1) Merodach-baladan, the king of Babylon, sent letters and a gift to Hezekiah, king of Judah, after hearing about his illness and recovery. 2) Scholars have struggled to reconcile this account with other biblical passages since Babylon was under Assyrian rule at this time. However, recent discoveries have shed light on a period where Merodach-baladan briefly usurped the Babylonian throne. 3) Merodach-baladan likely sent the envoy to form an alliance against their common enemy, the Assyrians, and inquire about the miracle of the sun dial's shadow reversing, which interested the Babylonians as astronomers.

1. ISAIAH 39 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Envoys From Babylon
1 At that time Marduk-Baladan son of Baladan king
of Babylon sent Hezekiah letters and a gift, because he
had heard of his illness and recovery.
1.BARNES, “At that time - That is, soon after his recovery; or after he had amassed great
wealth, and was surrounded with the evidences of prosperity 2Ch_32:27-31.
Merodach-baladan, the son of Balddan, king of Babylon - In the parallel place in
2Ki_20:12, this name is written Berodach-baladan, by a change of a single letter. Probably the
name was written and pronounced both ways. Merodach was an idol of the Babylonians
Jer_50:2 : ‘Babylon is taken, Bel is confounded, Merodach is confounded.’ This idol, according
to Gesenius, was probably the planet Mars, or Mars the god of war. To this god, as well as to