare that, Sennacherib defeated Pharaoh and his allies in the battle of Eltekah in
701 B.C."[9]
Whatever the problems about Tirhakah may be, it is still safe, as Honeycutt stated,

34. to view 2 Kings 19:9b-13 as a continuation of the same demands made previously.
[10]
Jamieson agreed that this second appeal for surrender exceeded the first one in its
blasphemy and also in the extension of the list of places conquered.[11] Also, in this
second demand, Sennacherib brought in the devastations perpetrated by his
predecessors upon "all lands." Apparently, the Assyrians enjoyed the conceit that
they were destined to destroy everyone on earth except themselves.
ELLICOTT, "(8) So Rab-shakeh returned.—This takes up the narrative from 2
Kings 18:37. It is not said, but is probably to be understood, that Tartan and
Rabsaris and the “great host” (2 Kings 18:17) departed with him, having been foiled
of their purpose.
Libnah.—See ote on 2 Kings 8:22. The great King had taken Lachish. (See ote on
2 Chronicles 32:9.) Its position is not yet determined. Schrader thinks it may be
Tell-es-Sâfieh, west of Lachish, and north north-west of Eleutheropolis; in which
case Sennacherib had already begun his retreat.
GUZIK, "3. (2 Kings 19:8-13) The response of Rabshakeh to King Hezekiah and
Jerusalem.
Then the Rabshakeh returned and found the king of Assyria warring against
Libnah, for he heard that he had departed from Lachish. And the king heard
concerning Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, “Look, he has come out to make war with
you.” So he again sent messengers to Hezekiah, saying, “Thus you shall speak to
Hezekiah king of Judah, saying: ‘Do not let your God in whom you trust deceive
you, saying, “Jerusalem shall not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria.”
Look! You have heard what the kings of Assyria have done to all lands by utterly
destroying them; and shall you be delivered? Have the gods of the nations delivered
those whom my fathers have destroyed, Gozan and Haran and Rezeph, and the
people of Eden who were in Telassar? Where is the king of Hamath, the king of
Arpad, and the king of the city of Sepharvaim, Hena, and Ivah?’”
a. So the Rabshakeh returned, and found the king of Assyria warring against
Libnah: This must have seemed to Hezekiah to be the fulfillment of the LORD’s
promise through the prophet Isaiah. The Rabshakeh left Jerusalem and Hezekiah
must have thought, “ ow he’ll go back to his own land and be killed, just like the
LORD promised. Good riddance! Thank You LORD!”
b. The king heard concerning Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, “He has come out to make
war with you.” While the Rabshakeh was away, the Assyrians learned that Egyptian
troops (under an Ethiopian king) were advancing from the south. This would be the
Egyptian intervention Assyria feared, and that many in Judah trusted in. As Isaiah
prophesied, it would come to nothing (Isaiah 20:1-6 and Isaiah 30:1-7).

35. i. “Actually Tirhakah was only a prince at the time, but because he assumed the
throne in 690 B.C., the title ‘king’ is used proleptically.” (Wolf, commentary on
Isaiah)
c. Do not let your God in whom you trust deceive you: The Rabshakeh was not in
Jerusalem, but that didn’t stop him from trying to build fear, discouragement, and
despair in Hezekiah. He sent a letter to the king of Judah to attack him from a
distance.
d. Have the gods of the nations: If read with an eye of faith, these must have been
trust-building words of the Rabshakeh to Hezekiah. In counting the LORD God of
Israel among the gods of the nations, the Rabshakeh blasphemed the LORD and
invited judgment.
i. The Rabshakeh listed many cities that the Assyrian army conquered, utterly
destroying them: “The list of city-states put to the ban (Hebrew herem;
‘exterminated’ or destroyed completely, RSV) reminds the reader that it was not
only Israel who used this method in warfare (see umbers 21:2-3; Joshua 6:21).”
(Wiseman)
PETT, "‘So Rabshakeh returned, and found the king of Assyria warring against
Libnah, for he had heard that he was departed from Lachish.’
Meanwhile as the representatives of King Hezekiah were approaching Isaiah, the
Rabshakeh was making his way to his master to report temporary failure.
Jerusalem had refused to surrender. But the king was no longer warring at Lachish.
‘He was departed from Lachish’. Those were ominous words. For it meant that
Lachish, the second in importance of all the cities of Judah, had fallen, and the rape
of Lachish had taken place. As archaeology would later discover the bodies of many
would have been tossed into a huge grave with Assyria’s refuse piled on top of them.
And many of those who remained alive were to experience the ‘blessings’ that the
king of Assyria had promised to Jerusalem. They were to be cruelly transported to
lands far away. Even more Jews were to go into exile.
And now the focus had turned on Libnah, possibly to the north of Lachish, although
its site is uncertain. That was the next city on which they would concentrate. And it
was thus there that the Rabshakeh found his master. It would also be near there
that the battle with the approaching Egyptian forces would take place at Eltekeh.
PULPIT, "So Rabshakeh returned. Rabshakeh's embassy came to an end with the
retirement of Hezekiah's officers from their conference with the three envoys of
Sennacherib. o further communication was held with him. He had outraged all
propriety by his appeal to the "men upon the wall" (2 Kings 18:27-35); and it seems
to have been thought most dignified to give him no answer at all. He had offered no
terms—he had simply delivered a summons to surrender, and the closed gates and

36. guarded walls were a sufficient reply. So he felt, and returned to his master, re
infecta. And found the King of Assyria warring against Libnah. The position of
Libnah relatively to Lachish is uncertain. The site of Lachish may be regarded as
fixed to Um-Lakis; but that of Libnah rests wholly on conjecture. It has been placed
at Tel-es-Safieh, twelve miles northeast of Um-Lakis; at Arak-el-Menshiyeh, about
five miles nearly due east of the same; and near Umm-el-Bikar, four miles south-east
of Um-Lakis. A removal from Um-Lakis to Tel-el-Safieh would mean a retreat. A
march from Um-Lakis to either of the other sites would he quite compatible with an
intention to push on to Egypt. For he had heard that he was departed from Lachish.
Whether Lachish had been taken or not cannot be determined from these words.
But we can scarcely suppose that a place of such slight strength can have defied the
Assyrian arms successfully. It is beat therefore to suppose, with Keil and Thenius,
that Lachish had been taken.
9 ow Sennacherib received a report that
Tirhakah, the king of Cush,[a]was marching out
to fight against him. So he again sent messengers
to Hezekiah with this word:
BAR ES, "Tirhakah king of Ethiopia - The Tehrak or Teharka of the
hieroglyphics. He was the last king of the 25th or Ethiopian dynasty, which commenced
with Shebek or Sabaco, and he reigned upward of 26 years. The Assyrian inscriptions
show that he still ruled in Egypt as late as 667 B.C., when Esarhaddon 2Ki_19:37 died,
and his son Asshur-bani-pal succeeded him. He probably ascended the Egyptian throne
about 692 B.C., having previously ruled over Ethiopia before he became king of Egypt
(compare Isa_37:9). Thus he was probably reigning in Ethiopia at the time of
Sennacherib’s expedition, while Sethos and perhaps other secondary monarchs bore rule
over Egypt. His movements caused Sennacherib to send a second embassy, instead of
marching in person against the Jewish king.
JAMISO 9-13. "when he heard say of Tirhakah ..., Behold, he is come out
to fight against thee, etc. — This was the “rumor” to which Isaiah referred [2Ki_
19:7]. Tirhakah reigned in Upper Egypt, while So (or Sabaco) ruled in Lower Egypt. He
was a powerful monarch, another Sesostris, and both he and Sabaco have left many
monuments of their greatness. The name and figure of Tirhakah receiving war captives,
are still seen in the Egyptian temple of Medinet Abou. This was the expected succor
which was sneered at by Rab-shakeh as “a bruised reed” (2Ki_18:21). Rage against
Hezekiah for allying himself with Egypt, or the hope of being better able to meet this

37. attack from the south, induced him, after hearing the rumor of Tirhakah’s advance, to
send a menacing letter to Hezekiah, in order that he might force the king of Judah to an
immediate surrender of his capital. This letter, couched in the same vaunting and
imperious style as the speech of Rab-shakeh, exceeded it in blasphemy, and contained a
larger enumeration of conquered places, with the view of terrifying Hezekiah and
showing him the utter hopelessness of all attempts at resistance.
K&D, "2Ki_19:9
There Sennacherib heard that Tirhakah was advancing to make war against him.
Tirhakah, Θαρακά (lxx), king of Cush, is the Ταρακός of Manetho, the successor of
Sevechus (Shebek II), the third king of the twenty-fifth (Ethiopian) dynasty, described
by Strabo (xv. 687), who calls him Τεάρκων, as a great conqueror. His name is spelt
Tåhålqa or Tåharqo upon the monuments, and on the Pylon of the great temple at
Medinet-Abu he is represented in the form of a king, cutting down enemies of conquered
lands (Egypt, Syria, and Tepopå, an unknown land) before the god Ammon (see
Brugsch, hist. d'Egypte, i. pp. 244,245).
(Note: According to Jul. Afric. (in Syncell. i. p. 139, ed. Dind.) he reigned eighteen
years, according to Euseb. (in Syncell. p. 140) twenty years. Both statements are
incorrect; for, according to an Apis-stele published by Mariette, the birth of an Apis
who died in the twentieth year of Psammetichus fell in the twenty-sixth year of
Tirhakah, so that the reign of Tirhakah may be supposed to have lasted twenty-eight
years (see Brugsch, l.c. p. 247). But the chronological conclusions respecting the date
of his reign are very uncertain. Whereas M. v. Niebuhr (Gesch. Ass. p. 72) fixes his
expedition against Sennacherib in the thirty-seventh aer. Nab., i.e., 710 b.c., and the
commencement of his reign over Egypt in 45 aer. Nab., i.e., 702 b.c., and assumes
that he marched against Sennacherib before he was king of Egypt, which is
apparently favoured by the epithet king of Cush, not of Egypt; Brugsch (l.c. p. 292)
has given the year 693 b.c. as the commencement of his reign. It is obvious that this
statement is irreconcilable with the O.T. chronology, since the fourteenth year of
Hezekiah, in which Sennacherib invaded Judah, corresponds to the year 714 or 713
b.c. These diversities simply confirm our remark (p. 411), that the chronological data
as to the kings of Egypt before Psammetichus cannot lay any claim to historical
certainty. For an attempt to solve this discrepancy see M. v. Niebuhr, pp. 458ff.)
- On hearing the report of the advance of Tirhakah, Sennacherib sent ambassadors
again to Hezekiah with a letter (2Ki_19:14), in which he summoned him once more to
give up his confidence in his God, and his assurance that Jerusalem would not be
delivered into the hands of the king of Assyria, since the gods of no other nation had
been able to save their lands and cities from the kings of Assyria who had preceded him.
The letter contained nothing more, therefore, than a repetition of the arguments already
adduced by Rabshakeh (2Ki_18:19.), though a larger number of the lands conquered by
the Assyrians are given, for the purpose of strengthening the impression intended to be
made upon Hezekiah of the irresistible character of the Assyrian arms. - To offer a
successful resistance to Tirhakah and overcome him, Sennacherib wanted above all
things a firm footing in Judah; and for this the possession of Jerusalem was of the
greatest importance, since it would both cover his back and secure his retreat.
Fortifications like Lachish and Libnah could be quickly taken by a violent assault. But it
was very different with Jerusalem. Salmanasar had stood before Samaria for three years

38. before he was able to conquer it; and Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem for two years
before the city was starved out and it was possible to take it (2Ki_25:1.). But as Tirhakah
was approaching, Sennacherib had no time now for so tedious a siege. He therefore
endeavoured to induce Hezekiah to surrender the city quietly by a boastful description of
his own power. Instead of ‫ח‬ ַ‫ל‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ַ‫ו‬ ‫ב‬ ָ‫שׁ‬ָ ַ‫ו‬ (2Ki_19:9), we have in Isaiah ‫ח‬ ַ‫ל‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ַ‫ו‬ ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ִ ַ‫,ו‬ “when he
heard this he sent,” which is probably the more original, and indicates that when
Sennacherib received the intelligence he sent at once (Drechsler).
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:9. He heard say of Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, &c. —
Probably of Ethiopia beyond Egypt. For Josephus affirms that the Egyptians
(against whom, according to Herodotus and Berosus, this Sennacherib warred) and
Ethiopians were confederates in this expedition. It is most likely he was the same
with the Sabaco of Herodotus. See Universal Hist., vol. 4, p. 321. He sent messengers
again unto Hezekiah — It is probable the king of Assyria thought by this message to
terrify Hezekiah and the people to compliance, which it was now the more necessary
for him to do, as the invasion of Tirhakah rendered it less proper for him to attempt
so long a siege as that of Jerusalem was likely to prove.
ELLICOTT, "(9) Heard say of Tirhakah.—For the construction, comp. Psalms 2:7;
Psalms 3:2.
Tirhakah.—Called in Egyptian inscriptions Taharka, in Assyrian Tarqû; the
ταρακὺς of Manetho, and Teapxwws of Strabo. He was the last king of the 25th, or
Ethiopian (Cushite) dynasty, and son of Shabataka the son of Shabaka (2 Kings
17:4). Sennacherib does not name Tirhakah, but calls him “the king of Meluhhu,”
i.e., Meroë. The two successors of Sennacherib had further wars with Tirhakah.
Esarhaddon, according to notices in the annals of Assurbanipal, conquered
Tirhakah, “king of Mizraim and Cush, and divided Egypt between a number of
vassal kings. A list of twenty names is preserved, beginning with” echo king of
Memphis and Sais.” This was Esarhaddon’s tenth expedition (circ. 671 B.C. ).
Tirhakah, however, invaded Egypt once more, for “he despised the might of Asshur,
Istar, and the great gods my lords, and trusted to his own power.” This led to
Assurbanipal’s first expedition, which was directed against Egypt. Ewald and
Knobel suppose that Isaiah 18 refers to an embassy from Tirhakah asking the co-
operation of Judah against the common foe. If it be alleged that Shabataka was still
nominal king of Egypt, we may regard Tirhakah as commanding in his father’s
name. But Egyptian chronology is too uncertain to be allowed much weight in the
question.
PETT, "Verses 9-14
ews of The Approach Of A Large Egyptian Army Under Tirhakah, King Of Cush
(the Sudan), Causes A Change Of Attitude And A Further Attempt To Obtain King
Hezekiah’s Submission (2 Kings 19:9-14).
The news that a large Egyptian army was approaching led by the son of the

39. Egyptian Pharaoh, who bore the title ‘king of Cush’, caused a hurried change of
mind in the Assyrian camp. ow it was more urgent than ever to obtain the
surrender and submission of King Hezekiah. So messengers were sent with a letter
addressed to ‘Hezekiah King Of Judah’
Its contents were brief and to the point. As they were addressed to Hezekiah himself
they clearly did not tell him not to listen to Hezekiah. or did he mention Egypt. He
did not want Hezekiah to think of Egypt. It might give him the wrong idea. He too
might have heard of the approaching Egyptian army. (It was in fact quite
remarkable how besieged cities did appear to be able to get messengers in and out).
What they concentrated on was the obvious fact of the might of the kings of Assyria
past and present, and it should be noted that now it was not ‘King Hezekiah’ who
was deceiving the people, it was YHWH! There is a total change of emphasis. Once
again it would drive Hezekiah into the presence of YHWH.
Analysis.
a And when he heard say of Tirhakah king of Cush, “Behold, he is come out to
fight against you,” he sent messengers again to Hezekiah, saying (2 Kings 19:9).
b “Thus shall you speak to Hezekiah king of Judah, saying, Do not let your
God in whom you trust deceive you, saying, ‘Jerusalem will not be given into the
hand of the king of Assyria’ ” (2 Kings 19:10).
c “Behold, you have heard what the kings of Assyria have done to all lands, by
destroying them utterly, and will you be delivered?” (2 Kings 19:11).
b “Have the gods of the nations delivered them, which my fathers have
destroyed, Gozan, and Haran, and Rezeph, and the children of Eden who were in
Telassar? Where is the king of Hamath, and the king of Arpad, and the king of the
city of Sepharvaim, of Hena, and Ivvah?” (2 Kings 19:12-13).
a And Hezekiah received the letter from the hand of the messengers, and read
it, and Hezekiah went up to the house of YHWH, and spread it before YHWH (2
Kings 9:14).
ote that in ‘a’ messengers were sent to Hezekiah, and in the parallel he received
the king of Assyria’s letter from their hands. In ‘b’ he is called on, under his royal
title, not to let God deceive him into thinking that He could deliver Jerusalem, and
in the parallel the contrast is made with the gods of other nations who had failed to
deliver their nations and cities. Central in ‘c’ was the reminder of what the kings of
Assyria past and present had achieved in destroying ‘all lands’ utterly (a hint of
what would happen if they did not immediately surrender).
2 Kings 19:9
‘And when he heard say of Tirhakah king of Cush, “Behold, he is come out to fight
against you,” he sent messengers again to Hezekiah, saying,’
While conducting the siege at Libnah news came to the king of Assyria through his
spies that a large Egyptian army was approaching under Tirhakah, ‘king of Cush’.
We know that in 701 BC Tirhakah (Egyptian Taharqa; Assyrian Tarqu) was
certainly old enough to lead an Egyptian army (errors of the past having been

40. corrected). It has been argued that he was not king of Cush (the Sudan) at that time.
But as his father was not only king of Cush but also Pharaoh of Egypt it is quite
possible that in fact his father had given him the title of ‘king of Cush’ (a title also
used of him in Assyrian records). And even if not so he certainly became king of
Cush later. Thus it might just be an identifying description made by the author.
Either way there is nothing in it to throw doubt on the narrative.
This threat of an Egyptian army, of an as yet unknown size, naturally alarmed the
king of Assyria and made him recognise that he would be advised to obtain the
surrender of Jerusalem (and of course Libnah and the other cities of Judah still
remaining to be taken) prior to facing up to the Egyptians. The last thing he wanted
was to have Judaean forces combining with the Egyptians. Thus he altered his
tactics. Instead of appealing directly to the people of Jerusalem and degrading
‘Hezekiah’ in order to undermine his authority, he now sought to approach king
Hezekiah directly, treating him with honour, and using as his argument the
unfailing ability of kings of Assyria to defeat whom they would.
PULPIT, "2 Kings 19:9-14
Sennacherib's letter to Hezekiah. Sennacherib seems to have been induced to write
to Hezekiah by the fact that he could not march against him at once. A forward
movement on the part of Tirhakah was reported to him (2 Kings 19:9), and he
thought it necessary to meet, or at least watch it. But he must vent his anger on the
rebel Judaean monarch in some way. He sends a letter, therefore, as more weighty
and impressive than a mere message. He warns Hezekiah against being himself
deceived by Jehovah (2 Kings 19:10); and he expands his inductive argument in
proof of the irresistible might of Assyria, by an enumeration of four more recent
conquests (2 Kings 19:12). Otherwise, he does little but repeat what Rabshakeh had
already urged.
2 Kings 19:9
And when he heard say of Tirhakah King of Ethiopia. Tirhakah was one of the most
distinguished of the later Egyptian monarchs. An Ethiopian by birth, and originally
ruling from apata over the Upper ile valley from the First Cataract to (perhaps)
Khartoum, he extended his dominion over Egypt probably about B.C. 700,
maintaining, however, Shabatok, as a sort of puppet-king, upon the throne. About
B.C. 693 he succeeded Shabatok, and held the throne till B.C. 667, being engaged in
many wars with the Assyrians. The native form of his name is "Tahrak" or
"Tahark," the Assyrian "Tarku" or "Tarqu," the Greek "Taracos" or
"Tearchon." He has left numerous memorials in Egypt and Ethiopia, and was
regarded by the Greeks as a great conqueror. At the time of Sennacherib's second
attack on Hezekiah he was, as appears in the text, not yet King of Egypt, but only of
Ethiopia. Still, he regarded Egypt as practically under his suzerainty, and when it
was threatened by Sennacherib's approach, he marched to the rescue. Behold, he is
come out to fight against thee. He may have regarded himself as bound in honor to

41. come to the relief of Hezekiah, or he may have been simply bent on defending his
own territory. He sent messengers again unto Hezekiah, saying,
10 “Say to Hezekiah king of Judah: Do not let the
god you depend on deceive you when he says,
‘Jerusalem will not be given into the hands of the
king of Assyria.’
CLARKE, "Let not thy God in whom thou trustest - This letter is nearly the same
with the speech delivered by Rab-shakeh. See 2Ki_18:29.
HE RY 10-13, "I. Sennacherib sent a letter to Hezekiah, a railing letter, a
blaspheming letter, to persuade him to surrender Jerusalem, because it would be to no
purpose for him to think of standing it out. His letter is to the same purport with
Rabshakeh's speech; there is nothing new offered in it. Rabshakeh had said to the
people, Let not Hezekiah deceive you, 2Ki_18:29. Sennacherib writes to Hezekiah, Let
not thy God deceive thee, 2Ki_18:10. Those that have the God of Jacob for their help,
and whose hope is in the Lord their God, need not fear being deceived by him, as the
heathen were by their gods. To terrify Hezekiah, and drive him from his anchor, he
magnifies himself and his own achievements. See how proudly he boasts, 1. Of the lands
he had conquered (2Ki_18:11): All lands, and destroyed utterly! How are the mole-hills
of his victories swelled to mountains! So far was he from destroying all lands that at this
time the land of Cush, and Tirhakah its king, were a terror to him. What vast hyperboles
may one expect in proud men's praises of themselves! 2. Of the gods he had conquered,
2Ki_18:12. “Each vanquished nation and its gods, which were so far from being able to
deliver them that they fell with them: and shall thy God deliver thee?” 3. Of the kings he
had conquered (2Ki_18:13), the king of Hamath and the king of Arpad. Whether he
means the prince or the idol, he means to make himself appear greater than either, and
therefore very formidable, and the terror of the mighty in the land of the living.
K&D, "2Ki_19:10-11
ָ‫ך‬ ֲ‫יא‬ ִ ַ‫י‬ ‫ל‬ፍ: “let not thy God deceive thee,” i.e., do not allow yourself to be deceived by
your confidence in your God. ‫ּר‬‫מ‬‫א‬ ֵ‫,ל‬ to say, i.e., to think or believe, that Jerusalem will not
be given, etc. To shatter this confidence, Sennacherib reminds him of the deeds of the

42. Assyrian kings. ‫ם‬ ָ‫ימ‬ ִ‫ר‬ ֲ‫ֽח‬ ַ‫ה‬ ְ‫,ל‬ to ban them, i.e., by smiting them with the ban. The verb ‫ים‬ ִ‫ר‬ ֱ‫ח‬ ֶ‫ה‬
is chosen with emphasis, to express the unsparing destruction. ‫ל‬ ֵ‫צ‬ָ ִ‫ה‬ ‫ה‬ ָ ፍְ‫:ו‬ and thou
shouldst be saved? - a question implying a strong negative.
2Ki_19:12-13
BE SO , "Verse 10-11
2 Kings 19:10-11. Thus shall ye speak to Hezekiah — That is, these things shall ye
communicate; for they did not signify them by word of mouth, but in writing. Let
not thy God, in whom thou trustest, deceive thee — Rab- shakeh had said to the
people, Let not Hezekiah deceive you. Sennacherib writes to Hezekiah, Let not thy
God deceive thee. Those who have the God of Jacob for their help, and whose hope
is in the Lord their God, need not fear being deceived by him, as the heathen were
by their pretended gods. It is probable Sennacherib had heard that Hezekiah
professed to have an assurance from the Lord, that the king of Assyria should not
prevail against him. Behold thou hast heard, &c. — This letter is of the same import
with the former message, presuming that the God of Israel was like the gods of other
countries, and had no more power to preserve his worshippers than they had to
preserve theirs.
PETT, "“Thus shall you speak to Hezekiah king of Judah, saying, Do not let your
God in whom you trust deceive you, saying, ‘Jerusalem will not be given into the
hand of the king of Assyria.’ ”
This time his message was addressed in all honour to ‘Hezekiah, King of Judah’.
And he called on him not to let ‘his God’ deceive him into thinking that He could
deliver Jerusalem out of the king of Assyria’s hand. It would appear that he was
aware that YHWH had so spoken through His prophet(s). But he wanted him to
recognise that it was a vain hope for the reasons now to be given.
PULPIT, "Thus shall ye speak to Hezekiah King of Judah, saying. The messengers
brought a "letter" ( ‫ים‬ִ‫ָד‬‫פ‬ְ‫ס‬ ), as we see from 2 Kings 19:14; but still they were to
"speak to Hezekiah"—i.e. they were first to read the contents to him, and then to
hand him the copy. Let not thy God in whom thou trustest deceive thee, saying,
Jerusalem shall not be delivered into the hand of the King of Assyria. Sennacherib
drops the fiction that he himself is sent by Jehovah to attack Judaea and destroy it
(2 Kings 18:25), and contents himself with suggesting that any announcements
which Hezekiah may have received from his God are untrustworthy. Probably he
spoke his convictions. He did not think it possible that Jerusalem could resist or
escape him (comp. Isaiah 10:8-11 and Isaiah 10:13, Isaiah 10:14).
11 Surely you have heard what the kings of

43. Assyria have done to all the countries, destroying
them completely. And will you be delivered?
BAR ES, "2Ki_19:10-11
ָ‫ך‬ ֲ‫יא‬ ִ ַ‫י‬ ‫ל‬ፍ: “let not thy God deceive thee,” i.e., do not allow yourself to be deceived by
your confidence in your God. ‫ּר‬‫מ‬‫א‬ ֵ‫,ל‬ to say, i.e., to think or believe, that Jerusalem will not
be given, etc. To shatter this confidence, Sennacherib reminds him of the deeds of the
Assyrian kings. ‫ם‬ ָ‫ימ‬ ִ‫ר‬ ֲ‫ֽח‬ ַ‫ה‬ ְ‫,ל‬ to ban them, i.e., by smiting them with the ban. The verb ‫ים‬ ִ‫ר‬ ֱ‫ח‬ ֶ‫ה‬
is chosen with emphasis, to express the unsparing destruction. ‫ל‬ ֵ‫צ‬ָ ִ‫ה‬ ‫ה‬ ָ ፍְ‫:ו‬ and thou
shouldst be saved? - a question implying a strong negative.
2Ki_19:12-13
ISBET, "SE ACHERIB’S I VASIO
‘Shalt thou be delivered?’
2 Kings 19:11
We can descry the vast army, with its multitudinous brown tents, environing the
city of God, and the fierce people, whose deep guttural speech was unintelligible to
the Jew, counting the towers and making preparation for the assault.
I. The challenge of Sennacherib’s general.—(1) By speech.—In 2 Kings 18:17-18, the
names of the officers are given and the precise position they occupied; also the
officers of the king’s household whom they specially addressed. They seem to have
used the Assyrian language, speaking probably by interpretation, so that all who
stood on the wall were able to overhear what transpired (2 Kings 18:26).
The principal argument adduced was the futility of trusting in Jehovah. Evidently
the God of Israel had achieved great renown. There were things in history, like the
crossing of the Red Sea, that could only be accounted for by His mighty
interposition. How good it is when outsiders bear witness to the greatness and glory
of our God! Surely we ought so to love and speak of Him as to enhance His power.
But the contention of Sennacherib’s ambassadors was that Israel had no further
right to claim the intervention of Jehovah, because Hezekiah had destroyed His
altars and introduced drastic religious reforms.
Hezekiah, of course, was one of the greatest religious reformers of Hebrew story. It
was the story of Hezekiah’s great reforms which had filled Sennacherib and his
officers with hope. They supposed that Hezekiah had definitely broken with
Jehovah, and that the alliance which had been so potent was now at an end. They

44. did not realise that what Hezekiah had done was rather a tightening and
strengthening of that sacred covenant. When Sennacherib spoke so boastfully, how
little he realised that he was but an axe or rod in the hands of God, useful for the
fulfilment of judgment and then to be cast aside!
(2) By letter.—He wrote letters. The purport of these letters is given in Isaiah 37:9-
14. Everything was done, apparently, that could be done by threat and appeal to
intimidate the Jews and induce them to surrender their city without an effort at its
defence.
Are there not times when it seems as though the enemies of the faith were allied
against the holy city of God, predicting her speedy overthrow? How often have
agnostics and infidels boasted that they were confident of their success! In the story
of the inner life also, there are days when it seems as though we must succumb
before the dark and evil spirits who mock at our faith. At such times either the
Church or the individual soul experiences the precise counterpart of this fierce
attack upon Jerusalem.
II. The secret trust of God’s servants.—Hezekiah the king and the prophet Isaiah
‘prayed and cried to heaven.’ What a touching announcement! We have the account
and burden of Hezekiah’s prayer in Isaiah 37:14-20. The letter which he had just
received lay open and transparent before the Divine eyes, and over it the good king
poured forth a perfect litany of intercession which it is still well to appropriate. It
would be wise if we were quicker to follow his example! When annoying, trying, and
offensive letters come to hand we are too apt to sit hastily down at our writing tables
and dip our pens in vitriol. How often these replies of ours aggravate the situation!
How often it would have been better to have attempted no reply, but to have let God
deal with it all. So at least Hezekiah found it.
The king had hardly returned to his palace when a messenger from Isaiah brought
him God’s answer to his prayer. He had the petition which he had desired, not
actually in possession, but as good as if it were. This is the beauty and glory of faith,
that we receive from the hand of God His good and perfect gifts and rejoice in them
before they actually come to hand.
Thus in all ages faith has hidden in God whilst dreaded evils have passed over.
What a blessed result of this lesson it would be if multitudes would learn to put God
between themselves and their Sennacheribs!
III. The result.—Sennacherib’s army was withered by the breath of God. The
boaster’s pride was humiliated, his proud tongue silenced. There is a Divine justice
in national assassinations and revolutions which does not take away the evil of them,
though they accomplish the Divine purpose. Let us live in fellowship with God,
leaving Him to save and defend us, trusting Him to guide us on every side, and
accepting any honour which comes from our fellows as His gift.
Illustrations

45. (1) ‘It is a wonderful quality of Divine love that it puts itself in the place of those it
loves. He who harms a child of God smites God in the face. He who taunts a
Christian for righteousness taunts God. He who does any unkindness to one who
belongs to Christ treats God Himself unkindly. We have this taught very beautifully
in the ew Testament in the Master’s parable of the judgment, where we learn that
he who gives food to the hungry and drink to the thirsty, and who shows pity and
mercy to the sick, the stranger, the prisoner, is showing the same kindness to Christ
Himself; while he who passes by the hungry, the thirsty, the sick, and the stranger
without helping him, is passing by the Lord Christ Himself.’
(2) ‘God says to the proud, insulting Assyrian, that the treatment he gave to his
captives should be given to himself in turn. He would become God’s captive, and
God would put a hook in his nose and would lead him back to his own land in
chains. It is a statement of that infallible law, that with what measure we mete it
shall be measured to us again. He who treats others mercilessly will find no mercy in
judgment.’
PETT, "“Behold, you have heard what the kings of Assyria have done to all lands,
by destroying them utterly, and will you be delivered?”
He would undoubtedly have heard what the kings of Assyria had done to ‘all lands’
in the past. one of them had been able to resist him and such of them as had not
submitted had been utterly destroyed because of their failure to submit. That being
so how could king Hezekiah hope to be an exception? How could he expect that he
alone would be delivered?
‘Destroying them utterly.’ The word initially indicated being put under the sacred
Ban and thus being completely destroyed as ‘belonging to a deity’ (compare Jericho
- Joshua 6:24). But by this time it could simply indicate being utterly destroyed.
PULPIT, "Behold, thou hast heard what the kings of Assyria have done to all lands,
by destroying them utterly (see the comment on 2 Kings 18:33). The fact was
indisputable (secret. 17). The question remained—Would this triumphant career of
success necessarily continue? And shalt thou be delivered? A perfect induction is
impossible in practical matters. Anything short of a perfect induction is short of a
proof.
12 Did the gods of the nations that were destroyed
by my predecessors deliver them—the gods of
Gozan, Harran, Rezeph and the people of Eden

46. who were in Tel Assar?
BAR ES, "Haran - Harran, the Carrhae of the Greeks and Romans Gen_11:31, was
among the earliest conquests of the Assyrians; being subject to them from the 12th
century. Its conquest would have naturally followed that of Gozan (Gauzanitis, 2Ki_
17:6), which lay between it and Assyria proper.
Rezeph - Probably the Rozappa of the Assyrian inscriptions, a city in the
neighborhood of Haran.
The children of Eden - Or, “the Beni-Eden,” who appear from the Assyrian
inscriptions to have inhabited the country on the east bank of the Euphrates, about the
modern Balis. Here they had a city called Beth-Adina, taken by the Assyrians about 880
B.C. This is probably the “Eden” of marginal reference.
Thelasar - Or Telassar. Probably a city on the Euphrates, near Beth-Adina, called
after the name of the god Asshur. The name would signify “the Hill of Asshur.”
K&D, "2Ki_19:12-13
“Have the gods of the nations delivered them?” ‫ם‬ ָ‫ּת‬‫א‬ is not a pronoun used in
anticipation of the object, which follows in ‫וגו‬ ‫ן‬ָ‫ּוז‬ (Thenius), but refers to ‫ּות‬‫צ‬ ָ‫ר‬ ֲ‫א‬ ָ‫ל־ה‬ ָⅴ in
2Ki_19:11, a specification of which is given in the following enumeration. Gozan may be
the province of Gauzanitis in Mesopotamia, but it may just as well be the country of
Gauzania on the other side of the Tigris (see at 2Ki_17:6). The combination with Haran
does not force us to the first assumption, since the list is not a geographical but a
historical one. - Haran (Charan), i.e., the Carrae of the Greeks and Romans, where
Abraham's father Terah died, a place in northern Mesopotamia (see at Gen_11:31), is
probably not merely the city here, but the country in which the city stood. - Rezeph
(‫ף‬ ֶ‫צ‬ ֶ‫,)ר‬ the Arabic rutsâfat, a very widespread name, since Jakut gives nine cities of this
name in his Geographical Lexicon, is probably the most celebrated of the cities of that
name, the Rusapha of Syria, called ʇΡησάφα in Ptol. v. 15, in Palmyrene, on the road from
Racca to Emesa, a day's journey from the Euphrates (cf. Ges. Thes. p. 1308). - “The sons
of Eden, which (were in Telassar,” were evidently a tribe whose chief settlement was in
Telassar. By ‫ן‬ ֶ‫ד‬ ֶ‫ע‬ we might understand the ‫ן‬ ֶ‫ד‬ ֶ‫ית־ע‬ ֵ of Amo_1:5, a city in a pleasant region
of Syria, called Παράδεισος by Ptol. (v. 15), since there is still a village called Ehden in
that locality (cf. Burckhardt, Syr. p. 66, and v. Schubert, Reise, iii. p. 366), if we could
only discover Telassar in the neighbourhood, and if the village of Ehden could be
identified with Παράδεισος and the Eden of the Bible, as is done even by Gesenius on
Burckhardt, p. 492, and Thes. p. 195; but this Ehden is spelt ‛hdn in Arabic, and is not to
be associated with ‫ן‬ ֶ‫ד‬ ֶ‫ע‬ (see Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 586, 587). Moreover the Thelseae near
Damascus (in the Itin. Ant. p. 196, ed. Wess.) is too unlike Telassar to come into

47. consideration. There is more to be said in favour of the identification of our ‫ן‬ ֶ‫ד‬ ֶ‫ע‬ with the
Assyrian Eden, which is mentioned in Eze_27:23 along with Haran and Calneh as an
important place for trade, although its position cannot be more certainly defined; and
neither the comparison with the tract of land called (Syr.) ma‛āde
n, Maadon, which
Assemani (Biblioth. or. ii. p. 224) places in Mesopotamia, towards the Tigris, in the
present province of Diarbekr (Ges., Win.), nor the conjecture of Knobel that the tribe-
name Eden may very probably have been preserved in the large but very dilapidated
village of Adana or Adna, some distance to the north of Bagdad (Ker Porter, Journey, ii.
p. 355, and Ritter, Erdk. ix. p. 493), can be established as even a probability. ‫ר‬ ָ ‫א‬ ַ‫ל‬ ְ ,
Telassar, is also quite unknown. The name applies very well to Thelser on the eastern
side of the Tigris (Tab. Peut. xi. e), where even the later Targums on Gen_10:12 have
placed it, interpreting Nimrod's Resen by ‫ר‬ ַ‫ס‬ ְ‫ל‬ ַ‫,ת‬ ‫ר‬ ָ‫ס‬ፎ ְ‫ל‬ ַ‫,ת‬ though Knobel opposes this on
the ground that a place in Assyria proper is unsuitable in such a passage as this, where
the Assyrian feats of war outside Assyria itself are enumerated. Movers (Phöniz. ii. 3, p.
251) conjectures that the place referred to is Thelassar in Terodon, a leading emporium
for Arabian wares on the Persian Gulf, and supposes that Terodon has sprung from
Teledon with the Persian pronunciation of the ‫ל‬ ֵ‫,ת‬ which is very frequent in the names of
Mesopotamian cities. This conjecture is at any rate a more natural one than that of
Knobel on Isa_37:12, that the place mentioned in Assemani (Bib. or. iii. 2, p. 870),
(Arabic) tl b-ᑑrᑑr, Tel on the Szarszar, to the west of the present Bagdad, is intended. -
With regard to the places named in 2Ki_19:13, see at 2Ki_18:34.
ELLICOTT, "(12) My fathers.—Sargon his father founded the dynasty; but he
speaks of his predecessors generally as his “fathers.”
Gozan.—2 Kings 17:6.
Haran.—Also a west Aramean town, mentioned by Tiglath Pileser I. (circ. 1120 B.C.
) Shalmaneser II. speaks of its conquest. It had a famous sanctuary of the moon god
Sin. (See Genesis 11:31.)
Rezeph.—The Assyrian Raçappa, a town of Mesopotamia, often mentioned in the
inscriptions.
The children of Eden.—Schrader identifies this community with Bît-Adini (“the
house of Eden”), often mentioned by Assurnâçirpal and Shalmaneser II. The latter
records his defeat of Ahuni, “son of Eden,” a phrase which exactly corresponds to
“the children (sons) of Eden” here. It lay on both banks of the middle Euphrates,
between the present Bâlis and Birejik.
Thelasar.—Heb., Tĕlassar, the Assyrian Tul-Assuri (“Mound of Assur”). More than
one place bore the name.

48. PETT, "“Have the gods of the nations delivered them, which my fathers have
destroyed, Gozan, and Haran, and Rezeph, and the children of Eden who were in
Telassar?”
Then he listed nations which his fathers had destroyed, and pointed out that their
gods had been unable to deliver them from the kings of Assyria. Gozan was Tel
Halaf, taken by the Assyrian in 809 BC. Rezeph may be Rezaphe, north east of
Damascus, taken in 841 BC. Eden was the Assyrian province of Bit Adini south of
Harran with Telassar (Tel Assur) being one of its towns (compare Isaiah 37:12). All
these victories would have been well known to politically aware Judaeans. And that
being so how could they hope that YHWH would be able to do anything different?
PULPIT, "Have the gods of the nations delivered them which my fathers have
destroyed? The Assyrian kings always speak of all their predecessors as their
ancestors. In point of fact, Sennacherib bad had only one "father" among the
previous kings, viz. Sargon. As Gozan (see the comment on 2 Kings 17:6). It is
uncertain at what time Gozan was finally conquered and absorbed. It was
frequently overrun by the Assyrians from the reign of Tiglath-pileser I.; but it was
probably not absorbed until about B.C. 809. The Prefect of Gozan first appears in
the list of Assyrian Eponyms in B.C. 794. And Haran. "Haran" is generally
admitted to be the city of Terah (Genesis 11:32), and indeed there is no rival
claimant of the name. Its position was in the western part of the Gauzanitis region,
on the Belik, about lat. 36° 50' . It was probably conquered by Assyria about the
same time as Gozan. And Reseph. A town called "Razappa," probably "Rezeph,"
appears in the Assyrian inscriptions from an early date. It is thought to have been in
the near vicinity of Haran, but had been conquered and absorbed as early as B.C.
818. Whether it is identical with the Resapha of Ptolemy ('Geograph.,' 5.15) is
doubtful. And the children of Eden. Probably the inhabitants of a city called "Bit-
Adini" in the Assyrian inscriptions, which was on the Middle Euphrates, not far
from Carchemish, on the left bank. This place was conquered by Asshur-nazir-pal,
about B.C. 877. Which were in Thelasar. "Thelasar" is probably the Hebrew
equivalent of "Tel-Asshur," "the hill or fort of Asshur," which may have been the
Assyrian name of Bit-Adini, or of a city dependent on it. Asshur-nazir-pal gave
Assyrian names to several cities on the Middle Euphrates.
13 Where is the king of Hamath or the king of
Arpad? Where are the kings of Lair, Sepharvaim,
Hena and Ivvah?”

49. BAR ES, "Compare the marginal reference 2Ki_17:24. 2Ki_19:12 refers to former
Assyrian successes, 2Ki_19:13 to comparatively recent ones.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:13. Where is the king of Hamath, &c. — He may mean the
gods of these places, calling them their kings, because the people looked upon them
as their protectors and governors, which kings are or should be to their subjects: or
rather, he means their kings, properly so called. And so, as before he compared
their gods with the God of Jerusalem, so now he compares their kings with King
Hezekiah; and by both comparisons intends to persuade Hezekiah and his people
that neither he, their king, nor their God, was able to save them out of his hand.
ELLICOTT, "(13) The king.—Comp. 2 Kings 18:34, from which, as well as from
the sequence of thought in 2 Kings 19:12-13 here, it is clear that “king” is here used
as a synonym of local god. (Comp. Amos 5:26; Psalms 5:2 : “My King, and my
God.”)
PETT, "“Where is the king of Hamath, and the king of Arpad, and the king of the
city of Sepharvaim, of Hena, and Ivvah?”
Indeed let King Hezekiah himself consider what had happened to their kings and
learn a lesson from it. Where now was the king of Hamath (to the north of
Damascus, on the east bank of the Orontes; taken in 840 BC and retaken in 820
BC), the King of Arpad (a city in north Syria, Tel Rif‘at, 30 kilometres (twenty
miles) north west of Aleppo, also taken in 840 BC and retaken in 820 BC), the king
of Sepharvaim (site unknown although some identify with Sibraim near Damascus),
the king of Hena (possibly Ana on the Euphrates), the king of Ivvah (compare 2
Kings 17:24. Site unknown)? Sennacherib’s hope was to break Hezekiah’s spirit.
PULPIT, "Where is the King of Hamath. Ilu-bid, King of Hamath, raised a
rebellion against Sargon in B.C. 720, and was taken prisoner the same year and
carried to Assyria. And the King of Arpad. Arpad revolted in conjunction with
Hamath, and was reduced about the same time. Its "king" is not mentioned, but he
probably shared the fate of Ilu-bid. And the King of the city of Sepharvaim, of
Hens, and Ivah? It is probably not meant that these three cities were all of them
under the dominion of one and the same king. "King" is to be taken distributively.
(On the sites of the cities, see the comment upon 2 Kings 18:34.)

50. Hezekiah’s Prayer
14 Hezekiah received the letter from the
messengers and read it. Then he went up to the
temple of the Lord and spread it out before the
Lord.
BAR ES, "Hezekiah received the letter - The inscriptions show that scribes
accompanied the Assyrian armies, with the materials of their craft, so that such a
dispatch might be easily drawn up. As Hezekiah himself “read” it, we may presume that
it was in the Hebrew tongue.
CLARKE, "Spread it before the Lord - The temple was considered to be God’s
dwelling-place; and that whatever was there was peculiarly under his eye. Hezekiah
spread the letter before the Lord, as he wished him to read the blasphemies spoken
against himself.
HE RY 14-19, "II. Hezekiah encloses this in another letter, a praying letter, a
believing letter, and sends it to the King of kings, who judges among the gods. Hezekiah
was not so haughty as not to receive the letter, though we may suppose the
superscription did not give him his due titles; when he had received it he was not so
careless as not to read it; when he had read it he was not in such a passion as to write an
answer to it in the same provoking language; but he immediately went up to the temple,
presented himself, and then spread the letter before the Lord (2Ki_18:14), not as if God
needed to have the letter shown to him (he knew what was in it before Hezekiah did),
but hereby he signified that he acknowledged God in all his ways, - that he desired not to
aggravate the injuries his enemies did him nor to make them appear worse than they
were, but desired they might be set in a true light, - and that he referred himself to God,
and his righteous judgment, upon the whole matter. Hereby likewise he would affect
himself in the prayer he came to the temple to make; and we have need of all possible
helps to quicken us in that duty. In the prayer which Hezekiah prayed over this letter, 1.
He adores the God whom Sennacherib had blasphemed (2Ki_18:15), calls him the God
of Israel, because Israel was his peculiar people, and the God that dwelt between the
cherubim, because there was the peculiar residence of his glory upon earth; but he gives
glory to him as the God of the whole earth, and not, as Sennacherib fancied him to be,
the God of Israel only, and confined to the temple. “Let them say what they will, thou art
sovereign Lord, for thou art the God, the God of gods, sole Lord, even thou alone,
universal Lord of all the kingdoms of the earth, and rightful Lord, for thou hast made
heaven and earth. Being Creator of all, by an incontestable title thou art owner and ruler
of all.” 2. He appeals to God concerning the insolence and profaneness of Sennacherib

51. (2Ki_18:16): “Lord, hear; Lord, see. Here it is under his own hand; here it is in black
and white.” Had Hezekiah only been abused, he would have passed it by; but it is God,
the living God, that is reproached, the jealous God. Lord, what wilt thou do for thy great
name? 3. He owns Sennacherib's triumphs over the gods of the heathen, but
distinguishes between them and the God of Israel (2Ki_18:17, 2Ki_18:18): He has
indeed cast their gods into the fire; for they were no gods, unable to help either
themselves or their worshipers, and therefore no wonder that he has destroyed them;
and, in destroying them, though he knew it not, he really served the justice and jealousy
of the God of Israel, who has determined to extirpate all the gods of the heathen. But
those are deceived who think they can therefore be too hard for him. He is none of the
gods whom men's hands have made, but he has himself made all things, Psa_115:3, Psa_
115:4. 4. He prays that God will now glorify himself in the defeat of Sennacherib and the
deliverance of Jerusalem out of his hands (2Ki_19:19): “Now therefore save us; for if we
be conquered, as other lands are, they will say that thou art conquered, as the gods of
those lands were: but, Lord, distinguish thyself, by distinguishing us, and let all the
world know, and be made to confess, that thou art the Lord God, the self-existent
sovereign God, even thou only, and that all pretenders are vanity and a lie.” Note, The
best pleas in prayer are those which are taken from God's honour; and therefore the
Lord's prayer begins with Hallowed be thy name, and concludes with Thine is the glory.
JAMISO 14-19, "2Ki_19:14-34. Hezekiah’s prayer.
Hezekiah received the letter ... and went up into the house of the Lord —
Hezekiah, after reading it, hastened into the temple, spread it in the childlike confidence
of faith before the Lord, as containing taunts deeply affecting the divine honor, and
implored deliverance from this proud defier of God and man. The devout spirit of this
prayer, the recognition of the Divine Being in the plenitude of His majesty - so strikingly
contrasted with the fancy of the Assyrians as to His merely local power; his
acknowledgment of the conquests obtained over other lands; and of the destruction of
their wooden idols which, according to the Assyrian practice, were committed to the
flames - because their tutelary deities were no gods; and the object for which he
supplicated the divine interposition - that all the kingdoms of the earth might know that
the Lord was the only God - this was an attitude worthy to be assumed by a pious
theocratic king of the chosen people.
K&D, "Hezekiah's prayer. - 2Ki_19:14. Hezekiah took the letter, read it, went into
the temple and spread it out before Jehovah, to lay open its contents before God. The
contents of the letter are given in 2Ki_19:10-13 in the form of the message which the
ambassadors delivered to Hezekiah from their king, because the ambassadors
communicated to Hezekiah by word of mouth the essential contents of the writing which
they conveyed, and simply handed him the letter as a confirmation of their words. ‫ים‬ ִ‫ר‬ ָ‫פ‬ ְ‫,ס‬
like litterae, means a letter; hence the singular suffix attached to ‫הוּ‬ ֵ‫שׂ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ְ‫פ‬ִ ַ‫,ו‬ whereas in the
case of ‫ם‬ ֵ‫א‬ ָ‫ר‬ ְ‫ק‬ִ ַ‫,ו‬ which stands nearer, the suffix follows the number of the noun to which it
refers. The spreading out of the letter before God was an embodiment of the wish, which
sprang from a child-like and believing trust, that the Lord would notice and punish that
defiance of the living God which it contained. What Hezekiah meant by this action he
expressed in the following prayer.

52. BE SO , "2 Kings 19:14. Hezekiah went up into the house of the Lord — Into the
outward court of the temple, for further he might not go, and at the entrance of the
court of the priests, he looked toward the sanctuary, where God was peculiarly
present, and spread the letter before him; which he did, not to acquaint God with its
contents, but as a token that he appealed to him concerning them, and referred
himself and his cause to his righteous judgment, expecting him to answer for
himself, and manifest that power which the king of Assyria had so daringly
blasphemed. He meant also hereby to affect his own mind, strengthen his own faith,
and quicken his desires in prayer, to a greater degree of fervency.
COFFMA , ""And Hezekiah ... spread it (the letter) before Jehovah" (2 Kings
19:14). "This was a symbolical action representing his prayer to Jehovah."[12]
However, this was in no sense such a thing as the prayer-wheels of the Buddhists, or
the petitions written on tiny strips of paper and attached to sacred trees. "What
Hezekiah meant by his spreading out that letter in the house of Jehovah is spelled
out in the prayer which followed."[13]
The prayer itself reaches sublime theological excellence. God is addressed, not
merely as Israel's God, but as THE GOD OF ALL ATIO S and THE CREATOR
OF HEAVE A D EARTH. Furthermore, the basis of Hezekiah's humble plea for
the salvation of his city is not based merely upon their own selfish interests, nor
upon any claim that Israel deserved such a rescue, but, "Upon the need for the
vindication of God's glory,"[14] and, "That all the kingdoms of the earth may know
that thou Jehovah art God alone" (2 Kings 19:19).
In this prayer Hezekiah also refuted Sennacherib's claim of having defeated the
gods of all nations. That pagan ruler had equated Jehovah with all the gods of the
pagans, but, "Hezekiah insisted that those gods were `no gods,' `mere blocks of
wood or stone,' the works of the hands of men, but that Jehovah was the God of all
the kingdoms of the earth."[15]
ELLICOTT, "(14) The letter.—The Hebrew word is plural, like the Latin litterae.
The first “it” is plural, the second singular. 2 Kings 19:10-13 may be regarded as
embodying the substance of the letter, which the envoys first delivered orally, and
then presented the letter to authenticate it. But perhaps the contents of the letter
were not preserved in the Hebrew annals.
Spread it before the Lord.—Commentators have taken offence at this act, as if it
betokened some heathenish conception of Jehovah. “Très-naïvement, pour que Dieu
la lût aussi” (Reuss). But one who could think of his God as having “made heaven
and earth,” and as the only God, would not be likely to imagine Him ignorant of the
contents of a letter until it had been laid before Him in His sanctuary. Hezekiall’s
act was a solemn and perfectly natural indication to his ministers and people that he
had put the matter into the hands of Jehovah.

53. GUZIK, "4. (2 Kings 19:14-19) Hezekiah’s prayer.
And Hezekiah received the letter from the hand of the messengers, and read it; and
Hezekiah went up to the house of the LORD, and spread it before the LORD. Then
Hezekiah prayed before the LORD, and said: “O LORD God of Israel, the One who
dwells between the cherubim, You are God, You alone, of all the kingdoms of the
earth. You have made heaven and earth. Incline Your ear, O LORD, and hear; open
Your eyes, O LORD, and see; and hear the words of Sennacherib, which he has sent
to reproach the living God. Truly, LORD, the kings of Assyria have laid waste the
nations and their lands, and have cast their gods into the fire; for they were not
gods, but the work of men’s hands; wood and stone. Therefore they destroyed them.
ow therefore, O LORD our God, I pray, save us from his hand, that all the
kingdoms of the earth may know that You are the LORD God, You alone.”
a. Hezekiah went up to the house of the LORD, and spread it before the LORD:
Hezekiah did exactly what any child of God should do with such a letter. He took it
to the house of the LORD (to the outer courts, not the holy place), and he spread it
out before the LORD. In this, Hezekiah boldly and effectively fulfilled the later
command of 1 Peter 5:7 : casting all your care upon Him, for He cares for you.
i. “As a child bringing his broken toy to his father for repair, so Hezekiah laid the
issues in God’s sight for resolution.” (Patterson and Austel)
ii. “In 2 Kings 19:14, Hezekiah reacted to the second letter in a different manner. He
didn’t go to Isaiah. He went to the temple and prayed alone, taking his plea directly
to the Lord. Both kinds of prayer are appropriate for a believer who is facing a
crisis.” (Dilday)
iii. “When therefore letters come to you, anonymous or otherwise, full of bitter
reproach; when unkind and malignant stories are set on foot with respect to you;
when all hope from man has perished, then take your complaint - the letter, the
article, the speech, the rumour - and lay it before God. Let your requests be known
unto Him.” (Meyer)
iv. One old preacher received a letter with no sender or return address on the
envelope. When he opened it, he saw a single piece of paper with only one word:
“Fool!” He took it to the pulpit the next Sunday, and said: “I received an unusual
letter this week. ever before have I received a letter where the writer signed his
name, but forgot to write anything else!”
b. God of Israel: This title for God reminded Hezekiah - and the LORD also, in our
human way of understanding - that the LORD God was the covenant God of Israel,
and that He should not forsake His people.
i. As recorded in Isaiah 37:16, Hezekiah also used another title when he addressed

54. God, crying out “O LORD of hosts.” This title for our God essentially means,
“LORD of armies.” Hezekiah was in a crisis that was primarily military in nature,
so it made sense for him to address the LORD first according to the aspect of God’s
nature that was most needful for him. “LORD of armies, send some troops to help
us!”
c. The One who dwells between the cherubim: Here, Hezekiah saw the great majesty
of God. Surely, the One who dwells between the cherubim would never allow the
Rabshakeh’s blasphemies to go unpunished.
i. “He is our Judge, Lawgiver, and King, and is therefore bound by the most solemn
obligation to save us, or his name will be tarnished.” (Meyer)
d. You are God, You alone: God is a simple title for our LORD, but perhaps the
most powerful. If He is God, then what can He not do? If He is God, then what is
beyond His control? Hezekiah realized the most fundamental fact of all theology:
God is God, and we are not! God is God, and the Rabshakeh or the Assyrians are
not!
e. You have made heaven and earth: In recognizing the LORD God as Creator,
Hezekiah saw that the LORD had all power and all rights over every created thing.
We can almost feel Hezekiah’s faith rising as he prayed this!
f. Incline Your ear, O LORD, and hear; open Your eyes, O LORD, and see:
Hezekiah knew very well that the LORD did in fact hear and see the blasphemies of
Rabshakeh. This is a poetic way of asking God to act upon what He has seen and
heard, assuming that if God has seen such things, He will certainly act!
g. Hear he words of Sennacherib, which he has sent to reproach the living God: In
his prayer, King Hezekiah drew the contrast between the living God and the false
gods of the nations the Assyrians had already conquered. Those false gods were not
gods, but the work of men’s hands; wood and stone, so they were not able to save
them from the Assyrians. But Hezekiah prayed confidently that the living God
would save them, that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that You are the
LORD God, You alone.
ISBET, "THE SPREAD LETTER
‘And Hezekiah received the letter … and spread it before the Lord.’
2 Kings 19:14
I. Here is a good man whose first thought in trouble is to carry the distress to
God.—The Temple and the altar are Hezekiah’s natural and inevitable refuge; he
never thinks of going anywhere else. I would be like him. I would flee to God before
consulting with any human helper, and before sitting down to ponder the matter in
my own mind.
II. Here is a good man who does not presume to dictate to God how He is to act.—

55. Hezekiah spreads the insulting letter of the Assyrian prince before the heavenly
King; he explains his own sorrow and need; and there he stops. He does not
prescribe to One so much wiser than himself. Thus, having told my Father
everything, let me leave Him to decide what to do. He makes no mistakes. He will
choose the right path.
III. Here is a good man who feels that God’s honour and glory are bound up with
his deliverance.—And if I am joined with Christ, God’s dear Son, the same
conviction should be mine. He cannot suffer me to perish. His own character
demands that I shall be more than a conqueror.
Illustration
‘ o one of us knows how soon he may have occasion to practise this lesson. o one
of us knows how soon some distressing letter, some heavy tidings, may come
suddenly upon him, and the only thing he can do with it will be to go and spread it
before the Lord: no relief, no consolation, but to betake himself to our Lord Jesus
Christ, tell Him the whole grief, cast all the burden upon Him. If such a moment
should come, and come it will sooner or later, should we live any long time in the
world, to every one of us; what a blessing will it prove, should we have been trained
beforehand to seek the Lord, to commit all to Him in regular prayer! What a help,
what a privilege at such a time to be conscious that you are not in the agony of the
moment setting about something which you have never been used to before! you are
not resorting in your extremity to an untried physician, but to Him Whose healing
power you have known by happy experience all your life long unto this day!’
PETT, "‘And Hezekiah received the letter from the hand of the messengers, and
read it, and Hezekiah went up to the house of YHWH, and spread it before
YHWH.’
Hezekiah’s response was to receive the letter from the hand of the messengers, read
it and then go to the Temple of YHWH and spread it out before YHWH. ‘Before
YHWH’ often only indicates simply the inner court, but Hezekiah may well have
entered the porch of the Holy Place. He could not, of course, enter the Holy Place
itself. That was only for the priests. Compare here Ezekiel 46:2. The ‘spreading out’
indicates a document on either papyrus or leather.
There is a reminder for us all here that when we receive a difficult communication,
the next thing to do after reading it is to spread it out before God.
In Mesopotamia it was normal practise for political communications, once read, to
be lodged in a temple where the gods could be made aware of them. Hezekiah’s
behaviour stressed his belief in the personal interest of YHWH in what had been
written.
PULPIT, "And Hezekiah received the letter. It had not been previously stated that

56. Sennacherib had written a letter. But the author forgets this, and so speaks of "the
letter." Kings generally communicated by letters, and not merely by messages (see 2
Kings 5:5; 2 Kings 20:12; 2 Chronicles 2:11; ehemiah 1:9, etc.). Of the hand of the
messengers, and read it. Probably Sennacherib had caused it to be written in
Hebrew. And Hezekiah went up into the house of the Lord, and spread it before the
Lord. ot as if God would not otherwise know the contents of the letter, but to
emphasize his detestation of the letter, and to make it silently plead for him with
God. Ewald rightly compares what Judas Maccabaeus did with the disfigured
copies of the Law at Maspha (1 Mace. 3:48), but incorrectly calls it "a laying down
of the object in the sanctuary." Maspha was "over against" the temple, at the
distance of a mile or more.
15 And Hezekiah prayed to the Lord: “Lord, the
God of Israel, enthroned between the cherubim,
you alone are God over all the kingdoms of the
earth. You have made heaven and earth.
BAR ES, "Which dwellest between the cherubims - The reference is to the
shechinah, or miraculous glory, which from time to time appeared above the mercy-seat
from between the two cherubims, whose wings overshadowed the ark of the covenant
(1Ki_6:23-27; compare Exo_25:22; Lev_16:2, etc.).
Thou art the God, even thou alone - This is the protest of the pure theist against
the intense polytheism of Sennacherib’s letter, which assumes that gods are only gods of
particular nations, and that Hezekiah’s God is but one out of an indefinite number, no
stronger or more formidable than the rest.
CLARKE, "Thou art the God, etc. - Thou art not only God of Israel, but God also of
Assyria, and of all the nations of the world.
K&D, "2Ki_19:15
In opposition to the delusion of the Assyrians, he describes Jehovah, the God of Israel,
as the only God of all the kingdoms of the earth, since He was the Creator of heaven and
earth. ‫ים‬ ִ‫ב‬ ֻ‫ר‬ ְⅴ ַ‫ה‬ ‫ב‬ ֵ‫ּשׁ‬‫י‬ (see at 1Sa_4:4 and Exo_25:22) indicates the covenant-relation into
which Jehovah, the almighty Creator and Ruler of the whole world, had entered towards
Israel. As the covenant God who was enthroned above the cherubim the Lord was bound
to help His people, if they turned to Him with faith in the time of their distress and

57. entreated His assistance; and as the only God of all the world He had the power to help.
In Isaiah, ‫ּות‬‫א‬ ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫,צ‬ which is very rare in historical prose, but very common in prophetical
addresses, is added to the name ‫ה‬ָ‫ּו‬‫ה‬ְ‫,י‬ and thus Jehovah at the very outset is addressed as
the God of the universe. On the meaning of ‫ּות‬‫א‬ ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫,צ‬ see at 1Sa_1:3. On ‫ים‬ ִ‫ּה‬‫ל‬ ֱ‫א‬ ָ‫ה‬ ‫הוּא‬ ‫ה‬ ָ ፍ, see
2Sa_7:28 and 1Ki_18:39.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:15. Hezekiah prayed and said, O Lord God of Israel, &c. —
He calls him the God of Israel, because Israel was his peculiar people; and the God
that dwelt between the cherubim, because there was the peculiar residence of his
glory on earth; but he gives glory to him as the God of the whole earth, and not, as
Sennacherib fancied, the God of Israel only. Let them say what they will, thou art
sovereign Lord, the God of gods, even thou alone; universal Lord of all the
kingdoms of the earth; and rightful Lord; for thou hast made heaven and earth —
Being Creator of all, by an incontestable title thou art owner and ruler of all.
ELLICOTT, "(15) Which dwellest between the cherubims.—Rather, which sittest
above the cherubim, or, the cherub-throned. (Comp. Exodus 25:22; 1 Samuel 4:4;
Psalms 18:10; Ezekiel 1:26.)
Thou art the God.—With emphasis on Thou. Thou art the true God, thou alone,
unto all the kingdoms, &c.
Thou hast made.—Thou it was that madest. The thought is, And therefore Thou
art—the only God for all the kingdoms (comp. Isaiah 40:18 seq.), and “the only
ruler of princes.”
ISBET, "HEZEKIAH’S PRAYER
‘And Hezekiah prayed before the Lord.’
2 Kings 19:15
I. Observe the one plea upon which Hezekiah rests his cause.—He says nothing of
himself, and of the services which he had wrought, and the reformation which he
had promoted throughout the land. It was but a small matter that Hezekiah and his
people should perish: there might be reasons why God would be pleased to suffer
the threatened danger to overwhelm them. But God’s own honour was at stake.
Hezekiah hoped that He would not suffer the nations of the earth to conclude that
He was of no more power and might than the worthless idols, which of course had
been unable to deliver their votaries from the hand of their enemies. He pleaded
with Him to vindicate His own greatness, and deliver those who trusted in Him.
II. Thus Hezekiah sought and found relief in his anxiety, and the account of it is
detailed with such fullness in Scripture, not only that we may admire Hezekiah’s
assured trust and hope in God, but may ourselves go and do likewise.—What have
we to do, when any danger, affliction, or perplexity befall us, but lay our case before
God, as Hezekiah did? Who can tell what a blessing this history would be to us, if

58. the very next time that any bad news was brought to us, whether it concerned
ourselves personally, or our family, or our country, or the Church of God, we would
go at once, without allowing ourselves to brood over our trouble, and perhaps grow
fretful, desponding, and uncharitable, and lay it with all our fear and sorrow before
our merciful Father, whether in His own House, to which Hezekiah repaired, or in
the retirement of our own chamber? Who can tell how it would soothe and
strengthen our hearts, and enable us to bear the impending blow? Even if it should
still please God that the blow should fall, the act of communing with Him as our
friend, and pouring out our hearts before Him, would be a stay and comfort,
according to those precious words of the Apostle: ‘Be careful for nothing; but in
everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests be made
known unto God; and the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep
your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus.’
Illustrations
(1) ‘This Lesson shows us a good man in a great trial. Hezekiah was king of Judah.
The king of Assyria was threatening him, and in a human sense there seemed no
possibility of being able to defend himself against the great host of the Assyrians. He
took the matter to the Lord, and here we have the result. The Lord took the king’s
trouble into His own hands, and brought about the destruction of the host of
Assyrians.’
(2) ‘Prayer is heard—that is one great lesson. We may safely lay all the interests of
our life, all our dangers, sorrows, and losses before God in prayer. The surest
weapon we can use against any one who is trying to hurt us is to pray against him—
not bitterly nor with resentment, but by laying all the hurt and danger before God,
that He may take care of our interests for His own name’s sake.’
(3) ‘God is ready always to help us with our troubles and dangers. He told Hezekiah
that He had heard his prayer against Sennacherib. We are not likely to be in such
condition as Hezekiah was in, but there are other enemies than Assyrians. When
temptation besieges us and we have no power against it, we may take the matter to
God and tell Him about it, and He will hear us. Whatever danger or trouble we are
in, if we go to God with it He will hear us and answer us.’
PETT, "Verses 15-19
The Prayer Of King Hezekiah (2 Kings 19:15-19).
It is almost impossible for us to appreciate the tension which Hezekiah must have
been experiencing at this time. Outside the city walls were the enemy. Inside were
what remained of his people. It was to be his decision as to what to do next. And he
did not know what to do. His prayer was simple and to the point.
· Firstly he considered just Whom it was to Whom he was speaking. It was the
God of Israel, the One Who sits between the cherubim, the one Who is the only God

59. and God alone, the Creator of Heaven and earth.
· Then he called on God to hear and look and consider the situation, and
especially these words that he had received from the king of Assyria, which He
should note were in defiance of Him as the living God.
· Then he humbly acknowledged the truth of what Sennacherib had written. It
was true that the kings of Assyria had laid waste the lands and cities mentioned, and
had cast their gods into the fire. But that had been because they were no-gods, and
simply the works of man’s hands (he had been well taught by Isaiah - see Isaiah
40:18-20; Isaiah 44:9-20). It was that that explained how they could be burned.
· And finally he called on YHWH to demonstrate to all the kingdoms of the
earth that He was different from all others, so that they might know that He alone
was God.
Thus having reached the end of his resources Hezekiah had recognised that his only
hope lay in God, and his approach was not on the basis of his own need, nor of the
need of his people, but on the basis that Sennacherib had insulted YHWH and that
YHWH should vindicate His ame for His own glory. His concern was for the
honour and ame of YHWH. That should be at the root of all prayer.
Analysis.
a And Hezekiah prayed before YHWH, and said, “O YHWH, the God of
Israel, who sits between the cherubim, you are the God, even you alone, of all the
kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth” (2 Kings 19:15).
b “Incline your ear, O YHWH, and hear; open your eyes, O YHWH, and see;
and hear the words of Sennacherib, by which he has sent him to defy the living
God” (2 Kings 19:16).
c “Of a truth, YHWH, the kings of Assyria have laid waste the nations and
their lands, and have cast their gods into the fire; for they were no gods, but the
work of men’s hands, wood and stone, therefore they have destroyed them” (2 Kings
19:17-18).
b “ ow therefore, O YHWH our God, save you us, I beseech you, out of his
hand (2 Kings 19:19 a)
a “So that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that you YHWH are God
alone” (2 Kings 19:19 b).
ote that in ‘a’ he calls on God as the One Who alone is God of all the kingdoms of
the earth, and in the parallel it is that all the kingdoms of the earth might know that
he is God alone. In ‘b’ he points to the threatening words of Sennacherib as defiance
of the living God, and in the parallel he asks to be delivered out of his hand. Central
in ‘c’ is the admission that the kings of Assyria have destroyed all other gods, but
that that was simply because they were no-gods.
2 Kings 19:15
‘And Hezekiah prayed before YHWH, and said, “O YHWH, the God of Israel, who
sits between the cherubim, you are the God, even you alone, of all the kingdoms of
the earth. You have made heaven and earth.” ’
Performing his responsibility as an intercessory priest of YHWH Hezekiah first

60. contemplates Who YHWH is. (It is always wise to consider exactly Who God is
before we pray). And he considered Him as the One Who sits between the
Cherubim, of which the Ark with its Cherubim was the symbol. But this was not to
limit Him to the Temple, for both the Psalms and Isaiah (2 Kings 6:1-7) make clear
that YHWH was seen as sitting between and borne by the real Cherubim (see 2
Samuel 22:11; Psalms 80:1; Psalms 99:1; compare also for the idea umbers 7:89).
Thus He was the God of Heaven. But He was also the only God of all the kingdoms
of the earth. For He was the sole Creator of heaven and earth. And it was as the only
God that he now approached Him.
PULPIT, "And Hezekiah prayed before the Lord, and said, O Lord God of Israel.
In the parallel passage of Isaiah 37:16 we find, "O Lord of hosts, Cod of Israel."
Our author probably abbreviates. Which dwellest between the cherubims; or, on
the cherubim—"which hast thy seat," i.e; behind the veil in the awful holy of holies,
consecrated to thee, and where thou dost manifest thyself." Hezekiah, as Keil
observes, calls into prominence "the covenant relation into which Jehovah, the
Almighty Creator and Ruler of the whole world, had entered towards Israel. As the
covenant God, who was enthroned above the cherubim, the Lord was bound to help
his people, if they turned to him with faith in the time of their distress and entreated
his assistance." Thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth.
Thou art not, i.e; as Sennacherib supposes, a mere local god, presiding over Judaea,
and protecting it; but thou art the God of all the earth and of all its kingdoms,
including his own, equally. Moreover, thou alone art the God of the kingdoms. Their
supposed gods are no gods, have no existence, are the mere fictions of an idle and
excited imagination, are mere "breath" and "nothingness." Thou hast made heaven
and earth. Whereas they have done nothing, have given no proof of their existence
(see Isaiah 41:23, Isaiah 41:24).
BI 15-19, "2 Kings 19:15-19
And Hezekiah prayed unto the Lord.
What to do when trouble comes
Hezekiah the King of Judah was in very great trouble. For some time the forces of the
Assyrian had overcome the land and had taken the fenced cities: Jerusalem had been
spared only on payment of a ransom that had greatly impoverished it. But that sufficed
for a time only: and now the hosts of the enemy had gathered again and demanded its
surrender. The city of Samaria had fallen and all the land was possessed by Assyria. It
was an insult to the proud conqueror that Jerusalem alone should defy him. Round
about the walls gathered their forces, and Rab-shakeh the commander had come near to
the city and Cried aloud in the ears of all the people his threats against them and his
summons to surrender. To his blasphemies Hezekiah had given no answer. Leaving
forces enough behind him to sustain the siege Rab-shakeh had marched off then to join
his royal master elsewhere. But now Egypt was marching up to fight the Assyrian. Of
that Jerusalem could know nothing; but Rab-shakeh was anxious to withdraw the army
from Jerusalem in order to strengthen his own forces; and he wrote a letter, impudent

61. and blasphemous, thinking to frighten Hezekiah into surrender
1. The first thing for us to look at is this,—A king in trouble. Troubled soul, do not
think within yourself that your case is peculiar,—all men have their troubles. Do not
go envying any man, for no position will bring escape from trouble. But further, here
is a good man in trouble. Turn to the beginning of the previous chapter and read the
record of this man. The worst thing that could befall us in this world would be for us
to have in anything our own way.
3. Again, here was a very great trouble. Net for himself was it that Hezekiah thought
only or even mostly, though this was quite enough to think about. A crown and
throne and all the proud position of king is quite enough to lose at one blow. But that
was swallowed up in his concern about his people and the perils that beset them.
4. And it was a trouble for which there seemed to be no help. Samaria had fallen, and
they looked in vain towards the north. (M. G. Pearse.)
Prayer in emergencies
The Christian believes in a revelation from God. Revelation unfolds many things which
we could not discover for ourselves, explains or accounts for many actions or events
which are puzzling without it. It takes us beyond second causes to the fountain head of
all plans and transactions; it deals with what we see not as merely hard dry facts, but
facts with a meaning and purpose; it tells of a higher, nobler, state of being belonging to
us; and of spiritual powers which have influence over us; it speaks to us of Him “in
Whom we live, and move, and have our being.” What is prayer? It is the means of
holding communication with the unseen world—all worship may be called prayer, for it
is the approach of man to God—the setting on foot a line of connection with our great
Invisible Ruler. If we at all understand our real complex nature, the union of an invisible
spirit with our outward bodies, we must see that our intercourse with the invisible world
is all important, and that an acknowledgment of our dependence upon the Supreme
Invisible Ruler is indispensable to our true and complete character. Prayer is a sign of
weakness, but an instrument of strength; it is a confession of our own inability, bur’s
laying our grasp upon the strong and mighty One, able to do all things. We pray because
we feel weak, but by prayer we feel strong. It is not for God’s information, but for our
security—not to persuade Him, but to prove our trust in Him—that we pray. It is of use
because it thus brings us consciously within the circle of His willing influence. It is of
obligation, because it is commanded by Him. Some men object to prayer as if it were
useless. They say, “God has laid down certain rules for the government of the world—
certain clear laws—and it is not to be expected that He should alter these laws for us,
when we choose to ask Him to do so.” But this surely is to make Almighty God a slave of
His own creatures. The Lawgiver has always power and the right to suspend His laws if
He will, and in this case the Lawgiver is such that it were an insult to Him to suppose
Him unable to suspend the action of His laws in a particular instance without
disarranging the whole machinery of the world, and putting it out of gear. Besides, His
laws are framed not blindly but with that infinite foresight which would enable Him to
foresee all prayers, all claims or entreaties for exemption from the working of His laws.
In the case of men we might reasonably think that laws would be inoperative if
exemptions were made at every turn, but in the case of Almighty God this conclusion
would not hold. He may maintain the principles on which His laws are based, even while
He suspends their action in special cases. Infinite Wisdom must needs be allowed
elasticity in the observance of His own laws, and He may surely with all justice and

62. consistency make His laws contingent upon man’s actions; and after all, the Supreme
Lord keeps in His own Hands the continuance of any laws He makes, He gives force to
His laws, His will is the motive power; therefore, if He will, the law must become
inoperative, if He will to listen to man’s prayer, the answer must come. Now, prayer is
generally to be regarded as a habit. But there is another kind of prayer—prayer in
emergencies. Though our life is on the whole monotonous, i.e., the same things happen
day after day, the same needs come, and therefore the same prayers are needed, yet
occasional occurrences intervene, requiring special attention and immediate thought
and help. Then we must seek instant succour. To delay may be fatal; to wait for our
morning or evening prayer must be to wait till the special danger has gone by, or has
fallen upon us. It becomes us, the moment the peril is recognised, to fall on our knees
and call in the intervention of God Almighty. We have in the case of Hezekiah an
admirable instance of the power and efficacy of prayer. But supposing the Assyrians had
not been destroyed, but had carried on the siege and triumphed, would Hezekiah’s
prayer have received no answer? God graciously sent a complete answer for the
encouragement of His people, and for the discomfiture of the vaunting Assyrians; but
even if so direct an answer had not been given, the prayer of faith would not have been in
vain. All that God promises is to answer—not to answer exactly as we wish. Suppose a
danger imminent: sickness nigh unto death; a shipwreck; a fire; an invasion of our
country; you would fain extricate yourself from the peril. There may be plenty to
volunteer advice: first one and then another specific is suggested; various lines of policy,
all conflicting, all perhaps hopeless to all appearance. Yet there is another resource: take
your anxieties and spread them before the Lord, take them especially into the house of
the Lord. Another form of perplexity arises from mental or spiritual difficulties: you fail
to see the truth of some Christian doctrine; or you cannot discover what truth is;
opposite opinions present themselves, and there is a temptation to cast off all belief
because you cannot come to a decision in your own mind as to which is the true
doctrine; some minds, for instance, have a difficulty in accepting the doctrine of the Holy
Trinity, because it seems to be inconsistent with common sense that three should in any
view be one—remember it is only above, not contrary to, reason. Take the matter quietly
before your God, kneel before Him in secrecy, and in faith ask His guidance, and then
spread out the conflicting passages before the light of His mercy-seat, and be assured
that somehow you will find light to direct you, for “the meek shall He guide in
judgment.” (G. F. Prescott, M. A.)
Hezekiah, or prayer in trouble
I. That prayer is the believer’s privilege. Viewing the children of God as participating in
the troubles of life in common with others, it is indeed a most important privilege.
Prayer has been called “the outlet of trouble, and the inlet of comfort;” it serves as the
open window to a heated room, to remove what is oppressive, and admit what is
refreshing. Prayer is a duty—not a mere duty, however, but a precious privilege; indeed,
all duties are privileges and blessings if rightly understood; God never assigns or
commands anything which is not for the good of those on whom it is enjoined. Prayer is
the choicest privilege of earth; it is the intercourse with heaven—the speaking to God as
to a Father and a Friend; it is not only conformity to Christ’s Spirit, but the joining in
very act with Son and Spirit, at the very time and for the very object in which they are
engaged. Christ not only prayed on earth, but is gone to pray in heaven, and has sent His
Spirit to take His place below. Oh! let us look at Son and Spirit pleading; would they ever
have assumed the office, but that they saw the helpless state of man, and volunteered to

63. plead in and for him? They pray for man; it is their pleasure; and if man be permitted to
conjoin with them in prayer, is it not a blessed privilege that he may so do?
II. Let us consider Hezekiah’s conduct and prayer as a test of the real state of the heart.
We are told, in verse 1, what was his great resource. Prayer was his habit; not the mere
exclamation, nor sudden feeling when danger threatened, which men have by instinct,
no! we are told “Hezekiah trusted in the Lord,” “he clave to the Lord”; such expressions
imply the habit of prayer; when trouble came he had not to commence an acquaintance
with God.
III. Let us consider Hezekiah’s prayer as an example of the manner of prayer. But let us
take Hezekiah as a model for our imitation. How did he particularise? “he spreads the
letter before the Lord”; he takes each part, and reasons on it; and if we compare the
particulars of the letter with what is specified in the prayer, we shall see the meaning of
his spreading the letter before the Lord. His was not a general prayer for deliverance, but
a specifying of particulars; thus had he abundant matter for his petitions, thus by
opening all his case, he disburdened his own heart, thus he put God in remembrance,
and involved His glory with His people’s safety. Such should be the manner of prayer,
then there will not be wandering or coldness. (B. Jacob, A. M.)
Hezekiah in trouble
I. First, a specimen of threatening communication is alluded to in my text, and recorded
in the verses immediately preceding it. In introducing it to your notice, I admonish you,
first, that the historical parts of the Scriptures are the records of Cod’s dealings with His
Church mainly, conveying only so much generally of the history of the world, as is
needful to illustrate these dealings with the Church; and consequently that every event is
to be viewed in accordance with this plan; otherwise we become bewildered and lost in
reading the narrative of Holy Scripture, and we lose the object for which that narrative is
perpetuated and recorded. If you look into the threatening letter of the haughty
Assyrian, you will find it remarkable, as containing three of the topics, which are
commonly dwelt upon by persecutors, when they desire to trouble the Church and
people of God. The first of these three topics is the mockery of Hezekiah’s faith, as mere
fancy. A second particular in the letter is this: here is an attempt to work upon
Hezekiah’s fears. For the world, like faithful servants of the wicked one, will try, and do
try, experiment after experiment, for the injury of the Lord’s people; if ridicule will not
prevail, terror will be used. Here is, further and thirdly, an attempt to confound the true
religion with the superstitions of men, and the Lord Jehovah with the idols of the
heathen: that So the visitations of judgment, with which the enemies of Cod are often
permitted to vex and destroy each other, might be held forth as an additional
discouragement from the exercise of faith in those who are “joined to the Lord.”
II. In the second place, my text affords us a specimen of wise demeanour in the people of
God, when they are assailed by persecutions or threatenings from the world. No business
whatever will detain us from the house and ordinances of God, if we have the fear and
love of God in our hearts; because we need His blessing in all our transactions. And if at
all other times, then especially we need it in seasons of affliction.
III. In the third place, a specimen of simple faith is also here presented; to which the
spiritually-minded among you will do well to take heed, as to that plan whereby we may
most effectually remove our anxious cares off our own shoulders, and honour that word
of grace and truth, given to every adopted child of God: “Cast thy burden upon the Lord,

64. and He shall sustain thee” (Psa_55:22). That phraseology is very remarkable, in the
superabundance of the promise above the matter involved in the exhortation—“Cast thy
burden upon the Lord”; the answer to that would be—“And He shall sustain it, He will
bear it for thee”; but the answer is more—“He shall sustain thee,” thee and thy burden
too.
1. Simplicity of faith is shown in the act under contemplation. It is left on record for
the instruction of those who in after ages would glorify God in a troublesome world.
2. Faith suggests the efficacy of prayer. The Lord’s people are thereby enabled to
judge Him faithful, “who hath promised.”
3. Finally, this faith may be exercised, and prayer presented, and that with good
success, in the most apparently perilous circumstances. (W. Borrows, M. A.)
A king in prayer
Prayers have their histories. Their ancestry is trouble, struggle with circumstances, and
helplessness. They mark epochs in our lives, They are born in those hours which leave an
indelible impression upon us. The sublimest strains which men have uttered have been
towards God in moments of agony,
I. Hezekiah prayed to Jehovah as the god of his nation. “O Lord God of Israel.”
1. The nation bore the name of one of its progenitors that “as a prince had prevailed
with God.” Names and events around which cluster Divine deliverances may
encourage us in prayer. Past manifestations of God’s power may enlarge our faith.
What God has been to our forefathers, our churches, our nations in times of trouble,
He will be to us amid the perils of our day. History is a handmaid in the service of
Faith.
2. His nation was Jehovah’s peculiar dwelling-place—“which dwellest between the
cherubims.” The Skekinah, the holy light, as a symbol of the Divine presence, ever
shone forth from between those weird and colossal figures which Solomon had
carved and placed on either side of the mercy-seat. God will protect where He dwells.
While He remains, there is perfect safety. When He departs, there is ruin.
(1) God dwelling in a nation saves it. God now manifests Himself, not by a
material brightness, but by righteousness, purity, and truth.
(2) God dwelling in a man saves him. Every Christian is a temple of God. The
true cherubim and Shekinah are in the soul.
(3) God dwelling in a Church saves it. No enemies can overthrow a Church that
has the Divine glory shining in the midst of it.
(4) We can appeal to the manifestations of the Divine presence to increase our
confidence in God in times of danger.
II. Hezekiah recognises, in his prayer, the sole supremacy of Jehovah. “Thou art the
God,” etc.; “and have cast their gods into the fire,” etc. Each nation had its gods.
Polytheistic ideas and customs prevailed in the nations surrounding Jordan. The gods
were often destroyed when the nations fell which they were supposed to protect. The
Jews alone asserted the existence of one supreme God.
1. Hezekiah asserted that Jehovah was the only true God. Polytheism was a foolish

65. delusion. It probably arose from men’s innate propensity to materialise spiritual
things, from the worship of natural objects as the manifestation of the Divine power,
from the sinful and insatiate imagination of men’s hearts, from the deification of
departed heroes, or from the attempt to give visible shape to applauded virtues. But
there can be but one infinite and eternal God.
2. That He exercised supreme control over all the kingdoms of the earth. He was not
only the God of Israel, but of all nations.
III. He appealed to Jehovah as the maker of “heaven and earth.” Heaven and earth to
the Jewish mind included all things. In this sublime idea of God is involved—
1. That He is eternal. He existed before all things; delighting in the glory of His own
nature before the worlds were made; no material form nor spiritual existence sharing
that eternity with Him.
2. That He is separate from His works. The universe is not He, as the ancient
pantheists taught, and as some teach now. He is immanent in all His creations, but
independent of them. The maker is not His work. God transcends all beings and
worlds.
3. That He is omnipotent. He who made the universe must be Almighty. Its
greatness is inconceivable, and the power that produced it must be infinite.
4. That He has an absolute right to control an things. The maker has indefeasible
rights in His productions.
5. That He has all things under His direct control. As He has created all forces, an
laws, an agencies, all worlds, all angels, all men, He has them under His immediate
direction, and can turn them “whithersoever He will.” This conception of God
afforded solid ground for Hezekiah’s faith.
IV. Hezekiah prayed with great earnestness. Earnestness is needed, not to lead God to
observe our condition, or to create a disposition in Him to help us, but—
1. That the strength of our desires may be revealed.
2. That we may be raised from the low condition of formal devotion.
3. That we may have all the spiritual culture which the outcries of real need may
impart.
4. That we may be prepared to receive Divine deliverances thankfully. Hezekiah was
stirred with the most powerful emotions as he prayed. His trouble heated his soul as
a fire.
V. Hezekiah recognised the greatness of the deliverance which he sought. “Of a truth,
Lord,” etc. To recognise the greatness of the deliverance we need will—
1. Deepen our sense of helplessness in ourselves
2. Stimulate the exercise of great faith.
3. Prepare us for the manifestation of God’s great delivering hand.
VI. Hezekiah associated the glory of Jehovah with the deliverance which he sought. The
reproaches which had been cast upon him had been cast upon God. But it was God’s
delivering arm put forth in answer to Hezekiah’s faith and prayer—
(1) that His people might learn to put their trust in Him, and

66. (2) that all the earth might know that none could defy His power and prosper.
(Homiletic Quarterly.)
Spiritual-mindedness a protection
Much constant communion will surround us with an atmosphere through which none of
the many influences which threaten our Christian life and our Christian work can
penetrate. As the diver in his bell sits dry at the bottom of the sea, and draws a pure air
from the free heavens far above him, and is parted from that murderous waste of green
death that clings so closely round the translucent crystal walls which keep him safe; so
we, enclosed in God, shall repel from ourselves all that would overflow to destroy us and
our work, and may by His grace lay deeper than the waters some courses in the great
building that shall one day rise, stately and many-mansioned, from out of the conquered
waves. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)
Laying down the burden
Dr. H. Clay Trumbull, the well-known religious leader of America who passed away the
other day, related a story about one of his little daughters. “She brought to me a while
ago,” he says, “a geography book, having on its cover a picture of fabled Atlas, bearing
the globe on his shoulders. Pointing to the overburdened man, with his bowed head,
upstrained shoulders, and distended muscles, staggering under the weight that seemed
just ready to crush him, she said: ‘Papa! Why don’t that man lay that thing down?’ ‘Well,
my dear,’ I answered, ‘it would be a great deal better if he did. But that man has the idea
that he must carry the world on his shoulders. There are a good many men of that sort,
as you will find when you are older.’ That child’s question is a pertinent one to any of you
who are struggling under oppressive burden of personal anxiety of any nature
whatosever. ‘Why don’t you lay that thing down?’ ‘Cast thy burden upon the Lord, and
He shall sustain thee.’”
16 Give ear, Lord, and hear;open your eyes, Lord,
and see; listen to the words Sennacherib has sent
to ridicule the living God.
K&D, "2Ki_19:16
The accumulation of the words, “bow down Thine ear, Jehovah, and hear; open,
Jehovah, Thine eyes and see, and hear the words,” etc., indicates the earnestness and
importunity of the prayer. The plural ָ‫יך‬ֵ‫ינ‬ ֵ‫ע‬ by the side of the singular ָ‫ך‬ְ‫נ‬ְ‫ז‬ፎ is the correct

67. reading, since the expression “to incline the ear” is constantly met with (Psa_17:6; Psa_
31:3; Psa_45:11, etc.); and even in the plural, “incline ye your ear” (Psa_78:1; Isa_55:3),
and on the other hand “to open the eyes” (Job_27:19; Pro_20:13; Zec_12:4; Dan_9:18),
because a man always opens both eyes to see anything, whereas he turns one ear to a
person speaking. The ָ‫ך‬ֶ‫ינ‬ ֵ‫ע‬ of Isaiah is also plural, though written defectively, as the
Masora has already observed. The suffix in ‫ּו‬‫ח‬ ָ‫ל‬ ְ‫,שׁ‬ which is wanting in Isaiah, belongs to
‫ר‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ ֲ‫,א‬ and refers with this to ‫י‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ ִ in the sense of speech: the speech which Sennacherib
had made in his letter.
BE SO , "Verses 16-18
2 Kings 19:16-18. Which hath sent him — That is, the messenger who brought this
railing letter; or rather Rab-shakeh, who is easily understood to be referred to from
the contents of the former chapter, although he would not do him the honour to
name him. Of a truth, Lord, the kings of Assyria have destroyed the nations, &c. —
He acknowledges their triumphs over the gods of the heathen, but distinguishes
between them and the God of Israel. And have cast their gods into the fire: for they
were no gods — They were unable to help either themselves or their worshippers,
and therefore it is no wonder that the Assyrians have destroyed them. And, in
destroying them, though they knew it not, they really served the justice and jealousy
of the God of Israel, who has determined to annihilate all the gods of the heathen.
But they were deceived in thinking they could therefore be too hard for him, who
was so far from being one of the gods whom men’s hands had made, that he himself
made all things.
ELLICOTT, "(16) Bow down thine ear, and hear.— ot so much my prayer as the
words of Sennacherib.
Open, Lord, thine eyes, and see.—Referring, as Thenius says, to Sennacherib’s
letter; not, however, as if Jehovah’s eyes were closed before this prayer. To treat the
figurative language of the Old Testament in such a manner does violence to common
sense. “Bow thine ear,” “Open thine eyes,” in Hezekiah’s mouth simply meant
“Intervene actively between me and my enemy;” although, no doubt, such
expressions originally conveyed the actual thoughts of the Israelites about God.
Which hath sent him.—Rather, which he hath sent. The “words” are regarded as a
single whole, a message.
The living God.—In contrast with the lifeless idols of Hamath, Arpad, &c.
PETT, "‘Incline your ear, O YHWH, and hear; open your eyes, O YHWH, and see;
and hear the words of Sennacherib, by which he has sent him to defy the living
God.”
Then he called on YHWH to specifically hear and see what Sennacherib had
written, words which were in clear defiance of the living God, in the same way as
Goliath’s had been in the time of David. Indeed it was clear that Sennacherib had

68. deliberately gone out of his way to defy YHWH the living God (although not of
course believing that He was the living God). So Hezekiah’s dependence was on the
fact that YHWH was the only God, and that He was the living God, active and
aware in man’s affairs, and able to intervene at will.
PULPIT, "Lord, bow down thine ear, and hear. "Bow down thine ear" is a Hebrew
idiom for "give ear," "attend "(see Psalms 31:2; Psalms 71:2; Psalms 86:1; Proverbs
22:17, etc.). It is based upon the fact that, when men wish to catch exactly what
another says to them, they bend themselves towards him, and bring one ear as near
to him as they can. Open, Lord, thine eyes, and see. Take cognizance both with eye
and ear; i.e. take full cognizance—let nothing escape thee. And hear the words of
Sennacherib, which hath sent him to reproach the living God; rather, which he has
sent to reproach. The suffix translated "him" in our version really means "it"—i.e.
the speech or letter of Sennacherib, which Hezekiah has "spread before the Lord."
17 “It is true, Lord, that the Assyrian kings have
laid waste these nations and their lands.
K&D, "2Ki_19:17-19
After the challenge, to observe the blasphemies of Sennacherib, Hezekiah mentions
the fact that the Assyrians have really devastated all lands, and therefore that it is not
without ground that they boast of their mighty power; but he finds the explanation of
this in the impotence and nothingness of the gods of the heathen. ‫ם‬ָ‫נ‬ ְ‫מ‬ፎ, truly, indeed -
the kings of Asshur have devastated the nations and their land. Instead of this we find in
Isaiah: “they have devastated all lands and their (own) land” - which is evidently the
more difficult and also the more original reading, and has been altered in our account,
because the thought that the Assyrians had devastated their own land by making war
upon other lands, that is to say, had depopulated it and thereby laid it waste, was not
easy to understand. “And have cast their gods into the fire, for they are not gods, but
works of human hands, wood and stone, and have thus destroyed them.” Hezekiah does
not mention this as a sign of the recklessness of the Assyrians (Knobel), but, because
Sennacherib had boasted that the gods of no nation had been able to resist him (vv. 12,
13), to put this fact in the right light, and attach thereto the prayer that Jehovah, by
granting deliverance, would make known to all the kingdoms of the earth that He alone
was God. Instead of ‫נוּ‬ ְ‫ת‬ָ‫נ‬ְ‫ו‬ we have in Isaiah ‫ּון‬‫ת‬ָ‫נ‬ְ‫,ו‬ the inf. absol.; in this connection the

69. more difficult and more genuine reading. This also applies to the omission of ‫ים‬ ִ‫ּה‬‫ל‬ ֱ‫א‬
(2Ki_19:19) in Isa_37:20, since the use of Jehovah as a predicate, “that Thou alone art
Jehovah,” is very rare, and has therefore been misunderstood even by Gesenius. By the
introduction of Elohim, the thought “that Thou Jehovah art God alone” is simplified.
ELLICOTT, "(17) Of a truth.—It is even as Sennacherib boasteth.
Destroyed.—Rather, laid waste. Perhaps put under the ban—the expression of 2
Kings 19:11—should be read.
Their lands.—Heb., their land, referring to each conquered country.
PETT, "2 Kings 19:17-18
“Of a truth, YHWH, the kings of Assyria have laid waste the nations and their
lands, and have cast their gods into the fire; for they were no gods, but the work of
men’s hands, wood and stone, therefore they have destroyed them.”
Then he basically admitted that Sennacherib’s words were right. It was true that all
these other nations had been laid waste, and that their gods had been burned. But
that was because they were no-gods. They were simply the work of men’s hands,
and made of wood and stone. That was why they could be destroyed. And that was
why they had been destroyed.
PULPIT, "Of a truth, Lord, the kings of Assyria—i.e. Sennacherib, and his
predecessors—the long line of monarchs who have sat on the Assyrian throne for
many past ages—have destroyed the nations and their lands; rather, have laid
waste, as in the parallel passage of Isaiah (Isaiah 37:18). "Destroyed" is too strong a
word. Hezekiah fully admits the boast of the Assyrian monarch, that he and his
predecessors have had a wonderful career of success (comp. Isaiah 10:5-14); but he
refuses to regard this past success as ensuring success in the future. All is in the
hand of God, and will be determined as God pleases. It is not an iron necessity that
rules the world, but a personal will, and this well may be affected by prayer, to
which (verse 19) he therefore has recourse.
18 They have thrown their gods into the fire and
destroyed them, for they were not gods but only
wood and stone, fashioned by human hands.

70. BAR ES, "Have cast their gods into the fire - In general the Assyrians carried
off the images of the gods from the temples of the conquered nations, and deposited
them in their own shrines, as at once trophies of victory and proof of the superiority of
the Assyrian deities over those of their enemies. But sometimes the gods are said to have
been “destroyed” or “burnt with fire;” which was probably done when the idols were of
rude workmanship or coarse material; and when it was inconvenient to encumber an
army with spoils so weighty and difficult, of transport.
ELLICOTT, "(18) And have cast (put) their gods into the fire.—Comp. 1
Chronicles 14:12. The Assyrian’s emphatic question, “Where are the gods?” implied
their annihilation.
For they were no gods.—This idea is common in the latter half of the Book of Isaiah.
The question has been raised whether the compiler of Kings has not made Hezekiah
express a stricter monotheism than had been attained by the religious thought of his
days. But if, as Kuenen alleges, no such definite statement of this belief is to be
found in Isaiah and Micah (but comp. Isaiah 2:18-21; Isaiah 8:10; Isaiah 10:10 seq.)
we may still point to the words of a third prophet of that age—namely, Amos the
herdman of Tekoah. (Comp. Amos 4:13; Amos 5:8; Amos 9:6-7.) “To Amos . . . the
doctrine of creation is full of practical meaning. ‘He that formed the mountains and
created the wind, that declareth unto man what is His thought, that maketh the
morning darkness and treadeth on the high places of the earth, Jehovah, the God of
hosts is His name.’ This supreme God cannot be thought of as having no interest or
purpose beyond Israel. It was He that brought Israel out of Egypt, but it was He too
who brought the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir. Every
movement of history is Jehovah’s work. It is not Asshur but Jehovah who has
created the Assyrian empire; He has a purpose of His own in raising up the vast
overwhelming strength, and suspending it as a threat of imminent destruction over
Israel and the surrounding nations. To Amos, therefore, the question is not what
Jehovah as king of Israel will do for His people against the Assyrian, but what the
Sovereign of the world designs to effect by the terrible instrument He has created”
(Robertson Smith). We do not think, however, that the utterance of Hezekiah on this
occasion was necessarily recorded in writing at the time. The prayer may well be a
free composition put into the king’s mouth by the author of this narrative.
PETT, "“ ow therefore, O YHWH our God, save you us, I beseech you, out of his
hand, that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that you YHWH are God alone.”
Having laid the foundation of his prayer Hezekiah now entered his plea, And that
was that YHWH, the God of Judah (‘our God’), would save Judah out of
Sennacherib’s hand so that all the kingdoms of the world might recognise His
uniqueness as the only God.

71. PULPIT, "And have east their gods into the fire. The images worshipped by the
various nations are regarded as "their gods," which they were, at any rate in the
minds of the common people. The ordinary practice of the Assyrians was to carry
off the images taken from a conquered people, and to set them up in their own
country as trophies of victory (see Isaiah 46:1, Isaiah 46:2, where a similar practice
is ascribed by anticipation to the Persians). But there are places in the inscriptions
where the gods are said to have been "destroyed" or "burnt." It is reasonable to
suppose that the images destroyed were those of wood, stone, and bronze, which had
little or no intrinsic value, while the gold and silver idols were carried off to the land
of the conqueror. o doubt idols of the former far outnumbered those of the latter
kind, and, at each sack of a city the "gods" which it contained were mostly burnt.
For they were no gods, but the work of men's hands, wood and stone (comp. Isaiah
42:17; Isaiah 44:9-20; Isaiah 46:6, Isaiah 46:7). Wooden images (the Greek ξόανα)
were probably the earliest that were made, and, on account of their antiquity, were
often especially reverenced. They were "carved, but rude, with undivided feet, and
eyes indicated by a line, the face colored red, or white, or gilt. It was only later that
ivory and gold plates were commonly laid over the wood, vested and decked out
with ornaments". Stone idols were at first shapeless masses, then pillars or cones,
finally imitations of the human form, varying from the rudest representations to the
priceless statues of Phidias. In Assyrian times, neither the wooden nor the stone
idols were possessed of any artistic beauty. Therefore they have destroyed them.
"Gods" of this kind could not help themselves, much less save their devotees or the
cities supposed to be under their protection. It was not to be wondered at that the
Assyrians had triumphed ever such gods.
19 ow, Lord our God, deliver us from his hand,
so that all the kingdoms of the earth may know
that you alone, Lord, are God.”
BAR ES, "If the mighty army of the great Assyrian king were successfully defied by a
petty monarch like Hezekiah, it would force the surrounding nations to confess that the
escape was owing to the protecting hand of Yahweh. They would thus be taught, in spite
of themselves, that He, and He alone, was the true God.
JAMISO , "Then Isaiah ... sent — A revelation having been made to Isaiah, the
prophet announced to the king that his prayer was heard. The prophetic message

72. consisted of three different portions: - First, Sennacherib is apostrophized (2Ki_19:21-
28) in a highly poetical strain, admirably descriptive of the turgid vanity, haughty
pretensions, and presumptuous impiety of the Assyrian despot. Secondly, Hezekiah is
addressed (2Ki_19:29-31), and a sign is given him of the promised deliverance - namely,
that for two years the presence of the enemy would interrupt the peaceful pursuits of
husbandry, but in the third year the people would be in circumstances to till their fields
and vineyards and reap the fruits as formerly. Thirdly, the issue of Sennacherib’s
invasion is announced (2Ki_19:32-34).
K&D, "The divine promise. - 2Ki_19:20, 2Ki_19:21. When Hezekiah had prayed, the
prophet Isaiah received a divine revelation with regard to the hearing of this prayer,
which he sent, i.e., caused to be handed over, to the king. ‫י‬ ִ ְ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ָ‫שׁ‬ (2Ki_19:21) is omitted in
Isaiah, so that ‫וגו‬ ָ ְ‫ל‬ ַ ַ ְ‫ת‬ ִ‫ה‬ ‫ר‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ ֲ‫א‬ is to be taken in the sense of “with regard to that which thou
hast prayed to me,” whilst ‫י‬ ִ ְ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ָ‫שׁ‬ (I have heard) elucidates the thought and simplifies the
construction. The word of the Lord announced to the king, (1) the shameful retreat of
Sennacherib as a just retribution for his mockery of the living God (2Ki_19:21-28; Isa_
37:22-29); (2) the confirmation of this assurance through the indication of a sign by
which Hezekiah was to recognise the deliverance of Jerusalem (2Ki_19:29-31; Isa_
37:30-32), and through the distinct promise, that the Assyrian would neither come into
the city nor besiege it, because the Lord was sheltering it (2Ki_19:32-34; Isa_37:33-35).
In the first part the words are addressed with poetic vivacity directly to Sennacherib, and
scourge his haughty boastings by pointing to the ridicule and scorn which would follow
him on his departure from the land.
BE SO , "Verses 16-18
2 Kings 19:16-18. Which hath sent him — That is, the messenger who brought this
railing letter; or rather Rab-shakeh, who is easily understood to be referred to from
the contents of the former chapter, although he would not do him the honour to
name him. Of a truth, Lord, the kings of Assyria have destroyed the nations, &c. —
He acknowledges their triumphs over the gods of the heathen, but distinguishes
between them and the God of Israel. And have cast their gods into the fire: for they
were no gods — They were unable to help either themselves or their worshippers,
and therefore it is no wonder that the Assyrians have destroyed them. And, in
destroying them, though they knew it not, they really served the justice and jealousy
of the God of Israel, who has determined to annihilate all the gods of the heathen.
But they were deceived in thinking they could therefore be too hard for him, who
was so far from being one of the gods whom men’s hands had made, that he himself
made all things.
ELLICOTT, "(18) And have cast (put) their gods into the fire.—Comp. 1
Chronicles 14:12. The Assyrian’s emphatic question, “Where are the gods?” implied
their annihilation.
For they were no gods.—This idea is common in the latter half of the Book of Isaiah.
The question has been raised whether the compiler of Kings has not made Hezekiah

73. express a stricter monotheism than had been attained by the religious thought of his
days. But if, as Kuenen alleges, no such definite statement of this belief is to be
found in Isaiah and Micah (but comp. Isaiah 2:18-21; Isaiah 8:10; Isaiah 10:10 seq.)
we may still point to the words of a third prophet of that age—namely, Amos the
herdman of Tekoah. (Comp. Amos 4:13; Amos 5:8; Amos 9:6-7.) “To Amos . . . the
doctrine of creation is full of practical meaning. ‘He that formed the mountains and
created the wind, that declareth unto man what is His thought, that maketh the
morning darkness and treadeth on the high places of the earth, Jehovah, the God of
hosts is His name.’ This supreme God cannot be thought of as having no interest or
purpose beyond Israel. It was He that brought Israel out of Egypt, but it was He too
who brought the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir. Every
movement of history is Jehovah’s work. It is not Asshur but Jehovah who has
created the Assyrian empire; He has a purpose of His own in raising up the vast
overwhelming strength, and suspending it as a threat of imminent destruction over
Israel and the surrounding nations. To Amos, therefore, the question is not what
Jehovah as king of Israel will do for His people against the Assyrian, but what the
Sovereign of the world designs to effect by the terrible instrument He has created”
(Robertson Smith). We do not think, however, that the utterance of Hezekiah on this
occasion was necessarily recorded in writing at the time. The prayer may well be a
free composition put into the king’s mouth by the author of this narrative.
GUZIK, "B. God speaks concerning the situation.
1. (2 Kings 19:20-21) Sennacherib is worthy of scorn - not fear and trembling.
Then Isaiah the son of Amoz sent to Hezekiah, saying, “Thus says the LORD God of
Israel: ‘Because you have prayed to Me against Sennacherib king of Assyria, I have
heard.’ This is the word which the LORD has spoken concerning him: ‘The virgin,
the daughter of Zion, Has despised you, laughed you to scorn; the daughter of
Jerusalem Has shaken her head behind your back!’”
a. Because you have prayed to Me: The glorious answer which fills the rest of the
chapter came because Hezekiah prayed. What if he had not prayed? Then we are to
think that no answer would have come, and Jerusalem would have been conquered.
Hezekiah’s prayer really mattered.
i. We should ask: How many blessings, how many victories, how many souls saved
for Jesus’ glory, lie unclaimed in heaven until the LORD can say, “because you have
prayed to Me”?
b. The virgin, the daughter of Zion, has despised you, laughed you to scorn: The
idea is that the Assyrians had come to ravish the daughter of Zion, the city of
Jerusalem. But God would not allow it. “Jerusalem is represented as a young girl
rebuffing with contempt the unwelcome advances of a churl.” (Grogan, commentary
on Isaiah)

74. i. Jerusalem could be called the virgin, the daughter of Zion for several reasons:
· She was unpolluted with the gross idolatry of the pagans
· God would defend her from the intended rape by Sennacherib and the
Assyrians
· She had never been invaded or conquered by another since the days of David
PULPIT, " ew therefore, O Lord our God. Hezekiah draws the strongest possible
contrast between Jehovah and the idols. Sennacherib had placed them upon a par (2
Kings 18:33-35; 2 Kings 19:10-13). Hezekiah insists that the idols are "no gods," are
"nothing"—at any rate are mere blocks of wood and stone, shaped by human
hands. But Jehovah is "the God of all the kingdoms of the earth" (2 Kings 19:15),
the Maker of heaven and earth (2 Kings 19:15), the one and only God (2 Kings
19:19)—answering to his name, self-existing, all-sufficient, the groundwork of all
other existence. And he is "our God"—the special God of Israel, bound by covenant
to protect there against all enemies. I beseech thee, save thou us out of his hand; i.e.
"do that which this proud blasphemer thinks that thou canst not do" (2 Kings
18:35); show him that thou art far mightier than he supposes, wholly unlike those
"no-gods," over whom he has hitherto triumphed—a "very present Help in
trouble"—potent to save. That all the kingdoms of the earth may know that thou art
the Lord God. The glory of God is the end of creation; and God's true saints always
bear the fact in mind, and desire nothing so much as that his glory should be shown
forth everywhere and always. Moses, in his prayers for rebellious Israel in the
wilderness, constantly urges upon God that it will not be for his glory to destroy or
desert them (Exodus 32:12; umbers 14:13-16; Deuteronomy 9:26-29). David, in his
great strait, asks the destruction of his enemies, "that men may know that thou,
whose name alone is Jehovah, art the Most High over all the earth" (Psalms 83:18);
and again (Psalms 59:13), "Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may
not be; and let them know that God ruleth in Jacob unto the ends of the earth."
Hezekiah prays for a signal vengeance on Sennacherib, not for his own sake, not
even for his people's sake, so much as for the vindication of God's honor among the
nations of the earth—that it may be known far and wide that Jehovah is a God who
can help, the real Ruler of the world, against whom earthly kings and earthly might
avail nothing. Even thou only. It would not satisfy Hezekiah that Jehovah should be
acknowledged as a mighty god, one of many. He asks for such a demonstration as
shall convince men that he is unique, that he stands alone, that he is the only mighty
God in all the earth.
Isaiah Prophesies Sennacherib’s Fall

75. 20 Then Isaiah son of Amoz sent a message to
Hezekiah: “This is what the Lord, the God of
Israel, says: I have heard your prayer concerning
Sennacherib king of Assyria.
HE RY, "We have here the gracious copious answer which God gave to Hezekiah's
prayer. The message which he sent him by the same hand (2Ki_19:6, 2Ki_19:7), one
would think, was an answer sufficient to his prayer; but, that he might have strong
consolation, he was encouraged by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for
God to lie, Heb_6:18. In general, God assured him that his prayer was heard, his prayer
against Sennacherib, 2Ki_19:20. Note, The case of those that have the prayers of God's
people against them is miserable. For, if the oppressed cry to God against the oppressor,
he will hear, Exo_22:23. God hears and answers, hears with the saving strength of his
right hand, Psa_20:6.
This message bespeaks two things: -
I. Confusion and shame to Sennacherib and his forces. It is here foretold that he
should be humbled and broken. The prophet elegantly directs his speech to him, as he
does, Isa_10:5. O Assyrian! the rod of my anger. Not that this message was sent to him,
but what is here said to him he was made to know by the event. Providence spoke it to
him with a witness; and perhaps his own heart was made to whisper this to him: for God
has more ways than one of speaking to sinners in his wrath, so as to vex them in his sore
displeasure, Psa_2:5. Sennacherib is here represented,
JAMISO , "Then Isaiah ... sent — A revelation having been made to Isaiah, the
prophet announced to the king that his prayer was heard. The prophetic message
consisted of three different portions: - First, Sennacherib is apostrophized (2Ki_19:21-
28) in a highly poetical strain, admirably descriptive of the turgid vanity, haughty
pretensions, and presumptuous impiety of the Assyrian despot. Secondly, Hezekiah is
addressed (2Ki_19:29-31), and a sign is given him of the promised deliverance - namely,
that for two years the presence of the enemy would interrupt the peaceful pursuits of
husbandry, but in the third year the people would be in circumstances to till their fields
and vineyards and reap the fruits as formerly. Thirdly, the issue of Sennacherib’s
invasion is announced (2Ki_19:32-34).
K&D, "The divine promise. - 2Ki_19:20, 2Ki_19:21. When Hezekiah had prayed, the
prophet Isaiah received a divine revelation with regard to the hearing of this prayer,
which he sent, i.e., caused to be handed over, to the king. ‫י‬ ִ ְ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ָ‫שׁ‬ (2Ki_19:21) is omitted in
Isaiah, so that ‫וגו‬ ָ ְ‫ל‬ ַ ַ ְ‫ת‬ ִ‫ה‬ ‫ר‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ ֲ‫א‬ is to be taken in the sense of “with regard to that which thou

76. hast prayed to me,” whilst ‫י‬ ִ ְ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ָ‫שׁ‬ (I have heard) elucidates the thought and simplifies the
construction. The word of the Lord announced to the king, (1) the shameful retreat of
Sennacherib as a just retribution for his mockery of the living God (2Ki_19:21-28; Isa_
37:22-29); (2) the confirmation of this assurance through the indication of a sign by
which Hezekiah was to recognise the deliverance of Jerusalem (2Ki_19:29-31; Isa_
37:30-32), and through the distinct promise, that the Assyrian would neither come into
the city nor besiege it, because the Lord was sheltering it (2Ki_19:32-34; Isa_37:33-35).
In the first part the words are addressed with poetic vivacity directly to Sennacherib, and
scourge his haughty boastings by pointing to the ridicule and scorn which would follow
him on his departure from the land.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:20. Then Isaiah, the son of Amoz, sent to Hezekiah — Isaiah
was informed, by the spirit of prophecy, that Hezekiah had represented his case to
God in the temple, and he was commissioned to assure him his petition was granted.
COFFMA , "This is the initial part of God's message, which is largely a scornful
declaration of just what a fool Sennacherib actually was. He defied GOD! His
ambition was unbounded; he would (so he thought) scale the highest mountains, he
would even dry up all the rivers of Egypt with the sole of his feet! Here was an
insane fool who thought he could drink the ocean dry! The passage begins with a
statement of the utter contempt and scorn of "The virgin daughter of Zion."
"The virgin daughter of Zion hath despised thee and laughed thee to scorn" (2
Kings 19:21). "Such expressions as these are not references to the morals of the
citizens. They mean that the city referred to has not been conquered and raped by a
foreign invader."[16]
There was an amazing amount of truth in what this beast of a heathen was saying.
The Assyrians "The Breakers" as they were called, were more familiar with the
human anatomy without the skin than they were with its normal appearance. This is
proved by the monuments and drawings with which they decorated their buildings.
One may see these `works of art' (?) in the Metropolitan Museum on Fifth Avenue,
ew York City. The ugly fact behind those artifacts of the past is that the Assyrians
flayed their victims. It is amazing that God tolerated that evil nation as long as he
did. o other nation in history ever surpassed the sadistic cruelty and ruthless
passion for destruction exhibited in the ravages of the Assyrians.
THE REST OF GOD'S MESSAGE CO CER I G SE ACHERIB
The Lord had a final word for that evil beast of a world conqueror, and that came
next.
ELLICOTT, "(20) Then Isaiah . . .—The prophet, as Hezekiah’s trusted adviser,
may have counselled the king to “go up into the house of the Lord,” or, at least,
would be cognisant of his intention in the matter.

77. Against.—Hebrew text, in regard to. . . . touching.
I have heard.—The verb has fallen out in Isaiah 37:21.
PETT, "Verses 20-28
Isaiah Communicates To King Hezekiah ‘The Word Of YHWH’ ow Active
Against The King Of Assyria (2 Kings 19:20-28).
As a result of King Hezekiah’s prayer Isaiah was given a prophetic message, an
‘oracle’ from YHWH (‘thus says YHWH’) to pass on to him. Such an oracle was
seen as not only spoken but active, as YHWH acted in accordance with His word.
The semi-personalised Word of YHWH was going forth to accomplish His will
(compare Isaiah 55:10-13. This would lead on to the idea of the fully personal Word
in John 1:1-14; 1 John 1:1-4; Revelation 19:13). This oracle was, as so often, in
rhythmic form, and was in the form of a message of rebuke to Sennacherib,
although issued at a distance. It was not intended to be delivered to Sennacherib,
but to be seen as an assurance to Hezekiah that ‘the word of YHWH’ was at work.
The oracle divides up into four main sections:
1) Judah’s Scorn At Sennacherib For Setting Himself Up Against YHWH (2
Kings 19:21-22).
2) A Description Of The Boasting And Defiance Of Sennacherib (2 Kings 19:23-
24).
3) YHWH’s Response That Sennacherib In Fact Owes All His Success To Him
(2 Kings 19:25-26).
4) An Assurance That Because Of Sennacherib’s Taunts YHWH Intends To
Act Against Him And Transport Him Back Like A Captive Wild Beast To ineveh
(2 Kings 19:27-28).
In order to be fully appreciated the oracle must be presented as a whole.
2 Kings 19:21-22
Judah’s Scorn At Sennacherib For Setting Himself Up Against YHWH (2 Kings
19:21-22).
“The virgin daughter of Zion has despised you and laughed you to scorn,
The daughter of Jerusalem has shaken her head after you.
Whom have you defied and blasphemed?
And against whom have you exalted your voice,
And lifted up your eyes on high?

78. Even against the Holy One of Israel.”
2 Kings 19:23-24
A Description Of The Boasting And Defiance Of Sennacherib (2 Kings 19:23-24).
“By your messengers you have defied the Lord,
And have said, With the multitude of my chariots,
Am I come up to the height of the mountains,
To the innermost parts of Lebanon,
And I will cut down its tall cedars,
And its choice fir-trees,
And I will enter into his farthest lodging-place,
The forest of his fruitful countryside.
I have dug,
And drunk strange waters,
And with the sole of my feet will I dry up
All the rivers of Egypt.”
2 Kings 19:25-26
YHWH Responds That Sennacherib In Fact Owes All His Success To Him (2 Kings
19:25-26).
“Have you not heard,
How I have done it long ago,
And formed it of ancient times?
ow have I brought it about,
That it should be yours to lay waste fortified cities,
Into ruinous heaps.

79. Therefore their inhabitants were of small power,
They were dismayed and confounded,
They were as the grass of the field,
And as the green herb,
As the grass on the housetops,
And as grain blasted before it is grown up.”
2 Kings 19:27-28
ow Because Of Sennacherib’s Taunts And Attitude YHWH Intends To Act
Against Him And Transport Him Back Like A Humiliated Captive To ineveh (2
Kings 19:27-28).
“But I know your sitting down, and your going out,
And your coming in, and your raging against me.
Because of your raging against me,
And because your arrogant attitude has come up into my ears,
Therefore will I put my hook in your nose,
And my bridle in your lips,
And I will turn you back,
By the way by which you came.”
2 Kings 19:20
‘Then Isaiah the son of Amoz sent to Hezekiah, saying, “Thus says YHWH, the God
of Israel, Whereas you have prayed to me against Sennacherib king of Assyria, I
have heard you.”
As a result of Hezekiah’s plea Isaiah sent to him an assurance of YHWH’s response.
Because he has humbled himself and prayed wholeheartedly to God, God has heard
him. ote the description of YHWH as ‘the God of Israel’. Judah now represented
the whole of Israel (and indeed contained many from the other tribes within its
population).
PULPIT, " ew therefore, O Lord our God. Hezekiah draws the strongest possible

80. contrast between Jehovah and the idols. Sennacherib had placed them upon a par (2
Kings 18:33-35; 2 Kings 19:10-13). Hezekiah insists that the idols are "no gods," are
"nothing"—at any rate are mere blocks of wood and stone, shaped by human
hands. But Jehovah is "the God of all the kingdoms of the earth" (2 Kings 19:15),
the Maker of heaven and earth (2 Kings 19:15), the one and only God (2 Kings
19:19)—answering to his name, self-existing, all-sufficient, the groundwork of all
other existence. And he is "our God"—the special God of Israel, bound by covenant
to protect there against all enemies. I beseech thee, save thou us out of his hand; i.e.
"do that which this proud blasphemer thinks that thou canst not do" (2 Kings
18:35); show him that thou art far mightier than he supposes, wholly unlike those
"no-gods," over whom he has hitherto triumphed—a "very present Help in
trouble"—potent to save. That all the kingdoms of the earth may know that thou art
the Lord God. The glory of God is the end of creation; and God's true saints always
bear the fact in mind, and desire nothing so much as that his glory should be shown
forth everywhere and always. Moses, in his prayers for rebellious Israel in the
wilderness, constantly urges upon God that it will not be for his glory to destroy or
desert them (Exodus 32:12; umbers 14:13-16; Deuteronomy 9:26-29). David, in his
great strait, asks the destruction of his enemies, "that men may know that thou,
whose name alone is Jehovah, art the Most High over all the earth" (Psalms 83:18);
and again (Psalms 59:13), "Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may
not be; and let them know that God ruleth in Jacob unto the ends of the earth."
Hezekiah prays for a signal vengeance on Sennacherib, not for his own sake, not
even for his people's sake, so much as for the vindication of God's honor among the
nations of the earth—that it may be known far and wide that Jehovah is a God who
can help, the real Ruler of the world, against whom earthly kings and earthly might
avail nothing. Even thou only. It would not satisfy Hezekiah that Jehovah should be
acknowledged as a mighty god, one of many. He asks for such a demonstration as
shall convince men that he is unique, that he stands alone, that he is the only mighty
God in all the earth.
MACLARE 20-22, "‘HE UTTERED HIS VOICE, THE EARTH MELTED’
2Ki_19:20-22, 2Ki_19:28-37
At an earlier stage of the Assyrian invasion Hezekiah had sent to Isaiah, asking him to
pray to his God for deliverance, and had received an explicit assurance that the invasion
would be foiled. When the second stage was reached, and Hezekiah was personally
summoned to surrender, by a letter which scoffed at Isaiah’s promise, he himself prayed
before the Lord. Isaiah does not seem to have been present, and may not have known of
the prayer. At all events, the answer was given to him to give to the king; and it is
noteworthy that, as in the former case, he does not himself come, but sends to Hezekiah.
He did come when he had to bring a message of death, and again when he had to rebuke
(2Ki_20:1-21), but now he only sends. As the chosen speaker of Jehovah’s will, he was
mightier than kings, and must not imperil the dignity of the message by the behaviour of
the messenger. In a sentence, Hezekiah’s prayer is answered, and then the prophet, in
Jehovah’s name, bursts into a wonderful song of triumph over the defeated invader. ‘I
have heard.’ That is enough. Hezekiah’s prayer has, as it were, fired the fuse or pulled
the trigger, and the explosion follows, and the shot is sped. ‘Whereas thou hast prayed, .

81. . . I have heard,’ is ever true, and God’s hearing is God’s acting in answer. The methods
of His response vary, the fact that He responds to the cry of despair driven to faith by
extremity of need does not vary.
But it is noteworthy that, with that brief, sufficient assurance, Hezekiah, as it were, is put
aside, and instead of three fighters in the field, the king, with God to back him, and on
the other side Sennacherib, two only, appear. It is a duel between Jehovah and the
arrogant heathen who had despised Him. Jerusalem appears for a moment, in a
magnificent piece of poetical scorn, as despising and making gestures of contempt at the
baffled would-be conqueror, as Miriam and her maidens did by the Red Sea. The city is
‘virgin,’ as many a fortress in other lands has been named, because uncaptured. But she,
too, passes out of sight, and Jehovah and Sennacherib stand opposed on the field. God
speaks now not ‘concerning,’ but to, him, and indicts him for insane pride, which was
really a denial of dependence on God, and passionate antagonism to Him, as manifested
not only in his war against Jehovah’s people, but also in the tone of his insolent
defiances of Hezekiah, in which he scoffed at the vain trust which the latter was placing
in his God, and paralleled Jehovah with the gods of the nations whom he had already
conquered (Isa_19:12).
The designation of God, characteristic of Isaiah, as ‘the Holy One of Israel,’ expresses at
once His elevation above, and separation from, all mundane, creatural limitations, and
His special relation to His people, and both thoughts intensify Sennacherib’s sin. The
Highest, before whose transcendent height all human elevations sink to a uniform level,
has so joined Israel to Himself that to touch it is to strike at Him, and to vaunt one’s self
against it is to be arrogant towards God. That mighty name has received wider extension
now, but the wider sweep does not bring diminished depth, and lowly souls who take
that name for their strong tower can still run into it and be safe from ‘the oppressor’s
wrong, the proud man’s contumely,’ and the strongest foes.
There is tremendous scorn in the threat with which the divine address to Sennacherib
ends. The dreaded world-conqueror is no more in God’s eyes than a wild beast, which He
can ring and lead as He will, and not even as formidable as that, but like a horse or a
mule, that can easily be bridled and directed. What majestic assertion lies in these
figures and in ‘My hook’ and ‘My bridle!’ How many conquerors and mighty men since
then have been so mastered, and their schemes balked! Sennacherib had to return by
‘the way that he came,’ and to tramp back, foiled and disappointed, over all the weary
miles which he had trodden before with such insolent confidence of victory. A modern
parallel is Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow. But the same experience really befalls all
who order life regardless of God. Their schemes may seem to succeed, but in deepest
truth they fail, and the schemers never reach their goal.
In 2Ki_19:29 the prophet turns away abruptly and almost contemptuously from
Sennacherib to speak comfortably to Jerusalem, addressing Hezekiah first, but turning
immediately to the people. The substance of his words to them is, first, the assurance
that the Assyrian invasion had limits of time set to it by God; and, second, that beyond it
lay prosperous times, when the prophetic visions of a flourishing Israel should be
realised in fact. For two seed-times only field work was to be impossible on account of
the Assyrian occupation, but it was to foam itself away, like a winter torrent, before a
third season for sowing came round.
But how could this sequence of events, which required time for its unfolding, be ‘a sign’?
We must somewhat modify our notions of a sign to understand the prophet. The
Scripture usage does not only designate by that name a present event or thing which
guarantees the truth of a prophecy, but it sometimes means an event, or sequence of

82. events, in the future, which, when they have come to pass in accordance with the divine
prediction of them, will shed back light on other divine words or acts, and demonstrate
that they were of God. Thus Moses was given as a sign of his mission the worshipping in
Mount Sinai, which was to take place only after the Exodus. So with Isaiah’s sign here.
When the harvest of the third year was gathered in, then Israel would know that the
prophet had spoken from God when he had sung Sennacherib’s defeat. For the present,
Hezekiah and Judah had to live by faith; but when the deliverance was complete, and
they were enjoying the fruits of their labours and of God’s salvation, then they could look
back on the weary years, and recognise more clearly than while these were slowly
passing how God had been in all the trouble, and had been carrying on His purposes of
mercy through it all. And there will be a ‘sign’ for us in like manner when we look back
from eternity on the transitory conflicts of earthly life, and are satisfied with the harvest
which He has caused to spring from our poor sowings to the Spirit.
The definite promise of deliverance in 2Ki_19:32-34 is addressed to Judah, and
emphasises the completeness of the frustration of the invader’s efforts. There is a climax
in the enumeration of the things that he will not be allowed to do-he will not make his
entry into the city, nor even shoot an arrow there, nor even make preparation for a siege.
His whole design will be overturned, and as had already been said (2Ki_19:28), he will
retrace his steps a baffled man.
Note the strong antithesis: ‘He shall not come into this city, . . . for I will defend this
city.’ Zion is impregnable because Jehovah defends it. Sennacherib can do nothing, for
he is fighting against God. And if we ‘are come unto the city of the living God,’ we can
take the same promise for the strength of our lives. God saves Zion ‘for His own sake,’
for His name is concerned in its security, both because He has taken it for His own and
because He has pledged His word to guard it. It would be a blot on His faithfulness, a
slur on His power, if it should be conquered while it remains true to Him, its King. His
honour is involved in protecting us if we enter into the strong city of which the builder
and maker is God. And ‘for David’s sake,’ too, He defends Zion, because He had sworn to
David to dwell there. But Zion’s security becomes an illusion if Zion breaks away from
God. If it becomes as Sodom, it shares Sodom’s fate.
It is remarkable that neither in the song of triumph nor in the prophecy of deliverance is
there allusion to the destruction of the Assyrian army. How the exultant taunts of the
one and the definite promises of the other were to be fulfilled was not declared till the
event declared it. But faithful expectation had not long to wait, for ‘that night’ the blow
fell, and no second was needed. We are not told where the Assyrian army was, but clearly
it was not before Jerusalem. Nor do we learn what was the instrument of destruction
wielded by the ‘angel of the Lord,’ if there was any. The catastrophe may have been
brought about by a pestilence, but however effected, it was ‘the act of God,’ the
fulfilment of His promise, the making bare of His arm. ‘By terrible things in
righteousness’ did He answer the prayer of Hezekiah, and give to all humble souls who
are oppressed and cry to Him a pledge that ‘as they have heard, so’ will they ‘see, in the
city of’ their ‘God.’ How much more impressive is the stern, naked brevity of the
Scriptural account than a more emotional expansion of it, like, for instance, Byron’s
well-known, and in their way powerful lines, would have been! To the writer of this book
it seemed the most natural thing in the world that the foes of Zion should be annihilated
by one blow of the divine hand. His business is to tell the facts; he leaves commentary
and wonder and triumph or terror to others.
There is but one touch of patriotic exultation apparent in the half-sarcastic and half-
rejoicing accumulation of synonyms descriptive of Sennacherib’s retreat. He ‘departed,

83. and went and returned.’ It is like the picture in Psa_48:1-14, which probably refers to the
same events: ‘They saw it, and so they marvelled; they were troubled, and hasted away.’
About twenty years elapsed between Sennacherib’s retreat and his assassination. During
all that time he ‘dwelt at Nineveh,’ so far as Judah was concerned. He had had enough of
attacking it and its God. But the notice of his death is introduced here, not only to
complete the narrative, but to point a lesson, which is suggested by the fact that he was
murdered ‘as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god.’ Hezekiah had gone
into the house of his God with Sennacherib’s letter, and the dead corpses of an army
showed what Jehovah could do for His servant; Sennacherib was praying in the temple
of his god, and his corpse lay stretched before his idol, an object lesson of the impotence
of Nisroch and all his like to hear or help their worshippers.
21 This is the word that the Lord has spoken
against him:
“‘Virgin Daughter Zion
despises you and mocks you.
Daughter Jerusalem
tosses her head as you flee.
BAR ES, "Concerning him - i. e., “concerning Sennacherib.” 2Ki_19:21-28 are
addressed to the great Assyrian monarch himself, and are God’s reply to his proud
boastings.
The virgin, the daughter of Zion, - Rather, holy eastern city, is here distinguished
from Jerusalem, the western one, and is given the remarkable epithet “virgin,” which is
not applied to her sister; probably because the true Zion, the city of David, had remained
inviolable from David’s time, having never been entered by an enemy. Jerusalem, on the
other hand, had been taken, both by Shishak 1Ki_14:26 and by Jehoash 2Ki_14:13. The
personification of cities as females is a common figure (compare marginal references).
Hath shaken her head at thee - This was a gesture of scorn with the Hebrews
(compare the marginal references; Mat_27:39).
CLARKE, "The virgin the daughter of Zion hath despised thee, and laughed
thee to scorn; the daughter of Jerusalem hath shaken her head at thee - “So
truly contemptible is thy power, and empty thy boasts, that even the young women of
Jerusalem, under the guidance of Jehovah, shall be amply sufficient to discomfit all thy

84. forces, and cause thee to return with shame to thy own country, where the most
disgraceful death awaits thee.” When Bishop Warburton had published his Doctrine of
Grace, and chose to fall foul on some of the most religious people of the land, a young
woman of the city of Gloucester exposed his graceless system in a pamphlet, to which
she affixed the above words as a motto!
HE RY 21-22, "1. As the scorn of Jerusalem, 2Ki_19:21. He thought himself the
terror of the daughter of Zion, that chaste and beautiful virgin, and that by his threats he
could force her to submit to him: “But, being a virgin in her Father's house and under his
protection, she defies thee, despises thee, laughs thee to scorn. Thy impotent malice is
ridiculous; he that sits in heaven laughs at thee, and therefore so do those that abide
under his shadow.” By this word God intended to silence the fears of Hezekiah and his
people. Though to an eye of sense the enemy looked formidable, to an eye of faith he
looked despicable.
2. As an enemy to God; and that was enough to make him miserable. Hezekiah
pleaded this: “Lord, he has reproached thee,” 2Ki_19:16. “He has,” saith God, “and I take
it as against myself (2Ki_19:22): Whom hast thou reproached? Is it not the Holy One of
Israel, whose honour is dear to him, and who has power to vindicate it, which the gods
of the heathen have not?” Meno me impune lacesset - No one shall provoke me with
impunity.
K&D, "2Ki_19:21
“The virgin daughter Zion despises thee, the daughter Jerusalem shakes the head
behind thee.” By daughter Zion, daughter Jerusalem, we are not to understand the
inhabitants of Zion, or of Jerusalem, as though ‫ת‬ ַ stood for ‫ים‬ִ‫נ‬ ָ or ‫י‬ֵ‫נ‬ ְ (Ges., Hitzig, and
others); but the city itself with its inhabitants is pictorially personified as a daughter and
virgin, and the construct state ‫ּון‬ ִ‫ת־צ‬ ַ is to be taken, like ‫ת‬ ָ‫ר‬ ְ ‫ר‬ ַ‫ה‬ְ‫,נ‬ as in apposition:
“daughter Zion,” not daughter of Zion (vid., Ges. §116, 5; Ewald, §287, e.). Even in the
case of ‫ת‬ ַ‫תוּל‬ ְ the construct state expresses simply the relation of apposition. Zion is
called a “virgin” as being an inviolable city to the Assyrians, i.e., one which they cannot
conquer. Shaking the head is a gesture denoting derision and pleasure at another's
misfortune (cf. Psa_22:8; Psa_109:25, etc.). “Behind thee,” i.e., after thee as thou goest
away, is placed first as a pictorial feature for the sake of emphasis.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:21. The daughter of Zion — That is, Jerusalem; which is
called the daughter of Zion, say some, because the hill of Zion, as being the strongest
and safest part, was first inhabited, and by the increase of inhabitants, Jerusalem
arising around, as it were, sprang from it, and might therefore properly enough be
termed its daughter. But it is more probable that the people of Zion, or of
Jerusalem, (Zion, an eminent part of the city, being put for the whole,) are here
termed its daughter, cities and countries being often called mothers, and their
inhabitants daughters. Thus we read of the daughter of Babylon, the daughter of
Tyre, &c., Psalms 137:8; Psalms 45:13. Zion or Jerusalem is termed a virgin,
because she was pure in good measure from that gross idolatry wherewith other
people were defiled, which is called spiritual whoredom; and to signify that God
would defend her from the rape which Sennacherib intended to commit upon her,

85. with no less care than parents do their virgin daughters from those who seek to
force and deflour them. The image is extremely fine, whereby the contempt of
Sennacherib’s threats is expressed.
ELLICOTT, "(21) This is the word . . .—The prophecy which follows is well
characterised by Cheyne as one “of striking interest, and both in form and matter
stamped with the mark of Isaiah.”
Concerning him.—Or, against him.
The virgin the daughter of Zion.—A poetic personification of place. Zion here, as
Jerusalem in the next line, is regarded as mother of the people dwelling there.
(Comp. 2 Samuel 20:19.) The term Virgin naturally denotes the inviolable security
of the citadel of Jehovah.
Hath shaken her head at thee.—Or, hath nodded behind thee. (Comp. Psalms 22:8.)
The people of Jerusalem nod in scorn at the retiring envoys of Sennacherib.
PETT, "“This is the word (Hebrew ha dabar; LXX ho logos) that YHWH has
spoken (diber) concerning him,”
He assured Hezekiah that YHWH’s ‘word’ had now gone forth and would
accomplish His will. When YHWH spoke His word it was the guarantee that action
would result (see Isaiah 55:11). In these contexts the ‘word’ of God can almost be
paralleled with the idea of the ‘Spirit’ of God as indicating God in action. This
would later be personified in Jesus Christ Who was God’s Logos supreme (John
1:1-4).
2 Kings 19:21-22
1). Judah’s Scorn At Sennacherib For Setting Himself Up Against YHWH (2 Kings
19:21-22).
2 Kings 19:21
“The virgin daughter of Zion has despised you and laughed you to scorn; the
daughter of Jerusalem has shaken her head after you.”
The picture is a vivid one. Sennacherib, through the Rabshakeh, had been ranting
at Jerusalem, and seeing her as like a virgin daughter waiting to be raped, but this
was now a picture of what the ‘virgin daughter’s’ response would be, mockery at his
folly in thinking that he could set himself up against the God of Israel. The ‘virgin
daughter of Zion’ (pure and unspoiled and reserved for YHWH) despised him and
‘laughed him to scorn’ (compare Psalms 2:4 where it is YHWH Himself who laughs
at the folly of the enemies of His Anointed). She shook her head ‘after him’, in other
words once he was running away. This was probably in incredulity at his folly, and
derisive wonderment at the fact that he had dared to defy the living God.

86. PULPIT, "This is the word that the Lord hath spoken concerning him. "Him" is, of
course, Sennacherib. It adds great liveliness and force to the opening portion of the
oracle, that it should be addressed directly by Jehovah to Sennacherib, as an answer
to his bold challenge. The only address at all similar in Scripture is that to
ebuchadnezzar (Daniel 4:31, Daniel 4:32), spoken by "a voice from heaven" But
the present passage is one of far greater force and beauty. The virgin the daughter
of Zion; rather, the virgin daughter of Zion, or the virgin daughter, Zion. Cities
were commonly personified by the sacred writers, and represented as "daughters"
(see Isaiah 23:10, Isaiah 23:12; Isaiah 47:1, Isaiah 47:5, etc.). "Virgin daughter"
here may perhaps represent "the consciousness of impregnability" (Drechsler); but
the phrase seems to have been used rhetorically or poetically, to heighten the beauty
or pathos of the picture (Isaiah 23:12; Isaiah 47:1; Jeremiah 46:11; Lamentations
2:13), without any reference to the question whether the particular city had or had
not been previously taken. Jerusalem certainly had been taken by Shishak (1 Kings
14:26), and by Joash (2 Kings 14:13); but Zion, if it be taken as the name of the
eastern city (Bishop Patrick, ad lee.), may have been still a "virgin fortress." Hath
despised thee, and laughed thee to scorn; or, despises thee and laughs thee to scorn.
The Hebrew preterite has often a present sense. Whatever was the case a little while
ago (see Isaiah 22:1-14), the city now laughs at thy threats. The daughter of
Jerusalem hath shaken her head at thee; or, wags her head at thee—in scorn and
ridicule (comp. Psalms 22:7).
22 Who is it you have ridiculed and blasphemed?
Against whom have you raised your voice
and lifted your eyes in pride?
Against the Holy One of Israel!
BAR ES, "The Holy One of Israel - This is a favorite phrase with Isaiah, in whose
prophecies it is found 27 times, while it occurs five times only in the rest of Scripture
Psa_71:22; Psa_78:41; Psa_89:18; Jer_50:29; Jer_51:5. Its occurrence here is a strong
proof - one among many - of the genuineness of the present passage, which is not the
composition of the writer of Kings, but an actual prophecy delivered at this time by
Isaiah.
K&D 22-23, "2Ki_19:22-23

87. This derision falls upon the Assyrian, for having blasphemed the Lord God by his
foolish boasting about his irresistible power. “Whom hast thou despised and
blasphemed, and against whom hast thou lifted up the voice? and thou liftest up thine
eyes against the Holy One of Israel.” Lifting up the voice refers to the tone of threatening
assumption, in which Rabshakeh and Sennacherib had spoken. Lifting up the eyes on
high, i.e., to the heavens, signifies simply looking up to the sky (cf. Isa_40:26), not
“directing proud looks against God” (Ges.). Still less is ‫ּום‬‫ר‬ ָ‫מ‬ to be taken adverbially in the
sense of haughtily, as Thenius and Knobel suppose. The bad sense of proud arrogance
lies in the words which follow, “against the Holy One of Israel,” or in the case of Isaiah,
where ‫ל‬ ֶ‫א‬ stands for ‫ל‬ ַ‫,ע‬ in the context, viz., the parallelism of the members. God is called
the Holy One of Israel as He who manifests His holiness in and upon Israel. This title of
the Deity is one of the peculiarities of Isaiah's range of thought, although it originated
with Asaph (Psa_78:41; see at Isa_1:4). This insult to the holy God consisted in the fact
that Sennacherib had said through his servants (2Ki_19:23, 2Ki_19:24): “With my
chariots upon chariots I have ascended the height of the mountains, the uttermost part
of Lebanon, so that I felled the tallness of its cedars, the choice of its cypresses, and came
to the shelter of its border, to the forest of its orchard. I have dug and drunk strange
water, so that I dried up all the rivers of Egypt with the sole of my feet.” The words put
into the mouth of the Assyrian are expressive of the feeling which underlay all his
blasphemies (Drechsler). The two verses are kept quite uniform, the second hemistich in
both cases expressing the result of the first, that is to say, what the Assyrian intended
still further to perform after having accomplished what is stated in the first hemistich.
When he has ascended the heights of Lebanon, he devastates the glorious trees of the
mountain. Consequently in 2Ki_19:24 the drying up of the Nile of Egypt is to be taken as
the result of the digging of wells in the parched desert; in other words, it is to be
interpreted as descriptive of the devastation of Egypt, whose whole fertility depended
upon its being watered by the Nile and its canals. We cannot therefore take these verses
exactly as Drechsler does; that is to say, we cannot assume that the Assyrian is speaking
in the first hemistichs of both verses of what he (not necessarily Sennacherib himself,
but one of his predecessors) has actually performed. For even if the ascent of the
uttermost heights of Lebanon had been performed by one of the kings of Assyria, there is
no historical evidence whatever that Sennacherib or one of his predecessors had already
forced his way into Egypt. The words are therefore to be understood in a figurative
sense, as an individualizing picture of the conquests which the Assyrians had already
accomplished, and those which they were still intending to effect; and this assumption
does not necessarily exhibit Sennacherib “as a mere braggart, who boastfully heaps up in
ridiculous hyperbole an enumeration of the things which he means to perform”
(Drechsler). For if the Assyrian had not ascended with the whole multitude of his war-
chariots to the loftiest summits of Lebanon, to feel its cedars and its cypresses, Lebanon
had set no bounds to his plans of conquest, so that Sennacherib might very well
represent his forcing his way into Canaan as an ascent of the lofty peaks of this mountain
range. Lebanon is mentioned, partly as a range of mountains that was quite inaccessible
to war-chariots, and partly as the northern defence of the land of Canaan, through the
conquest of which one made himself lord of the land. And so far as Lebanon is used
synecdochically for the land of which it formed the defence, the hewing down of its
cedars and cypresses, those glorious witnesses of the creation of God, denotes the
devastation of the whole land, with all its glorious works of nature and of human hands.
The chief strength of the early Asiatic conquerors consisted in the multitude of their
war-chariots: they are therefore brought into consideration simply as signs of vast
military resources; the fact that they could only be used on level ground being therefore

88. disregarded. The Chethîb ‫י‬ ָ ְ‫כ‬ ִ‫ר‬ ‫ב‬ ֶ‫כ‬ ֶ‫,ר‬ “my chariots upon chariots,” is used poetically for an
innumerable multitude of chariots, as ‫י‬ ַ‫ּוב‬ ‫ּוב‬ for an innumerable host of locusts (Nah_
3:17), and is more original than the Keri ‫י‬ ִ ְ‫כ‬ ִ‫ר‬ ‫ּב‬‫ר‬, the multitude of my chariots, which
simply follows Isaiah. The “height of the mountains” is more precisely defined by the
emphatic ‫ּון‬‫נ‬ ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫ל‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫ת‬ ְⅴ ְ‫ר‬ַ‫,י‬ the uttermost sides, i.e., the loftiest heights, of Lebanon, just as ‫ּור‬‫ב‬
‫י‬ ֵ‫ת‬ ְⅴ ְ‫ר‬ַ‫י‬ in Isa_14:15 and Eze_32:23 are the uttermost depths of Sheol. ‫יו‬ָ‫ז‬ ָ‫ר‬ ֲ‫א‬ ‫ת‬ ַ‫ּומ‬‫ק‬, his tallest
cedars. ‫יו‬ ָ‫ּשׁ‬‫ר‬ ְ ‫ּור‬‫ח‬ ְ‫ב‬ ִ‫,מ‬ his most select or finest cypresses. ‫ּה‬ ִ‫ק‬ ‫ּון‬‫ל‬ ְ‫,מ‬ for which Isaiah has the
more usual ‫ּו‬ ִ‫ק‬ ‫ּום‬‫ר‬ ְ‫,מ‬ “the height of his end,” is the loftiest point of Lebanon on which a
man can rest, not a lodging built on the highest point of Lebanon (Cler., Vitr., Ros.).
‫ּו‬ ִ‫מ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַⅴ ‫ר‬ ַ‫ע‬ַ‫,י‬ the forest of his orchard, i.e., the forest resembling an orchard. The reference is
to the celebrated cedar-forest between the loftiest peaks of Lebanon at the village of
Bjerreh.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:22. And lifted up thieve eyes on high — As those do who
have haughty thoughts, and look down on others with contempt and scorn. Even
against the Holy One of Israel — Whose honour is dear to him, and who has power
to vindicate it, which the gods of the heathen have not.
ELLICOTT, "(22) On high—i.e., towards heaven (Isaiah 40:26). (Comp. Isaiah
14:13-14.)
The Holy One of Israel.—A favourite expression of Isaiah’s, in whose book it occurs
twenty-seven times, and only five times elsewhere in the Old Testameut (Psalms
71:22; Psalms 78:41; Psalms 89:19; Jeremiah 50:29; Jeremiah 51:5).
GUZIK, "2. (2 Kings 19:22-28) God’s word to the King of Assyria and his
representatives.
Whom have you reproached and blasphemed? Against whom have you raised your
voice, and lifted up your eyes on high? Against the Holy One of Israel. By your
messengers you have reproached the Lord, and said: “By the multitude of my
chariots I have come up to the height of the mountains, to the limits of Lebanon; I
will cut down its tall cedars and its choice cypress trees; I will enter the extremity of
its borders, to its fruitful forest. I have dug and drunk strange water, and with the
soles of my feet I have dried up all the brooks of defense.” Did you not hear long ago
how I made it, from ancient times that I formed it? ow I have brought it to pass,
that you should be for crushing fortified cities into heaps of ruins. Therefore their
inhabitants had little power; they were dismayed and confounded; they were as the
grass of the field and the green herb, as the grass on the housetops and grain
blighted before it is grown. But I know your dwelling place, your going out and your
coming in, and your rage against Me. Because your rage against Me and your
tumult have come up to My ears, therefore I will put My hook in your nose and My

89. bridle in your lips, and I will turn you back By the way which you came.
a. Whom have you reproached and blasphemed? Against whom have you raised
your voice, and lifted up your eyes on high? Against the Holy One of Israel: The
LORD, speaking through Isaiah, simply said to the Rabshakeh, “Do you know
whom you are dealing with?” The Rabshakeh obviously did not know.
i. Curiously, this prophecy may have never reached the ears of the Rabshakeh. After
all, Isaiah didn’t exactly have free access to him. But perhaps before his terrible
end, God found a way to get this prophecy to him. Or, perhaps God had it for this
blasphemer as a special message in hell. At the very least, this prophecy would have
been hugely encouraging to Hezekiah and all of Judah, even if the Rabshakeh never
heard it on this earth.
ii. Sometimes God speaks to the enemy more for the sake of His people than for the
sake of the enemy himself.
b. By the multitude of my chariots, I have come up to the height of the mountains:
Here, the LORD described the great pride the Assyrians had in their own conquests.
But they forgot that the LORD was really in charge ( ow I have brought it to pass,
that you should be crushing fortified cites into heaps of ruins. Therefore the
inhabitants had little power). Even if the Assyrians didn’t know it, they owed their
success to the LORD.
i. “God then confronted Sennacherib with that which he had apparently not
considered: Sennacherib’s successes were foreordained by God . . . Sennacherib
should not boast as though what he had done was either self-generated or self-
accomplished.” (Patterson and Austel)
ii. This was humbling for the Assyrians. All along, they thought it was because of
their mighty power they had accomplished so much. Here, God made it plain that it
was His power that did it.
iii. “With the soles of my feet was Sennacherib’s boast that he commanded so many
soldiers that when they marched across riverbeds, the literally dried up the rivers.”
(Dilday)
c. I know your dwelling place, your going out and your coming in: God knew how to
find the Assyrians. And because Assyria went too far in blaspheming the One who
made all their success possible, therefore I will put My hook in your nose . . . and I
will turn you back by the way which you came. This was an especially dramatic
statement, because this is exactly how the Assryians cruelly marched those whom
they forced to relocate out of their conquered lands. They lined up the captives, and
drove a large fishhook through the lip or the nose of each captive, strung them all
together and marched them. God said, “I’m going to do the same thing to you.”
i. “The Assyrian practice of leading foreign princes captive with a ring or hook in

90. the nose is depicted on Esarhaddon’s stela at Zenjirli showing him holding
Tirhakah of Egypt and Ba’alu of Tyre.” (Wiseman)
PETT, "“Whom have you defied and blasphemed? And against whom have you
exalted your voice and lifted up your eyes on high? Even against the Holy One of
Israel.”
YHWH now drew Sennacherib’s attention to what he had done. He had defied and
blasphemed and lifted up his haughty eyes against none other than ‘the Holy One of
Israel’. othing could be more foolish than that. The title ‘the Holy One of Israel’
appears here, three times in the Psalms, twice in Jeremiah and twenty five times
spread throughout the Book of Isaiah. It is thus typical of an Isaianic prophecy. It
indicates His uniqueness and ‘otherness’, as ‘the High and Exalted One Who
inhabits eternity Whose ame is Holy’ (Isaiah 57:15).
PULPIT, "Whom hast thou reproached and blasphemed? i.e. "Against whom hast
thou been mad enough to measure thyself? Whom hast thou dared to insult and
defy?" ot an earthly king—not a mere angelic being—but the Omnipotent, the
Lord of earth and heaven. What utter folly is this! What mere absurdity? And
against whom hast thou exalted thy voice? i.e. "spoken proudly"—in the tone in
which a superior speaks of an inferior—and lifted up thine eyes on high?—i.e.
"looked down upon"—treated with contempt, as not worth consideration—even
against the Holy One of Israel. Isaiah's favorite phrase—used by him twenty-seven
times, and only five times in the rest of Scripture—marks this entire prophecy as his
genuine utterance, net the composition of the writer of Kings, but a burst of sudden
inspiration from the Coryphaeus of the prophetic band. The oracle bears all the
marks of Isaiah's elevated, fervid, and highly poetic style.
23 By your messengers
you have ridiculed the Lord.
And you have said,
“With my many chariots
I have ascended the heights of the mountains,
the utmost heights of Lebanon.
I have cut down its tallest cedars,
the choicest of its junipers.
I have reached its remotest parts,

91. the finest of its forests.
BAR ES, "And hast said - Isaiah clothes in words the thoughts of Sennacherib’s
heart - thoughts of the most extreme self-confidence. Compare Isa_10:7-14, where,
probably at an earlier date, the same overweening pride is ascribed to this king.
With the multitude of my chariots - There are two readings here, which give,
however, nearly the same sense. The more difficult and more poetical of the two is to be
preferred. Literally, translated it runs - “With chariots upon chariots am I come up, etc.”
To the sides of Lebanon - , “Lebanon,” with its “cedars” and its “fir-trees,” is to be
understood here both literally and figuratively. Literally, the hewing of timber in
Lebanon was an ordinary feature of an Assyrian expedition into Syria. Figuratively, the
mountain represents all the more inaccessible parts of Palestine, and the destruction of
its firs and cedars denotes the complete devastation of the entire country from one end
to the other.
The lodgings of his borders - literally, “the lodge of its (Lebanon’s) end;” either an
actual habitation situated on the highest point of the mountain-range, or a poetical
periphrasis for the highest point itself.
The forest of his Carmel - Or, “the forest of its garden” - i. e., “its forest which is
like a garden,” etc.
CLARKE, "The tall cedar trees - the choice fir trees - Probably meaning the
princes and nobles of the country.
The forest of his Carmel - Better in the margin: the forest and his fruitful field.
HE RY 23-26, "3. As a proud vainglorious fool, that spoke great swelling words of
vanity, and boasted of a false gift, by his boasts, as well as by his threats, reproaching
the Lord. For, (1.) He magnified his own achievements out of measure and quite above
what really they were (2Ki_19:23, 2Ki_19:24): Thou hast said so and so. This was not in
the letter he wrote, but God let Hezekiah know that he not only saw what was written
there, but heard what he said elsewhere, probably in the speeches he made to his
councils or armies. Note, God takes notice of the boasts of proud men, and will call them
to an account, that he may look upon them and abuse them, Job_40:11. What a mighty
figure does Sennacherib think he makes! Driving his chariots to the tops of the highest
mountains, forcing his way through woods and rivers, breaking through all difficulties,
making himself master of all he had a mind to. Nothing could stand before him or be
withheld from him; no hills too high for him to climb, no trees too strong for him to fell,
no waters too deep for him to dry up; as if he had the power of a God, to speak and it is
done. (2.) He took to himself the glory of doing these great things, whereas they were all
the Lord's doing, 2Ki_19:25, 2Ki_19:26. Sennacherib, in his letter, had appealed to what
Hezekiah had heard (2Ki_19:11): Thou hast heard what the kings of Assyria have done;
but, in answer to that, he is reminded of what God has done for Israel of old, drying up

92. the Red Sea, leading them through the wilderness, planting them in Canaan. “What are
all thy doings to these? And as for the desolations thou hast made in the earth, and
particularly in Judah, thou art but the instrument in God's hand, a mere tool: it is I that
have brought it to pass. I gave thee thy power, gave thee thy success, and made thee
what thou art, raised thee up to lay waste fenced cities and so to punish them for their
wickedness, and therefore their inhabitants were of small power.” What a foolish
insolent thing was it for him to exalt himself above God, and against God, upon that
which he had done by him and under him. Sennacherib's boasts here are expounded in
Isa_10:13, Isa_10:14, By the strength of my hand I have done it, and by my wisdom,
etc.; and they are answered (2Ki_19:15), Shall the axe boast itself against him that
heweth therewith? It is surely absurd for the fly upon the wheel to say, What a dust do I
make! or for the sword in the hand to say, What execution I do! If God be the principal
agent in all that is done, boasting is for ever excluded.
BE SO ,"2 Kings 19:23. By thy messengers thou hast reproached the Lord —
Advancing hereby thy very servants above him. And hast said, With the multitude
of my chariots, I am come up, &c. — I have brought up my very chariots to those
mountains, which were thought inaccessible by my army. To the sides of Lebanon
— A high hill famous for cedars and fir-trees, as is signified in what follows. And
will cut down the tall cedars thereof, &c. — This may be understood, 1st,
Mystically, I will destroy the princes and nobles of Judah, sometimes compared to
cedars and fir-trees, or their strongest cities. “Cities,” says Dr. Dodd, “in the
prophetical writings are metaphorically represented by woods or forests, especially
those of Lebanon and Carmel; and the several ranks of inhabitants by the taller and
lesser trees growing there. Hence we may collect the true sense of this passage,
which represents the Assyrian prince as threatening to take mount Zion, together
with the capital city Jerusalem, and to destroy their principal inhabitants.” The
following words, the height of his border, and the forest of his Carmel, or, as the
latter clause is more properly rendered, the grove of his fruitful field, are generally
thought figuratively to refer to the temple and city. The Chaldee paraphrast renders
it, And I will also take the house of their sanctuary, and I will subject to me their
fortified cities. If, 2d, The reader prefer understanding the words literally, the
meaning is, I will cut down the trees and woods that hinder my march, and will
prepare and make plain the way for all my numerous army and chariots. othing
shall stand in my way, nor be able to obstruct or impede my march, no, not the
highest and strongest places. The words contain an admirable description of the
boastings of a proud monarch, puffed up with his great success. As if he had said,
What place is there into which I cannot make my way? Or, what is there I cannot
achieve? Even if it were to go up to the top of the steepest mountains with my
chariots? My power is sufficient to remove all obstacles, and overcome all
opposition.
ELLICOTT, "(23) The multitude.—The reading of the Hebrew margin, of many
MSS., Isaiah, and all the versions. The Hebrew text has “with the chariotry of my
chariotry”—obviously a scribe’s error.

93. I am come up . . . mountains.—I (emphatic) have ascended lofty mountains. Such
boasts are common in the Assyrian inscriptions.
To the sides of Lebanon.—Thenius explains: “the spurs of the Lebanon—i.e., the
strongholds of Judæa, which Sennacherib had already captured.” “Lebanon, as the
northern bulwark of the land of Israel, is used as a representative or symbol for the
whole country (Zechariah 11:1)” (Cheyne). The language is similar in Isaiah 14:13.
And will cut down . . .—Or, and I will fell the tallest cedars thereof, the choicest firs
thereof. Cedars and firs in Isaiah’s language symbolise “kings, princes, and nobles,
all that is highest and most stately” (Birks), or “the most puissant defenders”
(Thenius). (See Isaiah 2:13; Isaiah 10:33-34.)
The lodgings of his borders.—Or, the furthest lodging thereof—i.e., Mount Zion or
Jerusalem. Isaiah has height for lodging, either a scribe’s error or an editor’s
correction.
Carmel—i.e., pleasure-garden or park (Isaiah 10:18). The royal palace and grounds
appear to be meant. Thenius compares “the house of the forest of Lebanon” (1
Kings 7:2).
PETT, "2 Kings 19:23-24
2). A Description Of The Boasting And Defiance Of Sennacherib (2 Kings 19:23-24).
YHWH points out that what Sennacherib has done in his folly is to defy the
Sovereign Lord of the Universe, as a result of his confidence in his massive (but
vulnerable) human resources, and He goes on to describe the exalted claims that he
has made.
2 Kings 19:23-24
“By your messengers you have defied the Lord,
And have said, With the multitude of my chariots,
Am I come up to the height of the mountains,
To the innermost parts of Lebanon,
And I will cut down its tall cedars,
And its choice fir-trees,
And I will enter into his farthest lodging-place,
The forest of his fruitful countryside.
I have dug,
And drunk strange waters,
And with the sole of my feet will I dry up
All the rivers of Matsor.”
ote the emphasis on the fact that he has ‘defied the Sovereign Lord (adonai)’. He
needed to recognise that YHWH was not to be seen as like all the other ‘gods’ that

94. he had had dealings with, not even his own Ashur (whom he called ‘lord’). Rather it
is YHWH Who is Lord of all, Lord of time (2 Kings 19:25), Lord of history (2 Kings
19:25). But Sennacherib had overlooked this fact and had defied Him with his puny
chariots (compare Isaiah 31:1; Isaiah 31:3; Psalms 20:7). He thought that because
he had so many chariots he could do what he wanted. He would prove to be
mistaken.
The words that follow must not be taken too literally. They are building up a picture
of extreme arrogance. o one in his right senses seeks to take chariots to the top of
the highest mountains. The point is rather that with his chariot forces he had so
taken possession of the land that even the highest mountains, where people thought
their gods to be, were under his control. The Assyrian annals, however, do contain
similar boasts that the king of Assyria in his chariot will reach even the most
inaccessible of regions where none have been before, and he boasted openly of his
achievements in taking his chariots into the mountains of Aram and Palestine.
He had taken over the very heart of Lebanon (its innermost parts). He is using
‘Lebanon’ (which is a flexible description, like Gilead) in its widest sense as taking
in a large part of the land that he has conquered in the south. And the pride of
Lebanon was its tall cedars and splendid fir trees. But these will be cut down,
leaving it bereft. Practically speaking they would be used to make siege engines and
siege towers, or exported for profit, but the idea is as much a picture of the loss that
Lebanon would suffer for defying him. The cutting down of trees unnecessarily was
usually frowned on (Deuteronomy 20:19-20). To do so despoiled the land, for they
took many years to grow. But Assyria did it quite callously.
owhere would escape Sennacherib’s attention. He would enter their most distant
and remote lodging places, and pierce the centre of their most expansive forests, for
which they were so famous. He would extract water from their unyielding ground,
digging wells, and drinking from those wells in foreign lands, wells which were far
from home, and which had previously belonged to others. In other words he would
make himself completely at home there, taking possession of everything both above
and below ground.
And in contrast he would dry up whatever waters he wished, even ‘the rivers of
Matsor’. This could be the Missor mentioned in the Amarna letters. On the other
hand if we take Matsor as signifying Egypt expressed poetically, as some do (Egypt
= mitsraim), this may indicate that his final aim was to bring Egypt under Assyrian
control.
· The expression may indicate his previous victory over Egypt, which he saw
as ‘drying up the rivers of Egypt’ (defeating the army which made safe its border).
· It may be proverbial, in that the rivers of Egypt never dried up. Egypt was
famous as the land which had no need of rain because it was permanently watered
by the ile (see Zechariah 14:18). Thus it may be intended to indicate his
determination to do the impossible. He would dry up what everyone knew could not
be dried up (it would be a typical Assyrian boast).

95. · He may simply have had in mind the ‘wadi of Egypt’ and the border rivers
which were at the southernmost end of Philistia (Genesis 15:18; umbers 34:5;
Joshua 15:4; Joshua 15:47) with the idea that he would quickly remove Egypt’s
defensive barriers, or even leave them without water (it is a boast).
· Or it may be that Sennacherib is depicted as saying that what YHWH had
done when Israel had escaped from Egypt (dry up a mere sea; compare Psalms
106:9), he could do better when he invaded, for he would dry up all their rivers.
PULPIT, "By thy messengers—literally, by the hand of thy messengers—
Rabshakeh and others (see 2 Kings 18:30, 2 Kings 18:35; 2 Kings 19:10-13)—thou
hast reproached the Lord, and but said. Sennacherib had net said what is here
attributed to him, any more than Sargon had said the words ascribed to him in
Isaiah 10:13, Isaiah 10:14. But he had thought it; and God accounts men's
deliberate thoughts as their utterances. Isaiah's "oracle" brings out and places in a
striking light the pride, self-confidence, and self-sufficiency which underlay
Sennacherib's messages and letters. With the multitude of my chariots; or, with
chariots upon chariots. The chariot-force was the main arm of the Assyrian military
service—that on which most dependence was placed, and to which victory was
commonly attributed. The number of chariots that could be brought into the field
by the Assyrians is nowhere stated; but we find nearly four thousand hostile
chariots collected to oppose an ordinary Assyrian invasion, and defeated. The
estimates of Cterias—eleven thousand for inas, and a hundred thousand for
Semiramis (Died. Sic; Isaiah 2:5. § 4)—are, of course, unhistorical. I am come up to
the height of the mountains. "The height of the mountains" is here the high ground
which an army would have to traverse in passing from the Coele-Syrian valley into
Palestine. It is not exactly Lebanon, which runs parallel with the coast, and certainly
does not "guard Palestine to the north," as Keil supposes; But it may be viewed as a
"side" or "flank" of Lebanon. In point of fact, Lebanon and Hermon unite their
roots to form a barrier between the Coele-Syrian plain (El Buka'a) and the valley of
the Jordan, and an invader from the north must cross this barrier. It is not so
difficult or rugged but that the Assyrians could bring their chariots ever it. They
were accustomed to traverse far more difficult regions in Zagros and iphatos and
Taurus, and to carry their chariots with them, dismounting when necessary, and
having the vehicles lifted over obstacles by human hands. To the sides of Lebanon.
An army which invades Palestine by the Coele-Syrian valley—quite the easiest and
most usual line of invasion—necessarily passes along the entire eastern "side," or
"flank," of Lebanon, which is the proper meaning of ‫ָה‬‫כּ‬ ְ‫ַר‬‫י‬, and not "loftiest height"
(Keil), or "innermost recess" (Revised Version). The plural, ‫י‬ֵ‫ְת‬‫כ‬ ְ‫ַר‬‫י‬, is natural when a
mountain range, like Lebanon, is spoken of. And will cut down the tall cedar trees
thereof, and the choice fir trees thereof. The felling of timber in the Syrian
mountain-chains was a common practice of the Assyrian invaders, and had two
quite distinct objects. Sometimes it was mere cruel devastation, done to injure and
impoverish the inhabitants; but more often it was done for the sake of the timber
which the conqueror carried off into his own country. "The mountains of Amanus I
ascended," says Asshur-nazir-pal; "wood for bridges, pines, box, cypress, I cut
down … cedar-wood from Amanus I destined for Bit-Hira and my pleasure-house

96. called Azmaku, and for the temple of the moon and sun, the exalted gods. I
proceeded to the land of Iz-mehri, and took possession of it throughout: I cut down
beams for bridges, and carried them to ineveh". The cedar (erez) and the pine, or
juniper (berosh), were in special request. And I will enter into the lodgings of his
borders—rather, the lodge of its border—perhaps a palace or hunting-lodge on the
outskirt of the Lebanon forest region (comp. Song of Solomon 7:4)—and into the
forest of his Carmel; rather, the forest of its orchard; i.e. the choicest part of the
Lebanon forest region—the part which is rather park or orchard than mere forest.
24 I have dug wells in foreign lands
and drunk the water there.
With the soles of my feet
I have dried up all the streams of Egypt.”
BAR ES, "Have digged and drunk ... and dried up - The meaning seems to be -
“Mountains do not stop me - I cross them even in my chariots. Deserts do not stop me - I
dig wells there, and drink the water. Rivers do not stop me - I pass them as easily as if
they were dry land.”
The rivers of besieged places - Rather, “the rivers of Egypt.” The singular form,
Mazor (compare the modern Misr and the Assyrian Muzr), is here used instead of the
ordinary dual form, Mizraim, perhaps because “Lower Egypt” only is intended. This was
so cut up with canals and branches of the Nile, natural and artificial, that it was regarded
as impassable for chariots and horses. Sennacherib, however, thought that these many
streams would prove no impediments to him; he would advance as fast as if they were
“dried up.”
CLARKE, "I have dipped and drunk strange waters - I have conquered strange
countries, in which I have digged wells for my army; or, I have gained the wealth of
strange countries.
With the sole of my feet - My infantry have been so numerous that they alone have
been sufficient to drink up the rivers of the places I have besieged.
K&D, "2Ki_19:24
2Ki_19:24 refers to the intended conquest of Egypt. Just as Lebanon could not stop
the expeditions of the Assyrians, or keep them back from the conquest of the land of
Canaan, so the desert of et Tih, which separated Egypt from Asia, notwithstanding its

97. want of water (cf. Herod. iii. 5; Rob. Pal. i. p. 262), was no hindrance to him, which
could prevent his forcing his way through it and laying Egypt waste. The digging of water
is, of course, not merely “a reopening of the wells that had been choked with rubbish,
and the cisterns that had been covered up before the approaching enemy” (Thenius), but
the digging of wells in the waterless desert. ‫ים‬ ִ‫ר‬ָ‫ז‬ ‫ם‬ִ‫י‬ ַ‫,מ‬ strange water, is not merely water
belonging to others, but water not belonging to this soil (Drechsler), i.e., water supplied
by a region which had none at other times. By the perfects the thing is represented as
already done, as exposed to no doubt whatever; we must bear in mind, however, that the
desert of et Tih is not expressly named, but the expression is couched in such general
terms, that we may also assume that it includes what the Assyrian had really effected in
his expeditions through similar regions. The drying up of the rivers with the soles of the
feet is a hyperbolical expression denoting the omnipotence with which the Assyrian rules
over the earth. Just as he digs water in the desert where no water is to be had, so does he
annihilate it where mighty rivers exist.
(Note: Compare the similar boasting of Alarich, already quoted by earlier
commentators, in Claudian, de bello Geth. v. 526ff.:
cum cesserit omnis
Obsequiis natura meis? subsidere nostris
Sub pedibus montes, arescere vidimus amnes.
v. 532. Fregi Alpes. galeis Padum victricibus hausi.)
‫י‬ ֵ‫ּור‬‫א‬ְ‫י‬ are the arms and canals of the Yeor, i.e., of the Nile. ‫ּור‬‫צ‬ ָ‫,מ‬ a rhetorical epithet for
Egypt, used not only here, but also in Isa_19:6 and Mic_7:12.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:24. I have digged and drunk strange waters — That is, says
Vitringa, “I have hitherto possessed all my desires; whatever I have vehemently
thirsted after, I have attained.” Others understand this and the following clause
more literally, thus: “I have marched through deserts, where it was expected my
army would have perished with thirst; and yet even there have I digged and found
water: and I have rendered rivers fordable by turning their streams from their
ancient beds, and have deprived the besieged of the benefit of those waters.”
Vitringa, however, renders the last clause, with the sole of my feet will I dry up all
the rivers of Egypt. The prophet is thought to allude to a custom of the Egyptians,
who commonly made use of machines, which were worked by the foot, to draw
water from rivers, for whatever purpose it might be wanted; and the meaning,
according to Vitringa, is, that the Assyrian, by the assistance of his very numerous
army, the sole of his foot, would dry up all the rivers of Egypt, so that they should
not delay the success of his expedition. The expression is of the hyperbolic kind, and
well suits this haughty monarch, whose mind was at this time full of his expedition
into Judea and Egypt. — See Dr. Dodd.
ELLICOTT, "(24) I have digged and drunk strange waters.—Scarcity of water has
hitherto been no bar to my advance. In foreign and hostile lands, where the
fountains and cisterns have been stopped and covered in (2 Chronicles 32:3), I have
digged new wells.

98. And with the sole . . . places.—Rather, and I will dry up with the sole of my feet all
the ile arms of Mâçôr—i.e., Lower Egypt. (Comp. Isaiah 19:5 seq.) either
mountains nor rivers avail to stop my progress. As the style is poetical, perhaps it
would be correct to take the perfects, which in 2 Kings 19:23-24 alternate with
imperfects, in a future sense: “I—I will ascend lofty mountains . . . I will dig and
drink strange waters” the latter in the arid desert that lies between Egypt and
Palestine (the Et-Tîh). Otherwise, both perfects and imperfects may mark what is
habitual: “I ascend . . . I dig.”
PULPIT, "I have digged and drunk strange waters; rather, perhaps, I dig, and
drink … and dry up—the preterit having again a present sense. Sennacherib means
that this is what he is wont to do. As mountains do not stop him (2 Kings 19:23), so
deserts do not stop him—he digs wells in them, and drinks water "strange" to the
soil—never before seen there. And with the sole of my feet have I dried up all the
rivers of besieged places; rather, will I dry up all the rivers of Egypt (compare the
Revised Version. "Mazor" is used for "Egypt" in Isaiah 19:6 and Micah 7:12). It is
the old singular from which was formed the dual Mizraim. Whether it meant "land
of strength" (Pusey), or "land of distress" (Ewald), may be doubted, since we have
no right to assume a Hebrew derivation. There was probably a native word, from
which the Hebrew Mazor, the Assyrian Muzr, and the Arabic Misr were taken.
Sennacherib's beast is that, as he makes deserts traversable by digging wells, so, if
rivers try to stop him, he will find a way of drying them up. Compare the boasts of
Alaric in Clau-dian, who had probably this passage of Kings in his thoughts—
"To patior suadente fugam, cum cesserit omnis
Obsequiis natura meis?
Subsidere nostris Sub pedibus montes, arescere vidimus amnes
Fregi Alpes, galeisque Padum victricibus hausi."
25 “‘Have you not heard?
Long ago I ordained it.
In days of old I planned it;
now I have brought it to pass,
that you have turned fortified cities
into piles of stone.

99. BAR ES, "2Ki_19:24
2Ki_19:24 refers to the intended conquest of Egypt. Just as Lebanon could not stop
the expeditions of the Assyrians, or keep them back from the conquest of the land of
Canaan, so the desert of et Tih, which separated Egypt from Asia, notwithstanding its
want of water (cf. Herod. iii. 5; Rob. Pal. i. p. 262), was no hindrance to him, which
could prevent his forcing his way through it and laying Egypt waste. The digging of water
is, of course, not merely “a reopening of the wells that had been choked with rubbish,
and the cisterns that had been covered up before the approaching enemy” (Thenius), but
the digging of wells in the waterless desert. ‫ים‬ ִ‫ר‬ָ‫ז‬ ‫ם‬ִ‫י‬ ַ‫,מ‬ strange water, is not merely water
belonging to others, but water not belonging to this soil (Drechsler), i.e., water supplied
by a region which had none at other times. By the perfects the thing is represented as
already done, as exposed to no doubt whatever; we must bear in mind, however, that the
desert of et Tih is not expressly named, but the expression is couched in such general
terms, that we may also assume that it includes what the Assyrian had really effected in
his expeditions through similar regions. The drying up of the rivers with the soles of the
feet is a hyperbolical expression denoting the omnipotence with which the Assyrian rules
over the earth. Just as he digs water in the desert where no water is to be had, so does he
annihilate it where mighty rivers exist.
(Note: Compare the similar boasting of Alarich, already quoted by earlier
commentators, in Claudian, de bello Geth. v. 526ff.:
cum cesserit omnis
Obsequiis natura meis? subsidere nostris
Sub pedibus montes, arescere vidimus amnes.
v. 532. Fregi Alpes. galeis Padum victricibus hausi.)
‫י‬ ֵ‫ּור‬‫א‬ְ‫י‬ are the arms and canals of the Yeor, i.e., of the Nile. ‫ּור‬‫צ‬ ָ‫,מ‬ a rhetorical epithet for
Egypt, used not only here, but also in Isa_19:6 and Mic_7:12.
CLARKE, "Hast thou not heard - Here Jehovah speaks, and shows this boasting
king that what he had done was done by the Divine appointment, and that of his own
counsel and might he could have done nothing. It was because God had appointed them
to this civil destruction that he had overcome them; and it was not through his might;
for God had made their inhabitants of small power, so that he only got the victory over
men whom God had confounded, dismayed, and enervated, 2Ki_19:26.
K&D, "2Ki_19:25-34
To this foolish boasting the prophet opposes the divine purpose which had been
formed long ago, and according to which the Assyrian, without knowing it or being
willing to acknowledge it, had acted simply as the instrument of the Lord, who had given

100. him the power to destroy, but who would soon restrain his ranting against Him, the true
God.
2Ki_19:25
“Hast thou not heard? Long ago have I done this, from the days of olden time have I
formed it! Now have I brought it to pass, that fortified cities should be to be destroyed
into waste heaps.” 2Ki_19:26. “And their inhabitants, short of hand, were dismayed and
put to shame; they were herb of the field and green of the turf, grass of the roofs and
blighted corn before the stalk.” 2Ki_19:27. “And thy sitting and thy going out and thy
coming I know, and thy raging against me.” 2Ki_19:28. “Because of thy raging against
me and thy safety, which rise up into my ears, I put my ring into thy nose, and my bridle
into thy lips, and bring thee back by the way by which thou hast come.” The words are
still addressed to the Assyrian, of whom the Lord inquires whether he does not know
that the destructive deeds performed by him had been determined very long before.
“Hast thou not heart?” namely, what follows, what the Lord had long ago made known
through His prophets in Judah (cf. Isa_7:7-9; Isa_8:1-4 and Isa_8:7, etc.). ‫ּוק‬‫ח‬ ָ‫ר‬ ֵ‫מ‬ ְ‫,ל‬ from
distant time have I done it, etc., refers to the divine ordering and governing of the events
of the universe, which God has purposed and established from the very beginning of
time. The pronoun ָ‫ּת‬‫א‬, and the suffixes attached to ָ‫יה‬ ִ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫צ‬ְ‫י‬ and ָ‫יה‬ ִ‫ּת‬‫א‬‫י‬ ֵ‫ב‬ ֲ‫,ה‬ do not refer with
vague generality to the substance of 2Ki_19:23 and 2Ki_19:24, i.e., to the boastings of
the Assyrians quoted there (Drechsler), but to ‫ּות‬‫שׁ‬ ְ‫ה‬ ַ‫ל‬ ‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ ְ‫,וּת‬ i.e., to the conquests and
devastations which the Assyrian had really effected. The ְ‫ו‬ before ‫יצרתיה‬ introduces the
apodosis, as is frequently the case after a preceding definition of time (cf. Ges. §155, a).
‫ּות‬‫שׁ‬ ְ‫ה‬ ַ‫ל‬ ‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ ְ‫,וּת‬ “that it may be to destroy” (‫ּות‬‫שׁ‬ ְ‫ה‬ ַ‫,ל‬ a contraction of ‫ּות‬‫א‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ַ‫ה‬ ְ‫,ל‬ Keri and Isaiah,
from ‫ה‬ፎ ָ‫;שׁ‬ see Ewald, §73, c., and 245, b.), i.e., that it shall be destroyed, - according to a
turn which is very common in Isaiah, like ‫ר‬ ֵ‫ע‬ ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫ל‬ ‫ה‬ָ‫י‬ ָ‫,ה‬ it is to burn = it shall be burned (cf.
Isa_5:5; Isa_6:13; Isa_44:15, and Ewald, §237, c.). The rendering given by Ges., Knob.,
Then., and others, “that thou mayest be for destruction,” is at variance with this usage.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:25. Hast thou not heard long ago, &c. — Hast thou not long
since learned that which some of thy philosophers could have taught thee; that there
is a supreme and powerful God, by whose decree and providence all these wars and
calamities are sent and ordered; whose mere instrument thou art; so that thou hast
no cause for these vain boastings? This work is mine, not thine. I have done it, &c.
— I have so disposed of things by my providence, that thou shouldest be a great and
victorious prince, and that thou shouldest be so successful as thou hast hitherto
been, first against the kingdom of Israel, and now against Judah. Thus God answers
the boastings of this proud prince, and shows him that all his counsel and power are
nothing; since these events wholly depended on a superior cause; namely, on God’s
sovereign decree and overruling providence, whereof he had made this Assyrian the
instrument in his almighty hand.
COFFMA , ""Hast thou not heard how I have done it long ago" (2 Kings 19:26)?
Sennacherib, along with all the ancient world, should have been fully aware of what
God had done for Israel in his deliverance of them from Egypt and in his driving

101. out the reprobate nations of Canaan before the chosen people.
"I brought it to pass, that it should be thine to lay waste fortified cities" (2 Kings
19:26). Assyria, like all other evil nations, was used by God, merely as a tool, such as
a razor or a saw, in order to punish and destroy other wicked peoples. That God
indeed had actually nurtured and protected Assyria until that day when God would
use them to destroy orthern Israel is inherent in what he did for ineveh through
the prophet Jonah. The mission of Jonah, resulting in the temporary conversion of
Assyria, was for the specific purpose of preserving them until the destruction of
orthern Israel. Jonah apparently had some premonition of this, and that accounts
for his bitter unwillingness to preach to ineveh.
What a fool, therefore, was Sennacherib who imagined that all of his exploits were
due simply to his personal power and ability.
"I will put my hook in his nose" (2 Kings 19:28). "This is a further detail of what
God prophesied in 2 Kings 19:7, above."[17] This is a characteristic of the inspired
writings which we have frequently noted. In every mention of a given event,
prophecy, or instruction, some significant detail, not previously mentioned, is added.
"One may still see, in a place called Khorsabad, old Assyrian sculptures in which
captives were led before the king, by a cord attached to a hook or ring passing
through the under lip, the upper lip, or the nose."[18] Thus, in this promise to put a
hook in his nose, God is giving a pledge that he will treat this beast of a man in
exactly the way he had treated others. The sculptures show the Assyrians leading
both men and animals in such a manner.[19]
ELLICOTT, "(25) Hast thou not heard . . .?—Hast thou not heard? In the far past
it I made; in the days of yore did I fashion it; now have I brought it to pass. The
“it”—the thing long since foreordained by Jehovah—is defined by the words: “that
thou shouldest be to lay waste,” &c. (Comp. Isaiah 22:11; Isaiah 46:10-11; Isaiah
10:5-15.)
PETT, "2 Kings 19:25-26
3). YHWH’s Response Is That Sennacherib In Fact Owes All His Success To Him (2
Kings 19:25-26).
The point is now made that Sennacherib may think that he has achieved what he
has on his own, but the truth is that he has only achieved it because it was YHWH’s
purpose. He needed to recognise that it was YHWH Who had taken him up and
used him as His instrument (compare Isaiah 10:5-6; Isaiah 10:15), and that that was
the only secret of his success.
2 Kings 19:25

102. “Have you not heard,
How I have done it long ago,
And formed it of ancient times?
ow have I brought it about,
That it should be yours to lay waste fortified cities,
Into ruinous heaps.”
YHWH asks Sennacherib whether he has in fact not heard that what is unveiling in
history had been formed in the mind of YHWH from ancient times? What he
needed to realise was that what he was thus doing was thus working out what
YHWH had already planned, for now YHWH’s ancient will was being carried out.
It was He, (and no one else), Who had purposed that Sennacherib should turn all
the cities he has referred to (2 Kings 19:12-13) into ruinous heaps. Thus in doing so
Sennacherib had simply been carrying out YHWH’s instructions.
PULPIT, "Hast thou not heard long ago how I have done it? The strain suddenly
changes—the person of the speaker is altered. It is no longer Sennacherib who
reveals the thoughts of his own heart, but Jehovah who addresses the proud
monarch. "Hast thou not heard, how from long ago I have acted thus? Hast thou
never been taught that revolutions, conquests, the rise and fall of nations, are God's
doing, decreed by him long, long age—ay, from the creation of the world? Art thou
not aware that this is so, either from tradition, or by listening to the voice of reason
within thine own heart?" It is implied that such knowledge ought to he in the
possession of every man. And of ancient times that I have formed it? A rhetorical
repetition of the previous question, needful for the balance of clauses, in which
Hebrew poetry delights, but adding nothing to the sense. ow have I brought it to
pass, that thou shouldest be to lay waste fenced cities into ruinous heaps. The idea
was very familiar to Isaiah and his contemporaries. Years before, when Assyria first
became threatening, Isaiah, speaking in the person of Jehovah, had exclaimed, "O
Assyrian, the rod of mine anger, and the staff in their hand is mine indignation. I
will send him against an hypocritical nation, and against the people of my wrath will
I give him a charge, to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread them down
like the mire of the streets" (Isaiah 10:5, Isaiah 10:6). But the heathen kings whom
God made his instruments to chasten sinful nations imagined that they conquered
and destroyed and laid waste by their own strength (see Isaiah 10:7-14).
26 Their people, drained of power,
are dismayed and put to shame.
They are like plants in the field,
like tender green shoots,

103. like grass sprouting on the roof,
scorched before it grows up.
BAR ES, "The weakness of the nations exposed to the Assyrian attacks was as much
owing to the divine decrees as was the strength of the Assyrians themselves.
The grass on the house tops - Compare the marginal reference. The vegetation on
the flat roofs of Oriental houses is the first to spring up and the first to fade away.
K&D, "2Ki_19:26-28
2Ki_19:26 is closely connected, so far as the sense is concerned, with the last clause of
2Ki_19:25, but in form it is only loosely attached: “and their inhabitants were,” instead
of “that their inhabitants might be.” ‫ד‬ָ‫י‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫צ‬ ִ‫,ק‬ of short hand, i.e., without power to offer a
successful resistance (cf. Num_11:23, and Isa_50:2; Isa_59:1). - They were herbage of
the field, etc., just as perishable as the herbage, grass, etc., which quickly fade away (cf.
Psa_37:2; Psa_90:5-6; Isa_40:6). The grass of the roofs fades still more quickly,
because it cannot strike deep roots (cf. Psa_129:6). Blighted corn before the stalk, i.e.,
corn which is blighted and withered up, before it shoots up into a stalk. In Isaiah we
have ‫ה‬ ָ‫מ‬ ֵ‫ד‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ instead of ‫ה‬ ָ‫פ‬ ֵ‫ד‬ ְ‫,שׁ‬ with a change of the labials, probably for the purpose of
preserving an assonance with ‫ה‬ ָ‫מ‬ ָ‫,ק‬ which must not therefore be altered into ‫ה‬ ָ‫מ‬ ֵ‫ד‬ ְ‫.שׁ‬ The
thought in the two verses is this: The Assyrian does not owe his victories and conquests
to his irresistible might, but purely to the fact that God had long ago resolved to deliver
the nations into his hands, so that it was possible to overcome them without their being
able to offer any resistance. This the Assyrian had not perceived, but in his daring pride
had exalted himself above the living God. This conduct of his the Lord was well
acquainted with, and He would humble him for it. Sitting and going out and coming
denote all the actions of a man, like sitting down and rising up in Psa_139:2. Instead of
rising up, we generally find going out and coming in (cf. Deu_28:6 and Psa_121:8).
ָ‫ך‬ְ‫ז‬ֶ ַ‫ר‬ ְ‫ת‬ ִ‫,ה‬ thy raging, commotio furibunda, quae ex ira nascitur superbiae mixta (Vitr.). We
must repeat ‫ן‬ ַ‫ע‬ ַ‫ר‬ before ָ‫ך‬ְ‫נ‬ַ‫נ‬ ֲ‫א‬ ַ‫;שׁ‬ and ‫י‬ַ‫נ‬ְ‫ז‬ፎ ְ‫ב‬ ‫ה‬ ָ‫ל‬ ָ‫ע‬ is to be taken in a relative sense: on account of
thy self-security, which has come to my ears. ‫ן‬ָ‫נ‬ ֲ‫א‬ ַ‫שׁ‬ is the security of the ungodly which
springs from the feeling of great superiority in power. The figurative words, “I put my
ring into thy nose,” are taken from the custom of restraining wild animals, such as lions
(Eze_19:4) and other wild beasts (Eze_29:4 and Isa_30:28), in this manner. For “the
bridle in the lips” of ungovernable horses, see Psa_32:9. To lead a person back by the
way by which he had come, i.e., to lead him back disappointed, without having reached
the goal that he set before him.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:26. Therefore their inhabitants were of small power — The
people of Israel and Judah, and of other countries which thou hast conquered,

104. because I had armed thee with my commission and strength, and had taken away
their spirit and courage, and had withdrawn my help from them to give it to thee.
They were as the grass of the field — Which is weak, and quickly fades, and is
unable to resist any hand or instrument which offers violence to it. As corn blasted
before it be grown up — All their designs and hopes were disappointed before they
could come to any perfection or success.
ELLICOTT, "(26) Of small power.—Literally, short-handed. (Comp. Isaiah 1:2;
Isa_59:1.) Keil compares the well-known title of Artaxerxes I., Longimanus, the
“long-handed,” as if that epithet meant far-reaching in power. Thenius says that a
frightened man draws in his arms (?)
As the grass . . .—The as may better be omitted. They were field growth and green
herbage; grass of the roofs and blasting before stalk. The sense seems imperfect,
unless we supply the idea of withering away, as in Psalms 37:2; Psalms 90:5-6;
Psalms 129:6; Isaiah 40 (5, 7. Instead of the word blasting the parallel text (Isaiah
37:27) has field—a difference of one letter. Thenius adopts this, and corrects stalk
into east wind, no great change in the Hebrew. We thus get the appropriate
expression: and a field before the east wind.
PETT, "2 Kings 19:26
“Therefore their inhabitants were of small power,
They were dismayed and confounded,
They were as the grass of the field,
And as the green herb,
As the grass on the housetops,
And as grain blasted before it is grown up.”
Indeed it was because YHWH was at work, and not because of Assyria’s might, that
the inhabitant of those cities had been deficient in strength (literally ‘were short of
hand’). That was why they were dismayed and confounded, and so easily and
quickly withered like the grass and vegetation in the countryside in the hot summer
sun once there was no rain. The grass that some grew on the flat roofs of their
houses soon withered and died in the glaring sun if it was not constantly watered
(compare Psalms 129:6), and it was the newest grain that was most vulnerable to the
sun. Thus they were an apt picture of weakness and vulnerability.
‘Before it has grown up.’ Literally ‘before (it has become) standing corn’.
PULPIT, "Therefore their inhabitants were of small power; literally, were short of
hand—unable, i.e; to make an effectual resistance. When God has decreed a change
in the distribution of power among the nations, his providence works doubly. It
infuses confidence and strength into the aggressive people, and spreads dismay and
terror among those who are attacked. Unaccountable panics seize them—they seem

105. paralyzed; instead of making every possible preparation for resistance, they fold
their hands and do nothing. They are like fascinated birds before the stealthy
advance of the serpent. They were dismayed and confounded. Historically, the
prophet declares, this was the cause of the general collapse of the nations whom the
Assyrians attacked. God put a craven fear into their hearts. They were as the grass
of the field, and as the green herb, as the grass on the house-tops. The "grass of the
field" is one of the most frequent similes for weakness. "All flesh is grass" (Isaiah
40:6); "They shall soon be cut down like the grass" (Psalms 37:2); "The grass
withereth, the flower fadeth" (Isaiah 40:8); "I am withered like grass" (Psalms
102:11). In the hot sun of an Eastern sky nothing faded more quickly. But this
weakness was intensified in the "grass of the house-tops." It "withered before it
grew up" (Psalms 129:6). The depth of earth was so slight, the exposure so great, the
heat so scorching, that it sank in death almost as soon as it had sprung to life. Such
has been the weakness of the nations given over as a prey to the Assyrians. And as
corn blasted before it be grown up. Corn blasted before it shoots into a stalk is as
frail as grass, or frailer. It dwindles and disappears without even asserting itself.
27 “‘But I know where you are
and when you come and go
and how you rage against me.
HE RY 27-28, "4. As under the check and rebuke of that God whom he blasphemed.
All his motions were, (1.) Under the divine cognizance (2Ki_19:27): “I have thy abode,
and what thou dost secretly devise and design, thy going out and coming in, marches
and counter-marches, and thy rage against me and my people, the tumult of thy
passions, the tumult of thy preparations, the noise and bluster thou makest: I know it
all.” That was more than Hezekiah did, who wished for intelligence of the enemy's
motions; but what need was there for this when the eye of God was a constant spy upon
him? 2Ch_16:9. (2.) Under the divine control (2Ki_19:28): “I will put my hook in thy
nose, thou great Leviathan (Job_41:1, Job_41:2), my bridle in thy jaws, thou great
Behemoth. I will restrain thee, manage thee, turn thee where I please, send thee home
like a fool as thou camest, re infecta - disappointed of thy aim.” Note, It is a great
comfort to all the church's friends that God has a hook in the nose and a bridle in the
jaws of all her enemies, can make even their wrath to serve and praise him and then
restrain the remainder of it. Here shall its proud waves be stayed.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:27. But I know thy abode, &c. — Though thou dost not

106. know me, yet I thoroughly know thee, and all thy designs and actions, all thy secret
contrivances in the place of thy abode, in thy own kingdom and court; and the
execution of thy designs abroad, what thou intendest in thy going out, and with
what farther thoughts thou comest in, or returnest to thy own land. And thy rage
against me — Against Hezekiah my servant, and my people, because they will not
deliver up Jerusalem to thee, and against my temple, to destroy it. Things are
frequently said to be done against God which are only done against his people, his
cause, and worship, because of that near relation and union which are between
them.
ELLICOTT, "(27) But I know thy abode . . .—Literally, and thy down sitting, and
thy going out, and thy coming in I know. Clearly something has fallen out at the
opening of the sentence. Probably the words before me is thine uprising have been
omitted by some copyist, owing to their resemblance to the words which end the last
verse. So Wellhausen. (See Psalms 139:2.) The thought thus expressed is this: I know
all thy plans and thy doings; I see also thy present rebellion against me. What thou
hast hitherto done was done because I willed it: now I will check thee.
PETT, "2 Kings 19:27-28
ow Because Of Sennacherib’s Taunts And Attitude YHWH Intends To Act
Against Him And Transport Him Back Like A Humiliated Captive To ineveh (2
Kings 19:27-28).
So YHWH warns him that because he is aware of all his doings, and especially of his
arrogance towards Him. In consequence He Himself will lead him like a humiliated
captive back to where he came from.
2 Kings 19:27-28
“But I know your sitting down, and your going out,
And your coming in, and your raging against me.
Because of your raging against me,
And because your arrogant attitude has come up into my ears,
Therefore will I put my hook in your nose,
And my bridle in your lips,
And I will turn you back,
By the way by which you came.”
What Sennacherib should realise is that YHWH was aware of everything he did,
whether he sat down, or whether he went out or in, and especially of his expressed
arrogance towards YHWH (literally ‘his careless ease’), and his raging against Him.
The putting of the hook through the nose was a deliberately humiliating way of
treating captive foreign princes and nobles used by the Assyrians, and there is a
relief in Zenjirli depicting such treatment given to Tirhakah of Egypt and Ba’alu of

107. Tyre, who were being led in that way (some years later) by Esarhaddon. The bridle
in the lips might indicate the same, or have in mind the treatment of wild animals or
horses in order to keep them obedient and submissive. Compare here 2 Chronicles
33:11 where Manasseh was taken ‘with hooks’ to Babylon.
ote the gradual build up of his behaviour. First his sitting on his throne, then his
activity in going out and in, and then finally his rising up in rage against YHWH.
PULPIT, "But I know thy abode, and thy going out, and thy coming in. "Resting in
peace, going out, and coming in, cover all the activity of a man" (Bahr), or rather,
cover his whole life, active and passive. Jehovah claims an absolute knowledge of all
that Sennacherib does or thinks, both when he is in action and when he is at rest.
othing is hid from him (comp. Psalms 139:1-16). Human pride should stand
abashed before such absolute knowledge. And thy rage against me. Opposition to
their will fills violent men with fury and rage. Sennacherib's anger was primarily
against Hezekiah, but when once he was convinced that Hezekiah really trusted in
Jehovah (2 Kings 19:10), his fury would turn against God himself (see Psalms 2:1-3,
where the Lord's anointed is primarily David).
28 Because you rage against me
and because your insolence has reached my
ears,
I will put my hook in your nose
and my bit in your mouth,
and I will make you return
by the way you came.’
BAR ES, "Thy tumult - Rather, “thy arrogance.”
I will put my hook in nose - Rather, “my ring.” The sculptures show that the kings
of Babylon and Assyria were in the habit of actually passing a ring through the flesh of
their more distinguished prisoners, of attaching a thong or a rope to it, and of thus
leading them about as with a “bridle.” In Assyria the ring was, at least ordinarily, passed
through the lower lip; while in Babylonia it appears to have been inserted into the
membrane of the nose. Thus Sennacherib would be here threatened with a punishment

108. which he was perhaps in the habit of inflicting.
CLARKE, "I will put my hook in thy nose - This seems to be an allusion to the
method of guiding a buffalo; he has a sort of ring put into his nose, to which a cord or
bridle is attached, by which he can be turned to the right, or to the left, or round about,
according to the pleasure of his driver.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:28. Thy rage and thy tumult is come into mine ears — That
is, thy tumultuous noise, thy clamours and blasphemies, belched forth against me by
thyself, and thy servants in thy name. I will put my hook in thy nose, and my bridle
in thy lips — The metaphor in the latter clause is plainly taken from a horse, or ass,
or mule, that must be thus governed; and that in the former may allude, perhaps, to
the manner in which they managed their beasts in the east, particularly the
dromedaries, which are led by a cord fastened to a ring run through the nostrils of
the beast. Or the allusion may be to the absolute power which a man has over a fish
which is fastened by the nose to his hook. The meaning of the passage is, that God
would so order and dispose matters by his providence, that the Assyrian monarch
should be compelled to return back with his army, being circumscribed and led like
a horse or wild beast, wherever and as God pleased. See Dodd. What a comfort it is
that God has a hook in the nose, and a bridle in the jaws, of all his and our enemies!
ELLICOTT, "(28) Because thy rage . . . is come up.—Literally, Because of thy rage .
. . and of thy self confidence (Isaiah 32:9; Isaiah 32:11; Isaiah 32:18) which hath
come up. Or else the construction is changed: Because of thy rage . . . and because
that thy self-confidence is come up . . .
I will put my hook . . . lips.—Comp. the ote on 2 Chronicles 33:11, where this
threat is shown to be no mere figure of speech. Keil’s remark, however, is also to the
purpose: “The metaphor is taken from wild animals, which are thus held in check—
the ring in the nose of lions (Ezekiel 19:4), and other wild beasts (Ezekiel 29:4;
Isaiah 30:28), the bridle in the mouth of intractable horses” (Psalms 32:9). This
agrees with “I will turn thee back,” &c. (With this last comp. 2 Kings 18:24).
PULPIT, "Because thy rage against me, and thy tumult—rather, thy arrogancy (see
the Revised Version); ‫שׁאנן‬ is rather the quiet security of extreme pride and self-
confidence than "tumult"—is come up into mine ears—i.e. has attracted my
notice—therefore I will put my hook in thy nose, and my bridle in thy lips. The
imagery is most striking. Captive kings were actually so treated by the Assyrians
themselves. A hook or split-ring was thrust through the cartilage of the nose, or the
fleshy part of the under lip, with a rope or thong attached to it, and in this guise
they were led into the monarch's presence, to receive their final sentence at his
hands. In the sculptures of Sargon at Khorsabad we see three prisoners brought

109. before him in this fashion, one of whom he seems to be about to kill with a spear. In
another sculpture set up by a Babylonian king, his vizier brings before him two
captives similarly treated, but with the ring, apparently, passed through the
cartilage of their noses Manasseh seems to have received the same treatment at the
hands of the "captains" (2 Chronicles 33:11) who brought him a prisoner to
Esarhaddon at Babylon. Other allusions to the practice in Scripture will be found in
Isaiah 30:28; Ezekiel 29:4; Ezekiel 38:4. The threat in the present passage was, of
course, not intended to be understood life-rally, but only as a declaration that God
would bring down the pride of Sennacherib, humiliate him, and reduce him to a
state of abject weakness and abasement. And I will turn thee back by the way by
which thou camest (comp. verse 33). The meaning is clear. Sennacherib would not
be allowed to come near Jerusalem. He would hurry back by the low coast route (2
Kings 18:17), by which he had made his invasion.
29 “This will be the sign for you, Hezekiah:
“This year you will eat what grows by itself,
and the second year what springs from that.
But in the third year sow and reap,
plant vineyards and eat their fruit.
BAR ES, "The prophet now once more addresses Hezekiah, and gives him a “sign,”
or token, whereby he and his may be assured that Sennacherib is indeed bridled, and
will not trouble Judaea anymore. It was a sign of the continued freedom of the land from
attack during the whole of the remainder of Sennacherib’s reign - a space of 17 years.
CLARKE, "This shall be a sign unto thee - To Hezekiah; for to him this part of the
address is made.
Ye shall eat this year - Sennacherib had ravaged the country, and seed-time was
now over, yet God shows them that he would so bless the land, that what should grow of
itself that year, would be quite sufficient to supply the inhabitants and prevent all
famine; and though the second year was the sabbatical rest or jubilee for the land, in
which it was unlawful to plough or sow; yet even then the land, by an especial blessing of
God, should bring forth a sufficiency for its inhabitants; and in the third year they
should sow and plant, etc. and have abundance, etc. Now this was to be a sign to
Hezekiah, that his deliverance had not been effected by natural or casual means; for as

110. without a miracle the ravaged and uncultivated land could not yield food for its
inhabitants, so not without miraculous interference could the Assyrian army be cut off
and Israel saved.
HE RY 29-34, "II. Salvation and joy to Hezekiah and his people. This shall be a sign
to them of God's favour, and that he is reconciled to them, and his anger is turned away
(Isa_12:1), a wonder in their eyes (for so a sign sometimes signifies), a token for good,
and an earnest of the further mercy God has in store for them, that a good issue shall be
put to their present distress in every respect.
1. Provisions were scarce and dear; and what should they do for food? The fruits of the
earth were devoured by the Assyrian army, Isa_32:9, Isa_32:10, etc. Why, they shall not
only dwell in the land, but verily they shall be fed. If God save them, he will not starve
them, nor let them die by famine, when they have escaped the sword: “Eat you this year
that which groweth of itself, and you shall find enough of that. Did the Assyrians reap
what you sowed? You shall reap what you did not sow.” But the next year was the
sabbatical year, when the land was to rest, and they must neither sow nor reap. What
must they do that year? Why, Jehovah-jireh - The Lord will provide. God's blessing shall
save them seed and labour, and, that year too, the voluntary productions of the earth
shall serve to maintain them, to remind them that the earth brought forth before there
was a man to till it, Gen_1:11. And then, the third year, their husbandry should return
into its former channel, and they should sow and reap as they used to do. 2. The country
was laid waste, families were broken up and scattered, and all was in confusion; how
should it be otherwise when it was over-run by such an army? As to this, it is promised
that the remnant that has escaped of the house of Judah (that is, of the country people)
shall yet again be planted in their own habitations, upon their own estates, shall take
root there, shall increase and grow rich, 2Ki_19:30. See how their prosperity is
described: it is taking root downwards, and bearing fruit upwards, being well fixed and
well provided for themselves, and then doing good to others. Such is the prosperity of
the soul: it is taking root downwards by faith in Christ, and then being fruitful in fruits of
righteousness. 3. The city was shut up, none went out or came in; but now the remnant
in Jerusalem and Zion shall go forth freely, and there shall be none to hinder them, or
make them afraid, 2Ki_19:31. Great destruction had been made both in city and country,
bit in both there was a remnant that escaped, which typified the saved remnant of
Israelites indeed (as appears by comparing Isa_10:22, Isa_10:23, which speaks of this
very event, with Rom_9:27, Rom_9:28), and they shall go forth into the glorious liberty
of the children of God. 4. The Assyrians were advancing towards Jerusalem, and would
in a little time besiege it in form, and it was in great danger of falling into their hands.
But it is here promised that the siege they feared should be prevented, - that, though the
enemy had now (as it should seem) encamped before the city, yet they should never
come into the city, no, nor so much as shoot an arrow into it (2Ki_19:32, 2Ki_19:33), -
that he should be forced to retire with shame, and a thousand times to repent his
undertaking. God himself undertakes to defend the city (2Ki_19:34), and that person,
that place, cannot but be safe, the protection of which he undertakes. 5. The honour and
truth of God are engaged for the doing of all this. These are great things, but how will
they be effected? Why, the zeal of the Lord of hosts shall do this, 2Ki_19:31. He is Lord
of hosts, has all creatures at his beck, therefore he is able to do it; he is jealous for
Jerusalem with great jealousy (Zec_1:14); having espoused her a chaste virgin to
himself, he will not suffer he to be abused, 2Ki_19:21. “You have reason to think
yourselves unworthy that such great things should be done for you; but God's own zeal
will do it.” His zeal, (1.) For his own honour (2Ki_19:34): “I will do it for my own sake, to

111. make myself an everlasting name.” God's reasons of mercy are fetched from within
himself. (2.) For his own truth: “I will do it for my servant David's sake; not for the sake
of his merit, but the promise made to him and the covenant made with him, those sure
mercies of David.” Thus all the deliverances of the church are wrought for the sake of
Christ, the Son of David.
K&D, "2Ki_19:29
To confirm what he had said, the prophet gave to Hezekiah a sign (2Ki_19:29.): “Eat
this year what groweth in the fallow, and in the second year what groweth wild, and in
the third year sow and reap and plant vineyards, and eat the fruit thereof.” That the
words are not addressed to the king of Assyria as in 2Ki_19:28, but to Hezekiah, is
evident from their contents. This sudden change in the person addressed may be
explained from the fact that from 2Ki_19:29 the words contain a perfectly fresh train of
thought. For ‫ּות‬‫א‬ ָ‫ה‬ ָ‫ך‬ ְ ‫ה־‬ֶ‫ז‬ see Exo_3:12; 1Sa_2:34 and 1Sa_14:10; also Jer_44:29. In all
these passages ‫ּות‬‫א‬, σηµεሏον, is not a (supernatural) wonder, a ‫ת‬ ֵ‫ּופ‬‫מ‬ as in 1Ki_13:3, but
consists simply in the prediction of natural events, which serve as credentials to a
prediction, whereas in Isa_7:14 and Isa_38:7 a miracle is given as an ‫ּות‬‫א‬. The inf. abs.
‫ּול‬‫כ‬ፎ is not used for the pret. (Ges., Then., and others), but for the imperf. or fut.: “one
will eat.” ‫ה‬ָ‫נ‬ ָ ַ‫,ה‬ the (present) year. ַ‫יח‬ ִ‫פ‬ ָ‫ס‬ signifies the corn which springs up and grows
from the grains that have been shaken out the previous year (Lev_25:5, Lev_25:11). ‫ישׁ‬ ִ‫ח‬ ָ‫ס‬
(in Isa. ‫יס‬ ִ‫ח‬ ָ‫)שׁ‬ is explained by Abulw. as signifying the corn which springs up again from
the roots of what has been sown. The etymology of the word is uncertain, so that it is
impossible to decide which of the two forms is the original one. For the fact itself
compare the evidence adduced in the Comm. on Lev_25:7, that in Palestine and other
lands two or three harvests can be reaped from one sowing. - The signs mentioned do
not enable us to determine with certainty how long the Assyrians were in the land. All
that can be clearly gathered from the words, “in this and the following year will they live
upon that which has sprung up without any sowing,” is that for two years, i.e., in two
successive autumns, the fields could not be cultivated because the enemy had occupied
the land and laid it waste. But whether the occupation lasted two years, or only a year
and a little over, depends upon the time of the year at which the Assyrians entered the
land. If the invasion of Judah took place in autumn, shortly before the time for sowing,
and the miraculous destruction of the Assyrian forces occurred a year after about the
same time, the sowing of two successive years would be prevented, and the population of
Judah would be compelled to live for two years upon what had sprung up without
sowing. Consequently both the prophecy of Isaiah and the fulfilment recorded in vv. 35,
36 would fall in the autumn, when the Assyrians had ruled for a whole year in the land;
so that the prophet was able to say: in this year and in the second (i.e., the next) will they
eat after-growth and wild growth; inasmuch as when he said this, the first year had not
quite expired. Even if the overthrow of the Assyrians took place immediately afterwards
(cf. 2Ki_19:35), with the extent to which they had carried out the desolation of the land,
many of the inhabitants having been slain or taken prisoners, and many others having
been put to flight, it would be utterly impossible in the same year to cultivate the fields
and sow them, and the people would be obliged to live in the second or following year
upon what had grown wild, until the harvest of the second year, when the land could be

112. properly cultivated, or rather till the third year, when it could be reaped again.
(Note: There is no necessity, therefore, to explain the sign here given, either by the
assumption of a sabbatical year, with or without a year of jubilee following, or by
supposing that the Assyrians did not depart immediately after the catastrophe
described in 2Ki_19:35, but remained till after they had attempted an expedition into
Egypt, or indeed by any other artificial hypothesis.)
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:29. This shall be a sign unto thee — Of the certain
accomplishment of the promises here made; that Zion shall triumph over this
insulting enemy, 2 Kings 19:21; and that God will not only preserve the city from
Sennacherib’s present fury, but also will bless his people with durable prosperity,
and a happy increase, 2 Kings 19:30-31. For the sign here given is not so much
intended to be a token of their present deliverance from Sennacherib, which would
be effected before the sign took place, as of their future preservation from him and
the Assyrians, and of blessings which were to continue long after it. In other
passages of Scripture we have signs given in the same manner, particularly in
Exodus 3:12 and Isaiah 7:14. At the time that Isaiah spoke this, nothing seemed
more improbable than that the Jews, delivered from the Assyrians, should freely use
and enjoy their own land, and be supported from its productions. They had cause to
fear that the Assyrians would be greatly enraged at their shameful repulse, and the
destruction of their army, and would quickly recruit their forces and come against
them with far greater strength and violence than before. But if not, they had reason
to fear another enemy equally formidable and destructive, a grievous famine. The
Assyrian army had trodden down or eaten up all their corn, and the next year,
which was the fifteenth of Hezekiah, was the sabbatical year, in which their law
neither allowed them to plough nor sow. How were they to be supported? God
engages they shall have sufficient support: Ye shall eat this year — ‫,ספיח‬ sapiach,
sponte natum, the natural produce of the ground, which the invasion of the
Assyrian army in a great measure prevented you from ploughing and sowing. And
the second year, that which springeth of the same — ‫,סחישׁ‬ sachish, sponte renatum,
the name here given to the spontaneous productions of the earth the second year
that it had not been sown. And in the third year, sow ye, and reap — You shall not
sow, and another reap, as has lately been the case; but you shall enjoy the fruit of
your own labour. ow this was an excellent sign, for it was miraculous, especially
considering the waste and destruction which the Assyrians had made in the land,
and that the Jews had been forced to retire into their strong holds, and consequently
to neglect their tilling, sowing, and reaping. And these events taking place
accordingly, year after year, and the predictions being punctually fulfilled, the
hopes of Hezekiah and his people would be revived and confirmed more and more,
and assurance would be given them that they had nothing further to fear from the
Assyrians, and that God would yet defend, bless, and prosper his people.
COFFMA , ""This shall be the sign unto thee" (2 Kings 19:29). What is meant
here is that, because their crops had been destroyed, they would eat of what came
up voluntarily; the same would happen the following year because nothing was
planted; but the third year everything would be back to normal. It is evident here

113. that the person addressed is no longer Sennacherib, but Hezekiah. Such
unannounced switches of persons addressed are common in prophecy.
"The house of Judah shall again take root downward" (2 Kings 19:30). "There was
a 113-year interval yet remaining in the history of Judah before the Babylonian
captivity,"[20] and during this time Judah did indeed prosper. "They were able to
recover their ancient vigor and to extend their dominion over nearly all of their old
territory."[21]
"Out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant, and out of mount Zion they that shall
escape" (2 Kings 19:31). Here indeed was the bad news for Jerusalem. Alas, it would
also fall, just like Samaria. The present deliverance from Sennacherib,
notwithstanding, Judah and Jerusalem would also pay the penalty of their
stubborn, wicked idolatry. Hezekiah's own son, Manasseh, would be a principal
cause of her ultimate destruction. A remnant would be saved, not in Jerusalem, but
out of it. It is amazing that Judah and Jerusalem paid so little attention to this
warning. God's purpose for Israel was never focused upon the whole people, but
upon the few (the remnant) who would have the faith and character of Abraham.
"The king of Assyria ... shall not come unto this city ... nor cast up a mound against
it" (2 Kings 19:33). Yes, in the Assyrian inscriptions, Sennacherib claims to have
done this; but no Christian should allow any servant of Satan to contradict the
Word of God. We believe that this prophecy was fulfilled exactly as Isaiah gave it.
The angel of death spread his wings on the blast
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed;
And the might of the Gentile unsmote by the sword
Was melted like snow in the glance of the Lord.
- Lord Byron
ELLICOTT, "(29) And this shall be a sign unto thee.—The prophet now addresses
Hezekiah.
A sign.—Rather, the sign; namely, of the truth of this prophetic word. “The sign
consists in the foretelling of natural and nearer events, which serve to accredit the
proper prediction. The purport of it is that this and the next year the country will be
still occupied by the enemy, so that men cannot sow and reap as usual, but must live
on that which grows without sowing. In the third year, they will again be able to
cultivate their fields and vineyards, and reap the fruits of them” (Keil). The
prophecy was probably uttered in the autumn, so that only one full year from that
time would be lost to husbandry.

114. Ye shall eat.—Or, eat ye.
Such things as grow of themselves.—The Hebrew is a single word, sâphîah, “the
after-growth” (Cheyne; see Leviticus 25:5; Leviticus 25:11).
That which springeth of the same.—Again one word in the Hebrew, sâhîsh, or as in
Isaiah, shâhîs probably synonymous with the preceding term, “after-shoot,” i.e., the
growth from old roots left in the ground.
GUZIK, "3. (2 Kings 19:29-31) God will prosper wounded Judah.
This shall be a sign to you: You shall eat this year such as grows of itself, and in the
second year what springs from the same; also in the third year sow and reap, plant
vineyards and eat the fruit of them. And the remnant who have escaped of the house
of Judah shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward. For out of
Jerusalem shall go a remnant, and those who escape from Mount Zion. The zeal of
the LORD of hosts will do this.
a. You shall eat this year such as grows of itself: “The invasion prevented sowing in
702 B.C., but when the threat lifted in 701 they would find sufficient growth to
preserve life; in 701 the withdrawing Assyrians still inhibited agriculture, yet in 700
there would still be enough through ‘chance growth’. Thus the Lord would confirm
retrospectively that it was his hand that dispersed the threat.” (Motyer, commentary
on Isaiah)
i. “When in the harvest of the third year the people ate in abundance, they would
know assuredly that God had been in the entire crisis.” (Patterson and Austel)
b. For out of Jerusalem shall go a remnant: As much as the Assyrians would like to
crush Jerusalem and Judah, they will not be able to. God will preserve His remnant.
i. “The doctrine of the remnant (2 Kings 19:4; 2 Kings 19:30) left by God’s grace
through times of trial was demonstrated by Isaiah, whose son was named Shear-
Jashub, ‘remnant will return’ (Isaiah 7:3; Isa_37:30-32). Israelites fled to Judah so
that in one sense Judah also included the remnant of Israel to carry on God’s name
and work.” (Wiseman)
PETT, "Verses 29-31
Through Isaiah YHWH Gives A Sign That Jerusalem’s Deliverance Is At Hand (2
Kings 19:29-31).
As in the case of Moses in Exodus 3:12 and Isaiah’s prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 the sign
now given was to be found in the guarantee of a future event, not in the event itself.
It was saying, ‘this is what I, YHWH, intend to do, and you may take me at My
word. Because it is My promise it is the guarantee of its fulfilment, and it is that
certain guarantee that is the sign that I have given.’ In this case the promise that by

115. the third year from when it was spoken they would be carrying out their normal
agricultural activity from start to finish was a promise that the siege was about to
end (otherwise it could not happen).
There is a deliberate change here from poetic metre to prose indicating emphatically
that this is a new prophecy and not a part of the prophecy in 2 Kings 19:21-28. It is
a promise of immediate deliverance.
Analysis.
· “And this will be the sign to you” (2 Kings 19:29 a).
· “You will eat this year what grows of itself, and in the second year what
springs of the same, and in the third year sow you, and reap, and plant vineyards,
and eat its fruit” (2 Kings 19:29 b).
· “And the remnant which is escaped of the house of Judah will again take
root downward, and bear fruit upward” (2 Kings 19:30).
· “For out of Jerusalem will go forth a remnant, and out of mount Zion they
who will escape” (2 Kings 19:31 a).
· “The zeal of YHWH will perform this” (2 Kings 19:31 b).
ote that in ‘a’ the guarantee is given as a sign, and in the parallel it is the zeal of
YHWH which will perform it. In ‘b’ they will leave the city almost immediately, so
that normal agricultural activity, which will take time to establish, will begin,
surviving in the meantime on what grows of itself, and in the parallel the remnant
that remains who have escaped the anger of Sennacherib will go triumphantly out of
Jerusalem. Centrally in ‘c’ they will not only have physical blessing but will have
spiritual blessing as they take root in the Law of YHWH and look up to Him in
worship and prayer.
2 Kings 19:29
“And this will be the sign to you, You will eat this year what grows of itself, and in
the second year what springs of the same, and in the third year sow you, and reap,
and plant vineyards, and eat its fruit.”
The sign that was being given was His guaranteed promise. And that promise was
that within three years their agricultural round would be back to normal. It was
presumably too late for the first sowing which would have to await the following
year, thus in the first part year (from then until the ew Year) they would have to
eat what naturally grew out of the ground, in the second year (in the latter part of
which they would be able to begin their sowing) they would survive on what
resulted naturally from what grew in the first year, but by the third year what they
had themselves sowed in the middle of the second year would be growing and be
able to be reaped and eaten.
PULPIT, "And this shall be a sign unto thee. Another sudden change in the address.
The prophet turns from Sennacherib to Hezekiah, and proceeds to give him a sign,
and otherwise speak to him encouragingly. Signs were at the time freely offered and

116. given by God both to the faithful and the unfaithful (see 2 Kings 20:4; Isaiah 7:11,
Isaiah 7:14). They generally consisted in the prediction of some near event, whose
occurrence was to serve as a pledge, or evidence, of the probable fulfillment of
another prediction of an event more distant. Such signs are not necessarily
miraculous. Ye shall eat this year such things as grow of themselves. The Assyrian
invasion, coming early in the spring, as was usual, had prevented the Israelites from
sowing their lands. But they would soon be gone, and then the Israelites could
gather in such self-sown corn as they might find in the corn-lands. The next year,
probably a sabbatical year, they were authorized to do the same, notwithstanding
the general prohibition (Leviticus 25:5); the third year they would return to their
normal condition. The sign was not given with reference to Sennacherib's
departure, which belonged to the first year, and must take place before the
ingathering of the self-sown corn could begin, but with reference to the promise that
Jerusalem should be free from any further attack on his part. Sennacherib reigned
seventeen years longer, but led no further expedition into Palestine. And in the
second year that which springeth of the same; and in the third year sow ye, and
reap, and plant vineyards, and eat the fruits thereof.
30 Once more a remnant of the kingdom of Judah
will take root below and bear fruit above.
BAR ES, "The remnant that is escaped - Terrible ravages seem to have been
committed in the first attack (2Ki_18:13 note). And though the second invasion was
comparatively harmless, yet it probably fell heavily on the cities of the west and the
southwest. Thus the “escaped” were but “a remnant.”
Bear fruit upward - The flourishing time of Josiah is the special fulfillment of this
prophecy 2Ki_23:15-20.
CLARKE, "The remnant - shall yet again take root - As your corn shall take root
in the soil, and bring forth and abundantly multiply itself, so shall the Jewish people; the
population shall be greatly increased, and the desolations occasioned by the sword soon
be forgotten.
K&D, "2Ki_19:30-34
The sign is followed in 2Ki_19:30, 2Ki_19:31 by the distinct promise of the

117. deliverance of Judah and Jerusalem, for which Isaiah uses the sign itself as a type. “And
the remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah will again strike roots downwards and
bear fruit upwards; for from Jerusalem will go forth a remnant, and that which is
escaped from Mount Zion; the zeal of Jehovah will do this.” ‫שׁ‬ ֶ‫ּר‬‫שׁ‬ ‫ף‬ ַ‫ס‬ָ‫,י‬ to add roots, i.e., to
strike fresh roots. The meaning is, that Judah will not succumb to this judgment. The
remnant of the nation that has escaped from destruction by the Assyrians will once more
grow and flourish vigorously; for from Jerusalem will a rescued remnant go forth. ‫ה‬ ָ‫יט‬ ֵ‫ל‬ ְ
denotes those who have escaped destruction by the judgment (cf. Isa_4:2; Isa_10:20,
etc.). The deliverance was attached to Jerusalem or to Mount Zion, not so much because
the power of the Assyrians was to be destroyed before the gates of Jerusalem, as because
of the greater importance which Jerusalem and Mount Zion, as the centre of the
kingdom of God, the seat of the God-King, possessed in relation to the covenant-nation,
so that, according to Isa_2:3, it was thence that the Messianic salvation was also to
proceed. This deliverance is traced to the zeal of the Lord on behalf of His people and
against His foes (see at Exo_20:5), like the coming of the Messiah in Isa_9:6 to establish
an everlasting kingdom of peace and righteousness. The deliverance of Judah out of the
power of Asshur was a prelude and type of the deliverance of the people of God by the
Messiah out of the power of all that was ungodly. The ‫ּות‬‫א‬ ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫צ‬ of Isaiah is omitted after ‫ה‬ָ‫ּו‬‫ה‬ְ‫,י‬
just as in 2Ki_19:15; though here it is supplied by the Masora as Keri. - In 2Ki_19:32-34
Isaiah concludes by announcing that Sennacherib will not come to Jerusalem, nor even
shoot at the city and besiege it, but will return disappointed, because the Lord will
defend and save the city for the sake of His promise. The result of the whole prophecy is
introduced with ‫ן‬ ֵ‫כ‬ ָ‫:ל‬ therefore, because this is how the matter stands, viz., as explained
in what precedes. ְ‫ך‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ֶ‫ל־מ‬ ֶ‫,א‬ with regard to the king, as in 2Ki_19:20. ‫ן‬ֵ‫ג‬ ָ‫מ‬ ‫ה‬ָ ֶ‫מ‬ ְ ַ‫ק‬ְ‫י‬ ‫ּא‬‫ל‬, “he will
not attack it with a shield,” i.e., will not advance with shields to make an attack upon it.
‫ם‬ ֵ ִ‫ק‬ with a double accusative, as in Psa_21:4. It only occurs here in a hostile sense: to
come against, as in Psa_18:19, i.e., to advance against a city, to storm it. The four clauses
of the verse stand in a graduated relation to one another: not to take, not even to shoot at
and attack, yea, not even to besiege the city, will he come. In 2Ki_19:33 we have 2Ki_
19:28 taken up again, and 2Ki_19:32 is repeated in 2Ki_19:33 for the purpose of
strengthening the promise. Instead of ָ ‫ּוא‬‫ב‬ָ‫י‬ we have in Isaiah ָ ‫א‬ ָ : “by which he has
come.” The perfect is actually more exact, and the imperfect may be explained from the
fact that Sennacherib was at that very time advancing against Jerusalem. In 2Ki_19:34
we have ‫ל‬ ֶ‫א‬ ‫י‬ ִ‫ּות‬ ַ instead of the ‫ל‬ ַ‫ע‬ ‫י‬ ִ‫ּות‬ ַ of Isaiah: ‫ל‬ ַ‫ע‬ is more correct than ‫ל‬ ֶ‫.א‬ “For my sake,”
as Hezekiah had prayed in v. 19; and “for my servant David's sake,” because Jehovah, as
the unchangeably true One, must fulfil the promise which He gave to David (sees at 1Ki_
11:13).
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:30. The remnant that is escaped shall yet again bear fruit
upward — Shall increase and multiply greatly. It is a metaphor taken from plants.
“The prophet passes from fields to men, and from the cultivation of land to the state
of the church; for, having just said, that, being delivered from the Assyrians, they
should cultivate their land as usual, he adds, that it should also come to pass that the
kingdom and church, delivered from this calamity, should flourish again, increase,
and bring forth much fruit; which we know happened under Hezekiah.” — Dodd.

118. ELLICOTT, "(30) The remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah.—Rather, the
survival (survivors) of the house of Judah that are left. (Comp. Isaiah 11:11-16.)
Shall yet again take root.—Literally, shall add root, i.e., shall take firmer root, like a
tree after a storm. The figure naturally follows on the language of 2 Kings 19:29. It
is thoroughly in the style of Isaiah. (Comp. Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 27:6.)
PETT, "“And the remnant which is escaped of the house of Judah will again take
root downward, and bear fruit upward.”
But their crops were not the only things that would become established. Those who
remained of the house of Judah, those who had escaped the wrath of Sennacherib,
would also themselves ‘take root downwards’. They would become firmly
established, and that would include being established in His Law. And they would
‘bear fruit upwards’, offering to God what was pleasing to Him, not only in
offerings and sacrifices, but also in the fruit of their lives (see Isaiah 1:11-18).
PULPIT, "And the remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah. Sennacherib,
who in his first expedition had carried away out of Judaea 200,150 prisoners, had in
his second probably done considerable damage to the towns in the south-west of
Palestine—Lachish, for instance, which was a city of Judah (Joshua 15:39; 2 Kings
14:19). The open country had been wasted, great numbers killed, and many
probably carried off by famine and pestilence. Thus both Hezekiah (2 Kings 19:4)
and Isaiah regard the population still in the land as a mere "remnant." Shall yet
again take root downward—i.e; be firmly fixed and established in the land, like a
vigorous tree that strikes its roots into the soil deeply—and bear fruit upward; i.e.
exhibit all the outward signs of prosperity. The reign of Josiah, when the Jewish
dominion embraced the whole of Palestine (2 Kings 23:15-20), was the special
fulfillment of this prophecy.
31 For out of Jerusalem will come a remnant,
and out of Mount Zion a band of survivors.
“The zeal of the Lord Almighty will accomplish
this.

119. CLARKE, "Out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant - The Jews shall be so
multiplied as not only to fill Jerusalem, but all the adjacent country.
And they that escape out of Mount Zion - Some think that this refers to the going
forth of the apostles to the Gentile world, and converting the nations by the preaching of
the Gospel.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:31. For out of Judah shall go forth a remnant — That
handful of Jews who were now gathered together, and shut up in Jerusalem, should
go out to their several habitations, and, by God’s singular blessing, increase
exceedingly. The zeal of the Lord shall do this — Although, when you reflect upon
yourselves, and consider either your present fewness and weakness, or your great
unworthiness, this may seem too great a blessing for you to expect; yet God will do it
from the zeal which he hath, both for his own name, and for the good of his
undeserving people.
ELLICOTT, "(31)A remnant.—Isaiah’s favourite doctrine of the remnant (Isaiah
4:2-3; Isaiah 10:20-21).
They that escape.—A survival.
Out of Jerusalem.—The ravaged land was to be newly stocked from thence.
The zeal (jealousy) of the Lord of hosts shall do this.—Another of the phrases of
Isaiah. (See Isaiah 10:7.) (The word hosts, wanting in the common Hebrew text, is
found in many MSS., and all the versions).
PETT, "“For out of Jerusalem will go forth a remnant, and out of mount Zion they
who will escape. The zeal of YHWH will perform this.”
For it was YHWH’ guarantee that a remnant would go forth out of Jerusalem, the
remnant that now remained of all that Judah had been before the invasion. Out of
Mount Zion would go those who had escaped the fearsome hand of Sennacherib.
And this would be because YHWH had delivered them. They would be free and still
living in their own land. And all this would be because YHWH was acting in His
zealousness.
“The zeal of YHWH will perform this.” Compare Isaiah 9:7. In both cases the zeal
of YHWH would bring about His will in establishing His Kingly Rule. The saying is
typically Isaianic.
PULPIT, "For out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant. The march of
Sennacherib and the raid of Rabshakeh had driven the mass of the escaped
population of Judaea to take refuge within the walls of Jerusalem, from which, on

120. the retirement of the invaders, they would gladly "go forth," to recultivate their
lands (2 Kings 19:29) and restore their ruined homes. And they that escape—rather,
that shall escape—out of Mount Zion—"Mount Zion" is a variant for Jerusalem, as
in 2 Kings 19:21, and in Isaiah and the Psalms so continually—the zeal of the Lord
of hosts shall do this. So in Isaiah 9:7 and Isaiah 37:32. Here most manuscripts have
"the zeal of the Lord," omitting "of hosts;" and this is probably the right reading.
The meaning is that God's zealous love and care for his people will effect their
complete restoration to prosperity and glory, difficult as it was at the time to
imagine such a restoration.
32 “Therefore this is what the Lord says
concerning the king of Assyria:
“‘He will not enter this city
or shoot an arrow here.
He will not come before it with shield
or build a siege ramp against it.
BAR ES, "Nor come before it with shield - The “shields” of the Assyrians are
very conspicuous in the sculptures, and were of great importance in a siege, since the
assailing archers were in most instances defended, as they shot their weapons, by a
comrade, who held before himself and his friend a shield of an enormous size. It was
made of a framework of wood, filled in with wattling, and perhaps lined with skin; it was
rested upon the ground, and it generally curved backward toward the top; ordinarily it
somewhat exceeded the height of a man. From the safe covert afforded by these large
defenses the archers were able to take deliberate aim, and deliver their volleys with
effect.
Nor cast a bank against it - “Mounds” or “banks” were among the most common
of the means used by the Assyrians against a besieged town. They were thrown up
against the walls, and consisted of loose earth, trees, brushwood, stones, and rubbish.
Sometimes the surface of the mound was regularly paved with several layers of stone or
brick, which formed a solid road or causeway capable of bearing a great weight. The
intention was not so much to bring the mounds to a level with the top of the walls, as to
carry them to such a height as should enable the battering-ram to work effectively. Walls
were made very solid toward their base, for the purpose of resisting the ram; halfway up
their structure was comparatively weak and slight. The engines of the assailants, rams
and catapults, where therefore far more serviceable if they could attack the upper and
weaker portion of the defenses; and it was to enable them to reach these portions that
the “mounds” were raised.

121. CLARKE, "He shall not, etc. - Here follow the fullest proofs that Jerusalem shall not
be taken by the Assyrians.
1. He shall not come into this city;
2. He shall not be able to get so near as to shoot an arrow into it;
3. He shall not be able to bring an army before it,
4. Nor shall he be able to raise any redoubt or mound against it;
5. No; not even an Assyrian shield shall be seen in the country; not even a foraging
party shall come near the city.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:32. Thus saith the Lord, He shall not come to this city — The
king of Assyria shall be so far from possessing himself of the city at this time, that he
shall not shoot so much as an arrow into it, much less raise any bulwarks to besiege
it. There is a gradation in the words, says Dr. Dodd, as is usual with Isaiah. The first
declaration is, that Sennacherib, if he shall attempt to besiege the city, shall never be
able to succeed; he shall not come into this city. The second is, that he shall not
bring his army so near the city as to come before it with shields, wherewith to
defend themselves from those on the wall, or raise a bank against it. The third, that
he shall not even shoot an arrow into the city, which might be done from far. It
seems the army sent with Rab-shakeh did not form a close siege against it, but only
disposed themselves so as to block it up at some distance; possibly waiting till the
king of Assyria had taken Libnah and Lachish, (which they presumed he would
speedily do.)
ELLICOTT, "(32) Into this city.—Or, unto this city. Sennacherib shall not come
hither to make his intended attack.
or shoot an arrow there (at it).—In open assault.
or come before it with shield.—As a storming party advances to the walls under
cover of their shields.
or cast a bank against it.—In regular siege. Comp. 2 Samuel 20:15; Habakkuk
1:10). The incidents of warfare here specified may be seen represented on the
Assyrian sculptures from Khorsâbad and elsewhere.
(32-34) This may be, as Mr. Cheyne supposes, an after addition to the original
prophecy. Isaiah may have spoken it a little later, in which case it was quite natural
for an editor to append it here, as belonging to the same crisis. But it seems better to
see here a return to the subject of the king of Assyria, after the parenthetic address
to Hezekiah. The repetition of 2 Kings 19:28 in 2 Kings 19:33 favours this view.

122. GUZIK, "4. (2 Kings 19:32-34) God will defend Judah for His sake.
Therefore thus says the LORD concerning the king of Assyria: “He shall not come
into this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor come before it with shield, nor build a
siege mound against it. By the way that he came, by the same shall he return; and he
shall not come into this city,” says the LORD. “For I will defend this city, to save it
for My own sake and for My servant David’s sake.”
a. He shall not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow there . . . for I will defend this
city, to save it: God plainly and clearly drew a line. Although the Assyrian military
machine was poised to lay siege to Jerusalem and ultimately crush them, they won’t.
The king of Assyria would not come into this city because God promised to defend
it.
i. It is hard for modern people to understand the ancient horror of the siege, when a
city was surrounded by a hostile army and trapped into a slow, suffering starvation.
King Hezekiah and the people of Jerusalem lived under the shadow of this threat,
but God’s promise through Isaiah assured them that Sennacherib and the Assyrian
army would not only fail to capture the city, but would not even shoot an arrow or
build a siege mound against Jerusalem. God promised that they wouldn’t even begin
a siege.
b. For My own sake and for My servant David’s sake: This explains why God
promised to defend Jerusalem. God would defend His own glory. Often, we
unnecessarily think that we must defend the glory of the LORD. But that isn’t really
the case. God is more than able to defend His own glory.
i. God also does it “For My servant David’s sake.” King David had died almost 300
years before this, but God still honored His promise to David (2 Samuel 7:10-17).
God defended Jerusalem, not for the city’s sake at all - Jerusalem deserved
judgment! But He did it for His own sake and for the sake of David. In the same
way, God the Father defends and blesses us, not for our own sake - we often deserve
His judgment - but He often does it for His own sake, and for the sake of Jesus
Christ our Lord.
ii. For I will defend this city, to save it For My own sake and for My servant David’s
sake: “Jeremiah later argued that those who traded on this prophecy as meaning
that the temple in Jerusalem would never be taken were superstitious and
presumptuous (Jeremiah 7:1-15).”
PETT, "Verses 32-34
The Final Oracle Of Deliverance Which Will Result In Its Own Fulfilment (2 Kings
19:32-34).

123. The final oracle was put in plain and straightforward terms that could leave no
doubt. It was the policy of great kings to be personally present when, at the end of a
long siege, the city was about to fall. Thereby they could claim the victory for
themselves and it became attached to their name. See for a clear example of this 2
Samuel 12:26-31. And it was even customary for them to pick up a bow and shoot
an arrow, or to take up a shield or supervise the building of a mound, so that it
could be portrayed on the reliefs made of the event (very much like our modern
artificial photo-calls), making quite clear who was responsible for the victory. It was
all staged.
Thus the promise was that deliverance would come so soon that the king of Assyria
would not even come to the city, or shoot his arrow there, or pick up a shield, or
order the building of a mound. Rather he would soon be scurrying back to Assyria
by the way in which he had come, and this would be because YHWH was defending
Jerusalem, for the sake of His own glory, and for the sake of His servant David who
had chosen it, to whom He had made such great promises.
This ties in quite adequately with the promise in 2 Kings 19:7, and yet also contains
within it the seed of the glorious coming event that no one expected, the actual
destruction of a large part of the mighty Assyrian army. The fact that what will now
happen was never prophesied indicates the genuineness both of the prophecies and
of the event itself.
Analysis.
· “Therefore thus says YHWH concerning the king of Assyria, He will not
come to this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor will he come before it with shield,
nor cast up a mound against it” (2 Kings 19:32).
· “By the way that he came, by the same will he return, and he will not come to
this city, says YHWH” (2 Kings 19:33).
· “For I will defend this city to save it, for my own sake, and for my servant
David’s sake” (2 Kings 19:34).
ote that in ‘a’ Sennacherib would not come to the city and in the parallel that
would be because YHWH was defending it. Centrally in ‘b’ he would return home
having failed in his purpose.
2 Kings 19:32
“Therefore thus says YHWH concerning the king of Assyria, He will not come to
this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor will he come before it with shield, nor cast
up a mound against it.”
Like modern politicians ancient kings could not resist a ‘photo-call’. They wanted to
go down in history. Thus at any great victory, especially towards the end of a siege,
they would arrive and make some military gesture towards the enemy that could
later be recorded on stone. This might take the form of shooting an arrow,
brandishing a shield and sword, or ostentatiously supervising the building of
siegeworks. But in this case YHWH promised that this would not happen, simply

124. because the victory would not be achieved. There would be no crowning moment.
PULPIT, "Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the King of Assyria. The oracle
concludes with a general announcement, addressed to all whom it may concern, not
to any one individually, concerning the existing distress. First, it is laid down what
shall not be the issue. He—i.e. Sennacherib—shall not come into—rather, unto—
this city—i.e. Jerusalem—nor shoot an arrow there—i.e; he shall not begin the
attack, as was usually done, with discharges of arrows, to clear the walls of their
defenders, and make it safe for the sappers and miners and the siege artillery to
draw near—nor come before it with shield—i.e. advance close, to raise the scaling-
ladders, or mine the walls, or fire the gates, under the protection of huge shields—
nor east a bank against it. Much less shall he proceed to the last extremity of raising
mounds against the walls, and planting upon them his balistae and his battering-
rams, with the object of effecting a breach. Each of the successive stages of a siege is
touched, and negatived. one of these things shall be done. There shall be no siege.
33 By the way that he came he will return;
he will not enter this city,
declares the Lord.
BAR ES, "By the way that he came - i. e., through the low country of the
Shephelah, thus avoiding not only Jerusalem, but even Judaea.
CLARKE, "By the way that he came - Though his army shall not return, yet he shall
return to Assyria; for because of his blasphemy he is reserved for a more ignominious
death.
JAMISO , "shall not come into this city — nor approach near enough to shoot
an arrow, not even from the most powerful engine which throws missiles to the greatest
distance, nor shall he occupy any part of the ground before the city by a fence, a
mantelet, or covering for men employed in a siege, nor cast (raise) a bank (mound) of
earth, overtopping the city walls, whence he may see and command the interior of the
city. None of these, which were the principal modes of attack followed in ancient military
art, should Sennacherib be permitted to adopt. Though the army under Rab-shakeh
marched towards Jerusalem and encamped at a little distance with a view to blockade it,

125. they delayed laying siege to it, probably waiting till the king, having taken Lachish and
Libnah, should bring up his detachment, that with all the combined forces of Assyria
they might invest the capital. So determined was this invader to conquer Judah and the
neighboring countries (Isa_10:7), that nothing but a divine interposition could have
saved Jerusalem. It might be supposed that the powerful monarch who overran
Palestine and carried away the tribes of Israel, would leave memorials of his deeds on
sculptured slabs, or votive bulls. A long and minute account of this expedition is
contained in the Annals of Sennacherib, a translation of which has recently been made
into English, and, in his remarks upon it, Colonel Rawlinson says the Assyrian version
confirms the most important features of the Scripture account. The Jewish and Assyrian
narratives of the campaign are, indeed, on the whole, strikingly illustrative of each other
[Outlines of Assyrian History].
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:33-34. By the same shall he return — Whereas he expected
to devour the kingdom of Judah at one morsel, and then to proceed farther and
conquer Egypt, and other neighbouring countries; and to cut off nations not a few,
as is said of him concerning this very time and design, (Isaiah 10:7,) he shall meet
with so sad a disappointment and rebuke here, that he shall make haste to return
with shame to his own country. For my servant David’s sake — For my promise and
covenant’s sake made with David, concerning the stability and eternity of his
kingdom, 1 Kings 11:12-13. It must be remembered, that all the promises made to
David were made to him in Christ: he and his kingdom were types of the kingdom of
Christ. It is to this, and not to the personal merits of David, that the sacred writer
here alludes.
ELLICOTT, "(33) He came.—So the versions and Isaiah, rightly. The Heb. text
here has “he cometh,” or “shall come.” With the thought comp. 2 Kings 19:28 : “I
will turn thee back by the way by which thou camest.”
And shall not come into this city.—And unto this city he shall not come (2 Kings
19:32).
PETT, "“By the way that he came, by the same will he return, and he will not come
to this city, says YHWH.”
Indeed far from gaining victory he would shortly be returning home (with YHWH’s
hook through his nose, and YHWH’s bridle in his mouth) from Libnah. He would
never even approach Jerusalem. Thus it would not only be the end of his operations
against Jerusalem and Judah, it would also be the end of all his current operations
outside Assyria. This could only indicate real trouble at home which necessitated his
presence. It would also turn out to be because he would need to re-establish his
army. “By the way that he came, by the same will he return.’ Compare 2 Kings
19:28.

126. PULPIT, "By the way that he came, by the same shall he return (see 2 Kings 19:28).
ot merely, "he shall fail of his object" (Bahr, Keil), "he shall return
disappointed;" but, literally, he shall retrace his steps, he shall quit Palestine by the
same route by which he entered it—the coast route along the maritime plain, which
left Jerusalem on the right at a distance of forty miles. And shall not come into—
rather, unto—this city, saith the Lord. An emphatic ending (comp. Isaiah 22:14;
Isaiah 45:13; Isaiah 54:17; Isaiah 55:8; Isaiah 59:20; Isaiah 65:25; Isaiah 66:21,
Isaiah 66:23).
34 I will defend this city and save it,
for my sake and for the sake of David my
servant.’”
BAR ES, "For mine own sake - God’s honor was concerned to defend His own
city against one who denied His power in direct terms, as did Sennacherib 2Ki_18:35;
2Ki_19:10-12. His faithfulness was also concerned to keep the promise made to David
Psa_132:12-18.
PETT, "“For I will defend this city to save it, for my own sake, and for my servant
David’s sake.”
And the reason for it would be because YHWH was defending Jerusalem for His
own sake (so that He might be seen to be faithful to His promises to David) and for
His servant David’s sake, who had chosen Jerusalem and dedicated it to YHWH,
Who accepted it and had also thereby chosen it (compare 1 Kings 11:12-13). God
had not forgotten His promises to David, and would stand by them at all costs.
PULPIT, "For I will defend this city, to save it—not merely with a view of saving it,
but in such sort as effectually to save it—for mine own sake—i.e; because my own
honor is concerned in its preservation, especially after the taunts of Sennacherib (2
Kings 18:32-35; 2 Kings 19:10-13)—and for my servant David's sake. ot so much
on account of the promises made to David, as on account of the love which God bore
towards him for his faithfulness and earnest devotion.
35 That night the angel of the Lord went out and

127. put to death a hundred and eighty-five thousand
in the Assyrian camp. When the people got up the
next morning—there were all the dead bodies!
BAR ES, "The camp of the Assyrians - Which was now moved to Pelusium, if we
may trust Herodotus; or which, at any rate, was at some considerable distance from
Jerusalem.
When they arose early in the morning, behold ... - These words form the only
trustworthy data that we possess for determining to any extent the manner of the
destruction now worked. They imply that there was no disturbance during the night, no
alarm, no knowledge on the part of the living that their comrades were dying all around
them by thousands. All mere natural causes must be rejected, and God must be regarded
as having slain the men in their sleep without causing disturbance, either by pestilence
or by that “visitation” of which English law speaks. The most nearly parallel case is the
destruction of the first-born, Exo_12:29.
The Egyptian version of this event recorded in Herodotus is that, during the night,
silently and secretly, an innumerable multitude of field-mice spread themselves through
the Assyrian host, and gnawed their quivers, bows, and shield-straps, so as to render
them useless. When morning broke, the Assyrians fled hastily, and the Egyptians
pursuing put a vast number to the sword.
CLARKE, "That night - The very night after the blasphemous message had been sent,
and this comfortable prophecy delivered.
The angel of the Lord went out - I believe this angel or messenger of the Lord was
simply a suffocating or pestilential Wind; by which the Assyrian army was destroyed, as
in a moment, without noise confusion or any warning. See the note 1Ki_20:30. Thus was
the threatening, 2Ki_19:7, fulfilled, I will send a Blast upon him; for he had heard the
rumor that his territories were invaded; and on his way to save his empire, in one night
the whole of his army was destroyed, without any one even seeing who had hurt them.
This is called an angel or messenger of the Lord: that is, something immediately sent by
him to execute his judgments.
When they arose early - That is, Sennacherib, and probably a few associates, who
were preserved as witnesses and relaters of this most dire disaster. Rab-shakeh, no
doubt, perished with the rest of the army.
HE RY 35-37, "Sometimes it was long ere prophecies were accomplished and
promises performed; but here the word was no sooner spoken than the work was done.
I. The army of Assyria was entirely routed. That night which immediately followed the
sending of this message to Hezekiah, when the enemy had just set down before the city
and were preparing (as we now say) to open the trenches, that night was the main body

128. of their army slain upon the spot by an angel, 2Ki_19:35. Hezekiah had not force
sufficient to sally out upon them and attack their camp, nor would God do it by sword or
bow; but he sent his angel, a destroying angel, in the dead of the night, to make an
assault upon them, which their sentinels, though ever so wakeful, could neither discover
nor resist. It was not by the sword of a mighty man or of a mean man, that is, not of any
man at all, but of an angel, that the Assyrians army was to fall (Isa_31:8), such an angel
as slew the first-born of Egypt. Josephus says it was done by a pestilential disease, which
was instant death to them. The number slain was very great, 185,000 men, and
Rabshakeh, it is likely, among the rest. When the besieged arose, early in the morning,
behold they were all dead corpses, scarcely a living man among them. Some think the
76th Psalm was penned on this occasion, where we read that the stout-hearted were
spoiled and slept their sleep, their last, their long sleep, 2Ki_19:5. See how great, in
power and might, the holy angels are, when one angel, in one night, could make so great
a slaughter. See how weak the mightiest of men are before almighty God: who ever
hardened himself against him and prospered? The pride and blasphemy of the king are
punished by the destruction of his army. All these lives are sacrificed to God's glory and
Zion's safety. The prophet shows that therefore God suffered this vast rendezvous to be
made, that they might be gathered as sheaves into the floor, Mic_4:12, Mic_4:13.
II. The king of Assyria was hereby put into the utmost confusion. Ashamed to see
himself, after all his proud boasts, thus defeated and disabled to pursue his conquests
and secure what he had (for this, we may suppose, was the flower of his army), and
continually afraid of falling under the like stroke himself, He departed, and went, and
returned; the manner of the expression intimates the great disorder and distraction of
mind he was in, 2Ki_19:36. And it was not long before God cut him off too, by the hands
of two of his own sons, 2Ki_19:37. 1. Those that did it were very wicked, to kill their own
father (whom they were bound to protect) and in the act of his devotion; monstrous
villany! But, 2. God was righteous in it. Justly are the sons suffered to rebel against their
father that begat them, when he was in rebellion against the God that made him. Those
whose children are undutiful to them ought to consider whether they have not been so to
their Father in heaven. The God of Israel had done enough to convince him that he was
the only true God, whom therefore he ought to worship; yet he persists in his idolatry,
and seeks to his false god for protection against a God of irresistible power. Justly is his
blood mingled with his sacrifices, since he will not be convinced by such a plain and
dear-bought demonstration of his folly in worshipping idols. His sons that murdered
him were suffered to escape, and no pursuit was made after them, his subjects perhaps
being weary of the government of so proud a man and thinking themselves well rid of
him. And his sons would be looked upon as the more excusable in what they had done if
it be true (as bishop Patrick suggested) that he was now vowing to sacrifice them to his
god, so that it was for their own preservation that they sacrificed him. His successor was
another son, Esarhaddon, who (as it should seem) did not aim, like his father, to enlarge
his conquests, but rather to improve them; for he it was that first sent colonies of
Assyrians to inhabit the country of Samaria, though it is mentioned before (2Ki_17:24),
as appears, Ezr_4:2, where the Samaritans say it was Esarhaddon that brought them
thither.
JAMISO , "2Ki_19:35, 2Ki_19:36. An angel destroys the Assyrians.
in the morning ... they were all dead corpses — It was the miraculous
interposition of the Almighty that defended Jerusalem. As to the secondary agent
employed in the destruction of the Assyrian army, it is most probable that it was effected

129. by a hot south wind, the simoon, such as to this day often envelops and destroys whole
caravans. This conjecture is supported by 2Ki_19:7 and Jer_51:1. The destruction was
during the night; the officers and soldiers, being in full security, were negligent; their
discipline was relaxed; the camp guards were not alert, or perhaps they themselves were
the first taken off, and those who slept, not wrapped up, imbibed the poison plentifully.
If this had been an evening of dissolute mirth (no uncommon thing in a camp), their joy
(perhaps for a victory), or “the first night of their attacking the city,” says Josephus,
became, by its effects, one means of their destruction [Calmet, Fragments].
K&D 35-37, "The fulfilment of the divine promise. - 2Ki_19:35. “It came to pass in
that night, that the angel of the Lord went out and smote in the army of the Assyrian
185,000 men; and when they (those that were left, including the king) rose up in the
morning, behold there were they all (i.e., all who had perished) dead corpses,” i.e., they
had died in their sleep. ‫ים‬ ִ‫ת‬ ֵ‫מ‬ is added to strengthen ‫ים‬ ִ‫ר‬ָ‫ג‬ ְ : lifeless corpses. ‫הוּא‬ ַ‫ה‬ ‫ה‬ ָ‫ל‬ְ‫י‬ ַ ַ is in
all probability the night following the day on which Isaiah had foretold to Hezekiah the
deliverance of Jerusalem. Where the Assyrian army was posted at the time when this
terrible stroke fell upon it is not stated, since the account is restricted to the principal
fact. One portion of it was probably still before Jerusalem; the remainder were either in
front of Libnah (2Ki_19:8), or marching against Jerusalem. From the fact that
Sennacherib's second embassy (2Ki_19:9.) was not accompanied by a body of troops, it
by no means follows that the large army which had come with the first embassy (2Ki_
18:17) had withdrawn again, or had even removed to Libnah on the return of Rabshakeh
to his king (2Ki_19:8). The very opposite may be inferred with much greater justice from
2Ki_19:32. And the smiting of 185,000 men by an angel of the Lord by no means
presupposes that the whole of Sennacherib's army was concentrated at one spot. The
blow could certainly fall upon the Assyrians wherever they were standing or were
encamped. The “angel of the Lord” is the same angel that smote as ‫ית‬ ִ‫ח‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ַ ַ‫ה‬ the first-born
of Egypt (Exo_12:23, compared with Exo_12:12 and Exo_12:13), and inflicted the
pestilence upon Israel after the numbering of the people by David (2Sa_24:15-16). The
last passage renders the conjecture a very probable one, that the slaying of the Assyrians
was also effected by a terrible pestilence. But the number of the persons slain - 185,000
in a single night - so immensely surpasses the effects even of the most terrible plagues,
that this fact cannot be interpreted naturally; and the deniers of miracle have therefore
felt obliged to do violence to the text, and to pronounce either the statement that it was
“the same night” or the number of the slain a mythical exaggeration.
(Note: The assertion of Thenius, that 2Ki_19:35-37 are borrowed from a different
source from 2Ki_18:13-19, 2Ki_18:34 and 20:1-19, rests upon purely arbitrary
suppositions and groundless assumptions, and is only made in the interest of the
mythical interpretation of the miracle. And his conclusion, that “since the
catastrophe was evidently (?) occasioned by the sudden breaking out of a pestilence,
the scene of it was no doubt the pestilential Egypt,” is just as unfounded, - as if Egypt
were the only land in which a pestilence could suddenly have broken out. - The
account given by Herodotus (ii. 141), that on the prayer of king Sethon, a priest of
Vulcan, the deity promised him victory over the great advancing army of
Sennacherib, and that during the night mice spread among the enemy (i.e., in the
Assyrian camp at Pelusium), and ate up the quivers and bows, and the leather straps
of the shields, so that the next morning they were obliged to flee without their
weapons, and many were cut down, is imply a legendary imitation of our account,

130. i.e., an Egyptian variation of the defeat of Sennacherib in Judah. The eating up of the
Assyrian weapons by mice is merely the explanation given to Herodotus by the
Egyptian priests of the hieroglyphical legend on the standing figure of Sethos at
Memphis, from which we cannot even gather the historical fact that Sennacherib
really advanced as far as Pelusium.)
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:35. And it came to pass that night, &c. — Sometimes it was
long before prophecies were accomplished, and promises performed, but here the
word was no sooner spoken than the work was done. The night which immediately
followed the sending of this message to Hezekiah, was the main body of the
besieging army slain. Hezekiah had not force sufficient to sally out upon them, and
attack their camp, nor would God destroy them by sword or bow; but he sent a
destroying angel, in the dead of night, to make an assault upon them, which their
sentinels, though ever so watchful, could neither discover nor resist: such an angel
as slew the firstborn of Egypt. Josephus says, the angel slew them by inflicting a
pestilential disease which caused death immediately. “But his authority,” says
Vitringa, “in matters of this kind, is of no great weight. It is my opinion,” continues
he, “that in a dreadful storm, raised by this destroying angel, these men were killed
by lightning; their bodies being burned within, while their outward garments were
untouched.” The number slain was prodigious, and Rab-shakeh, probably, among
them. And when they rose early in the morning — amely, the few that were left
alive; behold, they were all dead corpses — Scarce a living man of their companions
and fellow- soldiers remained. How great in power and might must the holy angels
be, when one angel, in one night, could make so great a slaughter! And how weak
are the mightiest men before the almighty God! Who ever hardened himself against
him, and prospered? The pride and blasphemy of the king and his general are
punished by the destruction of one hundred and eighty- five thousand men! O God,
how terrible art thou in thy justice! All these lives are sacrificed to the glory of God
and the safety of his people!
COFFMA , "Some scholars like to point out that the actual assassination of
Sennacherib took place nearly twenty years later in 681 B.C., but, so what? 2 Kings
19:36 states clearly enough that he "dwelt in ineveh," indicating a time-lapse
before his murder. We learn from Isaiah 37:38 that the two assassins named here
were actually the sons of Sennacherib.
The paganism of Sennacherib appears in the name Adrammelech, which was also
the name of a pagan god (2 Kings 19:17:31). Whatever was the motive for this
parricide by Sennacherib's sons, it was not motivated by a desire to succeed him; for
they promptly fled to a distant land. There is a traditional report that both of these
sons of Sennacherib set up powerful dynasties that ruled in what is now Armenia.
We are impressed with what Homer Hailey stated, namely, that, "Isaiah himself
might have written this section of Kings."[22] This harmonizes with what we have
frequently mentioned, namely, that it was God's prophets who were the authors of
the material in the historical books, a viewpoint also affirmed and supported by

131. Josephus. o one was any better qualified than Isaiah to have given us these
chapters in 2Kings, along with their near-duplications in 2Kings 36,2 Kings 37 of
the Prophecy of Isaiah.
ELLICOTT, "(34) For I will defend.—And I will cover (with a shield). (Comp.
Isaiah 31:5; Isaiah 38:6; 2 Kings 20:6.)
For my servant David’s sake.—See 1 Kings 11:12-13, and the promise in 2 Samuel 7.
GUZIK, "C. God defends Jerusalem.
1. (2 Kings 19:35) God strikes down the mighty army of Assyria.
And it came to pass on a certain night that the angel of the LORD went out, and
killed in the camp of the Assyrians one hundred and eighty-five thousand; and when
people arose early in the morning, there were the corpses; all dead.
a. The angel of the LORD went out: Simply and powerfully, God destroyed this
mighty army in one night. 185,000 died at the hand of the angel of the LORD.
Against all odds, and against every expectation except the expectation of faith, the
Assyrian army was turned back without having even shot an arrow into Jerusalem.
The unstoppable was stopped, the undefeated was defeated.
i. The prophet Hosea made this same prediction: Yet I will have mercy on the house
of Judah, will save them by the LORD their God, and will not save them by bow,
nor by sword or battle, by horses or horsemen. (Hosea 1:7)
ii. “Herodotus, the Greek historian, recorded that one night Sennacherib’s army
camp was infested with mice (or rats) that destroyed the arrows and shield-thongs
of the soldiers. He probably got this tradition from Egyptian sources, and it could
well be a somewhat garbled version of the event recorded here.” (Grogan)
b. There were the corpses; all dead: This was not difficult for God to do. In a
manner of speaking, it was far harder for the LORD to get the heart and minds of
His people in the right place. Once they were there, it was nothing for God to
dispatch one angel to do this.
i. Some have speculated that there was a natural means that the angel used. “This
has been thought to be a bacillary dysentery which had a three-day incubation
period.” (Wiseman)
PETT, "Verses 35-37
YHWH Totally Unexpectedly Devastates The Assyrian Army Causing Sennacherib
To Return Home Where Subsequently He Arranges For His Assassination (2 Kings

132. 19:35-37).
What happened now was totally unexpected, and deliberately so. YHWH wanted to
make an instant and great impression on His people of what He could do on their
behalf. The fact that there was no forewarning indicates both the genuineness of the
previous prophecies (which if invented would hardly have failed to mention this
stupendous event) and of the event itself. Certainly something happened of such a
devastating nature that it shook the very heart of Israel, and bred in their
unbelieving and foolish hearts the certainty that YHWH would never in the future
allow Jerusalem to be destroyed.
Of course that was not what YHWH had intended. What He had wanted to do was
awaken in them praise and gratitude which would result in future responsive
hearts, and a desire from then on to do His will (then Jerusalem would indeed have
been invulnerable). But it was human nature to think mechanically that if YHWH
would do this once when they did not deserve it, He would always do it. It was a
mistake that would be brought home to them by the destruction of Jerusalem. They
were to learn by it that it was not Jerusalem that was invulnerable, but His true
people, who happened at this time to be in Jerusalem.
For that very night something happened that struck at the heart of the Assyrian
army. Speaking in heavenly terms ‘the Angel of YHWH went forth and smote a
large part of the Assyrian army’. This may well have been because a plague of rats
mentioned by Herodotus had infested the Assyrian camp bringing with them a
disease that rapidly decimated the army. Or it may have been in some other way,
such as a night attack by the Egyptian army (Sennacherib claimed victory, but then
so no doubt did Tirhakah And certainly what happened was that Sennacherib
withdrew, which would have been a strange way of celebrating a resounding
victory). But what was certain was that when morning came and the Assyrians
arose, there were corpses everywhere.
Coming on top of the news that he had received from ineveh (2 Kings 19:7) this
was the final decider, and he upped camp and returned to ineveh. But even there
he could not escape the long arm of YHWH, for some considerable time later
YHWH indirectly arranged for his assassination. He had received back his boasts to
the full.
2 Kings 19:35
“And it came about that night, that the angel of YHWH went forth, and smote in the
camp of the Assyrians a hundred and eighty and five thousand, and when men arose
early in the morning, behold, these were all dead bodies.’
There is, of course, no external evidence of this, which is in fact what we would
expect. Great kings never suffered disasters (compare how Egypt failed to record
what happened at the Red Sea). Stalemates were victories, and genuine victories
were lauded to the skies, but defeats, were discreetly forgotten. But what was
written firmly in history (by interpreting what was written) was that Sennacherib

133. did return to ineveh, that Jerusalem was never taken, and that Hezekiah was
never forced to submit in person. So something certainly happened. And it kept
Sennacherib away for a long time.
There is a familiar ring to the story, for it was only Israel who boasted in their
histories of victories gained totally by YHWH without their having any part in it.
And that was partly because it was only to them that it happened. It brought no
glory on them (which was the usual reason for recording history) but it did bring
glory on YHWH (which was the prophets’ reason for recording history).
In this case what happened was that by morning a large part of the Assyrian army
were dead. To Israel that could only have one explanation, it was due to the activity
of the Angel of YHWH, the same Angel Who had once almost smitten Jerusalem (2
Samuel 24:15-17). Humanly speaking it might have been due to a rapidly infectious
fatal disease (such as bacillary dysentery) or even a night attack by the Egyptian
army. Or there may have been some other reason. But certainly 2 Samuel 24:15-17
does indicate that this was how plague was described, and interestingly Herodotus
does record an occasion when the Assyrian army had to withdraw because of the
effects of a plague of vermin, which could well have brought a deadly plague with
them (compare the vermin connected with the plagues in Philistia in 1 Samuel 5:6; 1
Samuel 5:9; 1 Samuel 5:12; 1 Samuel 6:4-5), although Herodotus ascribed the
withdrawal of which he spoke to the fact that the vermin gnawed most of their
equipment (strictly, however, he indicates that the event he was speaking of
happened in Egypt). He does, also, speak of an Egyptian tradition that the Egyptian
army was saved from a momentous defeat in 701 BC by divine intervention.
The one hundred and eighty five eleph may indicate 185 military units (the
inhabitants of Libnah may well have counted the number of military units revealed
by their different standards), 185 captains (by repointing), or simply a very large
number. (Only the Assyrians would theoretically have known how many dead
bodies there were, and in their haste to dispose of them in the hot climate it is
doubtful, in view of their large numbers, if anyone was counting).
PULPIT, "2 Kings 19:35-37
DESTRUCTIO OF SE ACHERIB'S HOST, A D HIS OW VIOLE T
DEATH AT I EVEH. The sequel is told in a few words. That night destruction
came down on the host of Sennacherib, as it lay en-camped at some distance from
Jerusalem, silently and swiftly. Without noise, without disturbance, the sleeping
men slept the sleep of death, and in the morning, when the survivors awoke, it was
found that a hundred and eighty-five thousand were slain. Upon this, with the
remnant of his army, Sennacherib hastily returned to ineveh. There, some time
after—about seventeen years according to our reckoning—a conspiracy was formed
against him by two of his sons, who murdered him as he was worshipping in a
temple, and fled into Armenia. Another son, Esarhaddon, succeeded.

134. PULPIT 35, "And it came to pass that night. The important expression, "that
night," is omitted from the narrative of Isaiah 37:36, but is undoubtedly an original
portion of the present history. It can have no other meaning—as Keil and Bahr have
seen—than "the night following the day on which Isaiah had foretold to Hezekiah
the deliverance of Jerusalem." God's word "runneth very swiftly." o sooner was
the premise given than the destroying angel received his orders, and "that night"
the terrible stroke fell. That the angel of the Lord went out; or, an angel ( ἄγγελος
κυρίου, LXX.). We cannot say, with Bahr, that it was "the same one who smote the
firstborn in Egypt, and inflicted the pestilence after the census under David."
Revelation does not tell us that there is definitely one destroying angel. "The angel
of death" is a rabbinical invention. It accords rather with the analogy of God's
dealings that he should use at one time the services of one minister, at another time
those of another. And smote. Imagination has been over-busy in conjecturing the
exact manner of the smiting. Some critics have suggested pestilence, or more
definitely "the plague" (Gesenius, Dathe, Maurer, Ewald, Winer, Thenins, Keil,
etc.); others a terrible storm (Vitringa, Stanley); others the simoom (Prideaux,
Milman); others a nocturnal attack by Tirhakah (Ussher, Preiss, Michaelis). Some
of these the text altogether precludes, as the attack of Tirhakah, which must have
aroused the whole host, and not left the disaster to be discovered by those who
"awoke early in the morning." Others are improbable, as the simoom, or a terrible
storm with thunder and lightning, which have never been known to accomplish such
a destruction. Pestilence is no doubt possible, but a pestilence of a strange and
miraculous character, to which men succumbed without awaking or disturbing
others. But the narrative rather points to sudden and silent death during sleep, such
as often happens to men in the course of nature singly, and here on this occasion was
made to happen in one night to a hundred and eighty-five thousand men by the
Divine omnipotence acting abnormally. In the camp of the Assyrians. The
destruction was not only at one time, but in one place. "The camp of the Assyrians"
cannot mean half a dozen camps situated in half a dozen different places, as Keil
supposes. Sennacherib was somewhere with his main army, encamped for the night,
and there, wherever it was, the blow fell. But the exact locality is uncertain. All that
the narrative makes clear is that it was not in the immediate vicinity of Jerusalem.
Herodotus places the catastrophe at Pelusium. Bahr thinks it was probably before
Libnah. I should incline to place it between Libnah and the Egyptian frontier,
Sennacherib, when he heard that Tirhakah was coming against him (verse 9),
having naturally marched forward to meet and engage his army. A hundred four
score and five thousand. These figures do not pretend to exactness, and can scarcely
have been more than a rough estimate. They are probably the Assyrians' own
estimate of their loss, which the Jews would learn from such of the fugitives as fell
into their hands. And when they—i.e; the survivors—arose early in the morning,
they—i.e. the hundred and eighty-five thousand—were all dead corpses—absolutely
dead, that is; not merely sick or dying. The fact makes against the theory of a
pestilence.

135. 36 So Sennacherib king of Assyria broke camp
and withdrew. He returned to ineveh and stayed
there.
BAR ES, "Dwelt at Nineveh - The meaning is not that Sennacherib made no more
expeditions at all, which would he untrue, for his annals show us that he warred in
Armenia, Babylonia, Susiana, and Cilicia, during his later years; but that he confined
himself to his own part of Asia, and did not invade Palestine or threaten Jerusalem
anymore. Nineveh, marked by some ruins opposite Mosul, appears here unmistakably as
the Assyrian capital, which it became toward the close of the 9th century B.C. It has
previously been mentioned only in Genesis (marginal reference). Sennacherib was the
first king who made it his permanent residence. Its great size and large population are
marked in the description of Jonah Jon_3:2-3; Jon_4:11, whose visit probably fell about
760 B.C.
CLARKE, "Dwelt at Nineveh - This was the capital of the Assyrian empire.
JAMISO , "So Sennacherib king of Assyria ... went and returned — the
same way as he came (2Ki_19:33). The route is described (Isa_10:28-32). The early
chariot track near Beyrout is on the rocky edge of Lebanon, which is skirted by the
ancient Lycus (Nahr-el Kelb). On the perpendicular face of the limestone rock, at
different heights, are seen slabs with Assyrian inscriptions, which having been
deciphered, are found to contain the name of Sennacherib. Thus, by the preservation of
these tablets, the wrath of the Assyrian invaders is made to praise the Lord.
dwelt at Nineveh — This statement implies a considerable period of time, and his
Annals carry on his history at least five years after his disastrous campaign at Jerusalem.
No record of his catastrophe can be found, as the Assyrian practice was to record
victories alone. The sculptures give only the sunny side of the picture.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:36. So Sennacherib departed — Ashamed to see himself,
after all his proud boasts, thus defeated, and disabled to pursue his conquests, or
even to secure what he had gained, the flower of his army being cut off; nay, and
continually afraid of falling under the like stroke himself. The manner of the
expression, He departed, and went, and returned, intimates the great disorder and
distraction of mind he was in.

136. ELLICOTT, "(35-37) THE CATASTROPHE. SE ACHERIB’S RETREAT, A D
HIS “VIOLE T E D.
(35) And it came to pass (in) that night.—This definition of time is wanting in the
parallel text; but it is implied by the phrase in the morning (Isaiah 37:36; 2 Kings
19:35). The night intended can hardly be the one which followed the day when the
prophecy was spoken (see 2 Kings 19:29). The expression “in that night,” may
perhaps be compared with the prophetic “in that day,” and understood to. mean
simply “in that memorable night which was the occasion of this catastrophe.”
(Theuius sees in this clause an indication that the present section was derived from
another source, probably from the one used by the chronicler in 2 Chronicles 32:20-
23. Reuss thinks this confirmed by the fact that neither the prediction in 2 Kings
19:7, nor that of 2 Kings 19:21-34, speaks of so great and so immediate an
overthrow.)
The angel of the Lord went out.—The destroying angel, who smote the firstborn of
the Egyptians (Exodus 12:12-13; Exodus 12:23), and smote Israel after David’s
census (2 Samuel 24:15-17). These passages undoubtedly favour the view that the
Assyrian army was devastated by pestilence, as Josephus asserts. Others have
suggested the agency of a simoom, a storm with lightning, an earthquake, &c. In any
case a supernatural causation is involved not only in the immense number slain, and
that in one night (Psalms 91:6), but in the coincidence of the event with the
predictions of Isaiah, and with the crisis in the history of the true religion:
“Vuolsi così colà dove si puote
Ciò che si vuole; e più non dimandare.”
In the camp of the Assyrians.—Where this was is not said. That it was not before
Jerusalem appears from 2 Kings 19:32-33; and the well-known narrative of
Herodotus (ii. 141) fixes Egypt, the land of plagues, as the scene of the catastrophe.
“Of the details of the catastrophe, which the Bible narrative is content to
characterise as the act of God, the Assyrian monuments contain no record, because
the issue of the campaign gave them nothing to boast of; but an Egyptian account,
preserved by Herodotus, though full of fabulous circumstances, shows that in Egypt,
as well as in Judæa, it was recognised as a direct intervention of Divine power. The
disaster did not break the power of the great king, who continued to reign for
twenty years, and waged many other victorious wars. But none the less it must have
been a very grave blow, the effects of which were felt throughout the empire, and
permanently modified the imperial policy; for in the following year Chaldæa was
again in revolt, and to the end of his reign Sennacherib never renewed his attack
upon Judah” (Robertson Smith).
And when they arose early.—The few who were spared found, not sick and dying,
but corpses, all around them. (Comp. Exodus 12:33 : “They said, we be all dead

137. men.”)
Verse 36
(36) Departed, and went.—Broke up camp, and marched. There should be a stop at
returned.
And dwelt at ineveh.—Or, and he abode in ineveh, implying that he did not
again invade the west. Sennacherib records five subsequent expeditions to the east,
north, and south of his dominions, but these obviously were nothing to the peoples
of Palestine. (See otes on 2 Kings 20:12.)
ineveh.—The capital of Assyria, now marked by large mounds on the east bank of
the Tigris, opposite Mosul. (The Arabic version has “the king of Mosul,” instead of
“the king of Assyria.”) It is usually called inua in the inscriptions; sometimes inâ,
seldom inû (Greek, îvos.)
GUZIK, "2. (2 Kings 19:36-37) The defeated Sennacherib is judged in ineveh.
So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed and went away, returned home, and
remained at ineveh. ow it came to pass, as he was worshiping in the temple of
isroch his god, that his sons Adrammelech and Sharezer struck him down with the
sword; and they escaped into the land of Ararat. Then Esarhaddon his son reigned
in his place.
a. Departed and went away: This happened exactly as God said it would. But he left
still full of pride. After this retreat from Judah, Sennacherib commissioned a
record, which is preserved in the spectacular Annals of Sennacherib (the Taylor
Prisim), which can be seen in the British Museum. It shows how full of pride
Sennacherib’s heart still was, even if he could not even claim he conquered
Jerusalem.
i. “I attacked Hezekiah of Judah who had not subjected himself to me, and took
forty-six fortresses, forts and small cities. I carried away captive 200,150 people, big
and small, both male and female, a multitude of horses, young bulls, asses, camels,
and oxen. Hezekiah himself I locked up in Jerusalem like a bird in its cage. I put up
banks against the city. I separated his cities whose inhabitants I had taken prisoners
from his realm and gave them to Mitiniti, king of Ashdod, Padi, king of Ekron, and
Zilbel, king of Gaza and thus diminished his country. And I added another tax to
the one imposed on him earlier.” (Cited in Bultema, commentary on Isaiah)
ii. “The Biblical account concludes with the much debated statement that the
Assyrian army was struck down in some way during the night with considerable
loss of life, following which the siege was called off . . . The Assyrian Annals tacitly
agree with the Biblical version by making no claim that Jerusalem was taken, only
describing tribute from Hezekiah.” (T.C. Mitchell, The Bible in the British
Museum)

138. iii. “God spared Sennacherib, not in mercy, but in wrath, reserving to him a more
dreadful and shameful death by the hands of his own children.” (Poole)
b. ow it came to pass: Between 2 Kings 19:36 and 2 Kings 19:37; 2Ki_19:20 years
passed. Perhaps Sennacherib thought he had escaped the judgment of God, but he
hadn’t. He met the bitter end of death at the end of swords held by his own sons.
i. An old Jewish legend - and nothing more than a legend - says how it was that
Sennacherib’s sons came to kill him. Sennacherib was troubled at how God seemed
to bless the Jews so much, and tried to find out why. Someone told him it was
because Abraham had loved God so much that he was willing to sacrifice his son
unto the LORD. Sennacherib thought he would be even more favored by God, and
decided to kill two of his sons in sacrifice to the LORD, becoming even more blessed
than Abraham and his descendants. But his two sons learned of the plan, and killed
him before he could kill them, thus fulfilling the word of the LORD.
PETT, "‘So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and
dwelt at ineveh.’
The consequence of this was that Sennacherib immediately ‘departed and went and
returned’ (the repetition emphasising his departure) to ineveh (recorded in his
annals) where he took up his dwelling for some time, no doubt while he sorted out
affairs at home. ote the emphasis on his ‘returning’ to ineveh. See for this 2
Kings 19:7; 2 Kings 19:33. In the view of Isaiah YHWH had dragged him there by
his nose.
PULPIT, "So Sennacherib King of Assyria departed, and went and returned. The,
original is more lively, and more expressive of haste. Sennacherib, it is said,
"decamped, and departed, and returned"—the heaping up of the verbs expressing
the hurry of the march home (Keil); comp. 1 Kings 19:3. And dwelt at ineveh.
ineveh was Sennacherib's favorite residence. He had built himself a palace, there,
marked by the modern mound of Koyunjik. Sargon, his father, had dwelt mainly at
Dur-Sargina or Khorsabad, Tiglath-pileser and Shalmaueser at Calah or imrod.
Sennacherib's palace and his ether buildings at ineveh are described in his annals
at some length. The expression, "dwelt at ineveh," does not mean that he never
quitted it, but merely implies that he dwelt there for some considerable time after
his return, as he appears to have done by his annals. The Eponym Canon makes his
last year B.C. 682.
37 One day, while he was worshiping in the
temple of his god isrok, his sons Adrammelek

139. and Sharezer killed him with the sword, and they
escaped to the land of Ararat. And Esarhaddon
his son succeeded him as king.
BAR ES, "The death of Sennacherib, which took place many years afterward (680
B.C.), is related here, as, from the divine point of view, the sequel to his Syrian
expeditions.
Nisroch his god - Nisroch has not been as yet identified with any known Assyrian
deity. The word may not be the name of a god at all but the name of the temple, as
Josephus understood it. Assyrian temples were almost all distinguished by special
names. If this be the true solution, the translation should run - “As he was worshipping
his god in the house Nisroch.”
They escaped into the land of Armenia - literally, “the land of Ararat,” or the
northeastern portion of Armenia, where it adjoined Media. The Assyrian inscriptions
show that Armenia was at this time independent of Assyria, and might thus afford a safe
refuge to the rebels.
Esar-haddon (or Esar-chaddon), is beyond a doubt the Asshur-akh-iddin of the
inscriptions, who calls himself the son, and appears to be the successor of Sin-akh-irib.
He commenced his reign by a struggle with his brother Adrammelech, and occupied the
throne for only thirteen years, when he was succeeded by his son, Sardanapalus or
Asshur-bani-pal. He warred with Phoenicia, Syria, Arabia, Egypt, and Media, and built
three palaces, one at Nineveh, and the others at Calah and Babylon.
CLARKE, "Nisroch his god - We know nothing of this deity; he is nowhere else
mentioned.
Smote him with the sword - The rabbins say that his sons had learned that he
intended to sacrifice them to this god, and that they could only prevent this by slaying
him.
The same writers add, that he consulted his wise men how it was that such miracles
should be wrought for the Israelites; who told him that it was because of the merit of
Abraham who had offered his only son to God: he then said, I will offer to him my two
sons; which when they heard, they rose up and slew him. When a rabbin cannot untie a
knot, he feels neither scruple nor difficulty to cut it.
JAMISO , "2Ki_19:37. Sennacherib slain.
as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch — Assarae, or Asshur, the head
of the Assyrian Pantheon, represented not as a vulture-headed figure (that is now
ascertained to be a priest), but as a winged figure in a circle, which was the guardian
deity of Assyria. The king is represented on the monuments standing or kneeling

140. beneath this figure, his hand raised in sign of prayer or adoration.
his sons smote him with the sword — Sennacherib’s temper, exasperated
probably by his reverses, displayed itself in the most savage cruelty and intolerable
tyranny over his subjects and slaves, till at length he was assassinated by his two sons,
whom, it is said, he intended to sacrifice to pacify the gods and dispose them to grant
him a return of prosperity. The parricides taking flight into Armenia, a third son, Esar-
haddon, ascended the throne.
K&D, "2Ki_19:37
2Ki_19:37 contains an account of Sennacherib's death. When he was worshipping in
the temple of his god Nisroch, his sons Adrammelech and Sharezer slew him, and fled
into the land of Ararat, and his son Esarhaddon became king in his stead. With regard to
ְ‫ּך‬‫ר‬ ְ‫ס‬ִ‫,נ‬ Nisroch, all that seems to be firmly established is that he was an eagle-deity, and
represented by the eagle-or vulture-headed human figure with wings, which is frequently
depicted upon the Assyrian monuments, “not only in colossal proportions upon the walls
and watching the portals of the rooms, but also constantly in the groups upon the
embroidered robes. When it is introduced in this way, we see it constantly fighting with
other mythical animals, such as human-headed oxen or lions; and in these conflicts it
always appears to be victorious,” from which we may infer that it was a type of the
supreme deity (see Layard's Nineveh and its Remains). The eagle was worshipped as a
god by the Arabs (Pococke, Specim. pp. 94, 199), was regarded as sacred to Melkarth by
the Phoenicians (Nonnus, Dionys. xl. 495,528), and, according to a statement of Philo.
Bybl. (in Euseb. Praepar. evang. i. 10), that Zoroaster taught that the supreme deity was
represented with an eagle's head, it was also a symbol of Ormuzd among the Persians;
consequently Movers (Phöniz. i. pp. 68, 506, 507) regards Nisroch as the supreme deity
of the Assyrians. It is not improbable that it was also connected with the constellation of
the eagle (see Ideler, Ursprung der Sternnamen, p. 416). On the other hand, the current
interpretation of the name from ‫ר‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ֶ‫נ‬ (‫ר‬ ַ‫שׁ‬ְ‫,נ‬ Chald.; nsr, Arab.), eagle, vulture, with the
Persian adjective termination ok or ach, is very doubtful, not merely on account of the ‫ס‬
in ְ‫ּך‬‫ר‬ ְ‫ס‬ִ‫,נ‬ but chiefly because this name does not occur in Assyrian, but simply Asar, Assar,
and Asarak as the name of a deity which is met with in many Assyrian proper names.
The last is also adopted by the lxx, who (ed. Aldin. Compl.) have rendered ְ‫נסרך‬ by
ᅒσαράχ in Isaiah, and ᅠσοράχ (cod. Vatic.) in 2 Kings, by the side of which the various
readings Μεσεράχ in our text (cod. Vat.) and Νασαράχ in Isaiah are evidently secondary
readings emended from the Hebrew, since Josephus (Ant. x. 1, 5) has the form ᅒρασκής,
which is merely somewhat “Graecized.” The meaning of these names is still in obscurity,
even if there should be some foundation for the assumption that Assar belongs to the
same root as the name of the people and land, Asshur. The connection between the form
Nisroch and Asarak is also still obscure. Compare the collection which J. G. Müller has
made of the different conjectures concerning this deity in the Art. Nisroch in Herzog's
Cycl. - Adrammelech, according to 2Ki_17:31, was the name of a deity of Sepharvaim,
which was here borne by the king's son. ‫ר‬ ֶ‫צ‬ ֶ‫א‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫,שׁ‬ Sharezer, is said to mean “prince of fire,”
and was probably also borrowed from a deity. ‫ין‬ָ‫נ‬ ָ (Isa.) is wanting in our text, but is
supplied by the Masora in the Keri. The “land of Ararat” was a portion of the high land

141. of Armenia; according to Moses v. Chorene, the central portion of it with the mountains
of the same name (see at Gen_8:4). The slaying of Sennacherib is also confirmed by
Alex. Polyhistor, or rather Berosus (in Euseb. Chr. Armen. i. p. 43), who simply names,
however, a son Ardumusanus as having committed the murder, and merely mentions a
second Asordanius as viceroy of Babylon.
(Note: With regard to the statement of Abydenus in Euseb. l. c. p. 53, that
Sennacherib was followed by Nergilus, who was slain by his son Adrameles, who
again was murdered by his brother Axerdis, and its connection with Berosus and the
biblical account, see M. v. Niebuhr, Geschichte Assurs, pp. 361ff. Nergilus is
probably the same person as Sharezer, and Axerdis as Esarhaddon.)
The identity of the latter with Esarhaddon is beyond all doubt. The name ‫ּן‬ ַ‫ר־ח‬ ַ‫ס‬ ֵ‫,א‬
Esar-cha-don, consisting of two parts with the guttural inserted, the usual termination
in Assyrian and Babylonian, Assar-ach, is spelt ᅒσορδάν in the lxx, Σαχερδονός in Tobit -
probably formed from ᅒσερ-χ-δονοσορ by a transposition of the letters, - by Josephus
ᅒσσαραχόδδας, by Berosus (in the armen. Euseb.) Asordanes, by Abyden. ibid. Axerdis,
in the Canon Ptol. ᅒσαράδινος, and lastly in Ezr_4:10 mutilated into ‫ר‬ ַ ַ‫נ‬ ְ‫ס‬ፎ, Osnappar
(Chald.), and in the lxx ᅒσσεναφάρ; upon the Assyrian monuments, according to Oppert,
Assur-akh-iddin (cf. M. v. Niebuhr, Gesch. Ass. p. 38). The length of his reign is
uncertain. The statements of Berosus, that he was first of all viceroy of Babylon, and
then for eight years king of Assyria, and that of the Canon Ptol., that he reigned for
thirteen years in Babylon, are decidedly incorrect. Brandis (Rerum Assyr. tempora
emend. p. 41) conjectures that he reigned twenty-eight years, but in his work Ueber den
histor. Gewinn, pp. 73, 74, he suggests seventeen years. M. v. Niebuhr (ut sup. p. 77), on
the other hand, reckons his reign at twenty-four years.
BE SO , "2 Kings 19:37. He was worshipping in the house of isroch his god —
The God of Israel had done enough to convince him that he was the only true God,
yet he persists in his idolatry: justly then is his blood mingled with his sacrifices,
who will not be convinced, by so dear-bought a demonstration, of his folly in
worshipping idols. His sons smote him — Smote their own father, (whom they were
bound to protect at the hazard of their own lives,) and that when they saw him
engaged in the very act of his devotion!
Monstrous villany! But God was righteous in it. Justly are the sons suffered to rebel
against their father that begat them, when he was in rebellion against the God that
made him. They, whose children are undutiful to them, ought to consider whether
they have not been so to their Father in heaven. They escaped into the land of
Armenia — Which was a country most fit for that purpose, because it was near to
that part of Assyria, and was very mountainous, and inaccessible by armies; and the
people were stout and warlike, and constant enemies to the Assyrians. And Esar-
haddon his son reigned in his stead — Who, according to Ezra, (Ezra 4:2,) sent
great supplies to his new colony at Samaria; fearing, probably, lest Hezekiah should
improve the last great advantage to disturb his late conquest there.

142. ELLICOTT, "(37) And it came to pass.—Twenty years afterwards.
isroch.—This name appears to be corrupt. The LXX. gives νεσεραχ and ΄εσορὰχ;
Josephus, ἐν αράσαη, “in Araskè,” as if the name were that of the temple rather
than the god. The Hebrew version of Tobit () gives Dagon as the god. Dagon (Da-
kan, Da-gan-nu) was worshipped at an early date in Babylonia, and later in Assyria;
but no stress can be laid on the evidence of a late version of an Apochryphon.
Wellhausen thinks the original reading of the LXX. must have been άσσαρὰχ, which
seems to involve the name of Asshur, the supreme god of the Assyrians.
Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him.—The Assyrian monuments are
silent on the subject of the death of Sennacherib. For Adrammelech, see the ote on
2 Kings 17:31. Sharezer, in Assyrian, Sar-uçur, “protect the king,” is only part of a
name. The other half is found in Abydenus (apud Eusebius), who records that
Sennacherib was slain by his son Adramelos, and succeeded by ergilos (i.e.,
ergal), who was slain by Axerdis (Esarhaddon). From this it appears that the full
name was ergal-sar-uçur, “ ergal protect the king!” (the Greek eriglissar.) (See
Jeremiah 39:3; Jeremiah 39:13.)
And they escaped into the land of Armenia.—Ararat, the Assyrian Urartu, was the
name of the great plain through which the Araxes flowed. The battle in which
Esarhaddon defeated his brothers was fought somewhere in Little Armenia, near
the Euphrates, according to Schrader, who gives a fragment of an inscription
apparently relating thereto.
Esarhaddon.—The Assyrian Assur-aha-iddina, “Asshur gave a brother,” who
reigned 681-668 B.C.
ISBET, "THE DEATH OF SE ACHERIB
‘As he was worshipping in the house of isroch his god … his sons smote him with
the sword.’
2 Kings 19:37
If we consider (1) the character of Sennacherib’s life, and compare with that (2) the
character of his death, we shall discover both the reason and the instruction of the
text.
I. The character of his life.—Two things had distinguished it towards man—
excessive violence and much pride. This King Sennacherib, perhaps, of all the
Assyrian sovereigns, was the most successful, and so, the worst. Probably, therefore,
it is his portrait which one sees most frequently on the slabs. At any rate, they help
to furnish us with a true idea of his life. Take a succession of those causeless
conflicts, those captured cities, those butchered prisoners, those blinded sovereigns,
those streaming executions, and you have the deeds of his reign. Take, next, the
triumphant pride with which he exults over them, and you have the full criminality
of those deeds.

143. The tide of his oppression came at last to the land of Judea—especially dangerous
ground. For here he came in contact with a ‘peculiar people,’ the family which God
was educating for the benefit of mankind. This added both to the enormity and to
the importance of the crime. How to the enormity, if he did not know what he was
doing? Because he knew sufficient to know more. Sennacherib was well aware that
he was fighting not against Hezekiah, but Jehovah. This ought to have led him to
inquire. Instead of this, he says in effect, ‘Be the Lord Jehovah Who He may, I am
not to be checked.’
Consider, also, the effect of his language and conduct on the Jews. How did his sin
appear in their eyes? Considering their position and destiny, this was of importance
to the world. And, in their eyes, it is clear that his offence involved the most direct
and daring challenge to all they adored. Would the Lord’s House be overthrown, or
the waves be driven back? Would this great conqueror conquer Jehovah, or would
he, instead, and at last, himself he subdued? All the faith of Judah stood by, and all
the unborn faith of Christianity stood behind it, to observe the result.
II. The character of Sennacherib’s death.—Having seen the nature of his challenge,
we have now to notice how it was taken up. God replied, first, to his pride. ‘Who can
stand,’ the king had said, ‘before me?’ God answered this wicked boast, not in
battle, not by spoken rebuke, but, as it was prophesied, by a ‘blast.’ In the morning
the once mighty sovereign is in a camp of dead men. Where is the terrible army
which he had previously relied on? What has he now left to be proud of? What can
he do now, except return home, humiliated and alone?
God replied, next, to his violence and bloodshed. After the king had returned to his
own kingdom and city, the weapon which he had so often employed on others was
employed on himself. As the prophet had foretold, he died by the ‘sword.’ This man
of unnatural cruelty, with a horrible kind of fitness, died by unnatural hands. He
was slain by his sons, who, brothers in hatred and cruelty, and worthy inheritors of
his nature, consented together in this deed, and so doubled the guilt upon each. How
often we see this! The instruments of the sinner’s punishment brought into being by
himself!
Lastly, Jehovah answered the man’s blasphemy and profaneness. The challenge had
been delivered certainly within sight of God’s House, in the ears and language of the
people who sat on the wall. o answer came at the time. God, Who sometimes waits
to be gracious, often delays to destroy. But the answer, when it did come, was most
conclusive. In the king’s own city, in the temple of his own idol, while engaged in the
very act of worship, the blow descended upon him. If safe anywhere, he thought, it
was there; but there it was, on the contrary, just there, that he died. ‘Where is the
God’ he had boasted, ‘who can deliver from me?’ ‘Can thine own god protect
thyself?’ replied the silent stroke of God’s hand.
It is unnecessary to point out the importance of such a lesson to the Jews. So
significant an incident was well worthy of being commemorated among them. And,
if the story was all this to them, not less of course, is it to us, who are taught by their

144. experience, and are the inheritors of their faith. ‘Evil shall hunt the wicked to
overthrow him.’ We see (just as they did) the conclusion of such a ‘hunt’ in our
text—we see how God and the impenitent sinner must come face to face at the last—
how such a man prepares his own torments, and creates his own executioners, and
sends up against heaven the very bolts which come down again perforce on himself.
These are truths much forgotten, and, therefore, to be often insisted on, in these
days. There is a way of preaching the Saviour as though there was nothing from
which to be saved. This grand Old Testament history, rising up out of those distant
Assyrian ruins, may help to deliver us from such a delusion. Doubtless there is a
Saviour; but there is a need for Him, too; there is such an awful reality as ‘the wrath
to come.’ Doubtless there is a ‘City of Refuge’; but that is not all. The ‘avenger of
blood’ is behind us; and if we do not flee to it, we are lost.
Rev. W. S. Lewis.
Illustration
‘Contrast the two kings, Sennacherib and Hezekiah—the godless and the just.
Sennacherib, who sees himself in peril and obliged to retreat by the approach of
Tirhakah, does not on that account become more modest or more humble, but only
more obstinate and arrogant. That is the way with godless and depraved men. In
distress and peril, instead of bending their will and yielding to the will of God, they
only become more stubborn, insolent, and assuming. Hezekiah, on the contrary, who
was in unprecedented trouble and peril, was thereby drawn into more earnest
prayer. He humbled himself under the hand of God, and sought refuge in the Lord
alone. He went into the House of God and poured out his soul in prayer.’
PETT, "‘And it came about, as he was worshipping in the house of isroch his god,
that Adrammelech and Sharezer smote him with the sword, and they escaped into
the land of Ararat. And Esar-haddon his son reigned instead of him.’
While this assassination undoubtedly occurred twenty years later (in 681 BC) it was
an evidence not only of the long arm of YHWH but also of His control of history.
‘The mills of God grind slowly, but they grind exceeding small’. The point is that
YHWH had not fully finished with Sennacherib at Libnah. Having drawn him by
his nose to ineveh he finally (indirectly) arranged for his assassination. It was
poetic justice. What Sennacherib had sought to do to Jerusalem was done to him.
Some of the detail is corroborated in Babylonian records where the assassination of
Sennacherib, and the revenge gained by Esarhaddon his appointed heir is
described. It is clear that this was an attempted coup in order to prevent
Esarhaddon (if we believe Esarhaddon) succeeding to the throne. It was led by
Arda-mulissi (Adrammelech). But the coup failed and the perpetrators had to flee to
Urartu where they were overtaken by Esarhaddon’s vengeance.
isroch may well be a Hebrew representation of the Assyrian god Assur (sometimes
Asarak), although others associate it with usku (nswk). If that be the case then the
house of isroch would be the Temple of usku at ineveh. This assumes a waw

145. changed to a resh - with swk becoming srk - whether deliberate or accidental.
Although waw and resh are very similar in Hebrew, it is quite possible that the
change were deliberate. Such changes were frequently made, sometimes in order to
indicate contempt, and at others in order to bring out a specific idea. The names
Adrammelech and Sharezer probably signify Arad-Melek and ergal-shar-usur.
(Arad and ergal were two Assyrian deities). ote how Arad is also changed to
Adra, and ergal is dropped altogether. These changes are in order to demonstrate
that these deities are unimportant and that their names do not matter. On the other
hand a western Semitic name is a possibility for one of his sons and would not be
unlikely, for Sennacherib was married to, among others, aqi’a-Zakutu, a woman
of western Semitic origin. But Shar-usur means ‘he has protected the king’ and we
would expect it to be preceded by the name of a god. The late Greek writer
Abydenus refers to them as Adramelus and ergilus.
‘Ararat.’ That is Urartu as found in Assyrian inscriptions. It was in the
neighbourhood of Lake Van in Armenia and was at this time enjoying a brief
revival of strength after its battering by the Cimmerians. The sons clearly saw it as a
safe refuge from the wrath of Esarhaddon, Sennacherib’s heir.
The non-mention of the assassination in Assyrian records is a typical indication of
how bad news was ignored when it was just not palatable. Especially when he was
apparently assassinated between the statues of his own ‘protective’ gods. But the
inference is undoubtedly there when Esarhaddon says of his brothers ‘even drawing
the sword within ineveh against divine authority’, and as we have seen it was
described in the Babylonian Chronicle (‘on the twentieth of the month of Tebet his
son killed Sennacherib king of Assyria during a rebellion’) while Ashurbanipal does
speak of ‘the very figures of the protective deities between which they had smashed
Sennacherib, my own grandfather’).
PULPIT, "And it came to pass—seventeen or eighteen years afterwards; not "fifty-
five days" after, as the author of Tobit (1. 21) says—as he was worshipping in the
house of isroch his god. The word isroch offers considerable difficulty. It has
been connected with nesher ( ‫ר‬ֶ‫ֶשׁ‬‫נ‬ ), "eagle," and explained as a reference to the
eagle-headed genius sometimes seen in the Assyrian sculptures. But there is no
evidence that the genii were ever worshipped in Assyria, much less that they had
temples of their own, nor is any name resembling " isroch" attached to any of
them. The word itself is somewhat doubtful, and different manuscripts of the
Septuagint, here and in Isaiah 37:38, have the variants of asaraeh, Esorach,
Meserach, and Asarach, while Josephus has Araskas. Asarach might conceivably be
a strengthened form of Asshur; but the substitution of samech for shin is against
this explanation. Still, Asshur was certainly Sennacherib's favorite god, the deity
whom he principally worshipped. Josephus regards the name as belonging, not to
the god, but to the temple ( ἐν τῷ ἰδίῳ ναῷ αράσκῃ λεγοµένῳ), which is perhaps the
true solution of the difficulty. Translate—"as he was worshipping his god in the
house isroch." That Adram-melech and Sharezer his sons. Adram-melech is called
"Adrammeles" by Abydenus, "Ardamazanes" by Polyhistor. either form

146. resembles any known Assyrian name, but Adrammelech has a good Semitic
derivation (see the comment on 2 Kings 18:31). "Sharezer" is probably a shortened
form of ergal-shar-ozer (comp. "Shalman," Hosea 10:14), which was a name in use
at the time. Abydenus seems to have called him ergilus. Smote him with the sword.
So Josephus ('Ant. Jud.,' 10.1. § 5) and Mos. Chor. ('Hist. Armen.,' 1.22). A
mutilated inscription of Esarhaddon's seems to have described his war with his
brothers at the commencement of his reign, but the earlier part is wanting. And they
escaped into the land of Armenia; literally, of Ararat. The Hebrew "Ararat" is the
Assyrian "Ur-arda"—the ordinary name for the country about Lakes Van and
Urumiyeh. The name "Armenia" is not found earlier than the inscriptions of Darius
Hystaspis. And Esarhaddon his son reigned in his stead. Esarhaddon (the
Sarchedon of Tobit 1:21, and the Asshur-akh-iddin of the Assyrian inscriptions)
succeeded his father in B.C. 681, and was engaged for some time in a war with his
brothers on the Upper Euphrates, after which he made himself master of ineveh.
He reigned from B.C. 681 to B.C. 669, when he was succeeded by his son, Asshur-
bani-pal. Assyria reached the acme of her prosperity in his time.
BI, "His sons smote him with the sword.
The death of Sennacherib
Why are we told of this fact? Holy Scripture, as a general rule, passes over the lives and
deaths and exploits of the mere great men of the world in a most cursory way. Only one
incident, for example, is mentioned in the life of Herod the Great. Nothing is told us of
the Roman Emperor, Augustus, except his office and name; and not so much even as
that of his successor, Tiberius. Why then have we related to us so particularly the death
of this king, taking place, as it did, so far to one side of the usual path of God’s word? The
answer will be found by a reference to the past. If we consider,
I. The character of his life. Two things had distinguished it towards man—excessive
violence and much pride. You have seen pictures from those Assyrian palaces brought to
light again of late years. A favourite subject in most is the victorious king, commanding
his captives to be slain, or himself blinding them perhaps with his spear. These pictures,
we may be quite certain, are only too correct. What the artist portrayed with such vigour
had frequently been in his sight. That almost brutal bodily strength, those stiff and
barbarous adornments, those merciless and unrelenting features, were observable, in
that ferocious dynasty, to the life. And this Sennacherib, perhaps, of all these sovereigns,
was the most successful, and so, the worst.
II. The character of Sennacherib’s death.
1. We have seen the nature of his challenge. We have now to notice the reply. God
replied, first, to his pride. Who can stand, the king had said, before me? God
answered him, not in battle, not by spoken rebuke, but, as it was prophesied, by a
“blast.”
2. God replied, next, to his violence and bloodshed. “With what measure ye mete,”
etc. (Mat_7:2; see also Jdg_1:7; 1Sa_15:13; Mat_26:52). The same kind of rule seems
to have been observed in this case. After the king had returned to his own kingdom
and city, the weapon he had so often employed was employed on himself.
3. Jehovah answered the man’s blasphemy and profaneness. The challenge had been

147. delivered, if not within hearing, certainly within sight, of God’s house, in the ears and
language of the people who sat on the wall. No answer came at the time. God, who
sometimes waits to be gracious, often delays to destroy. (Homilist.).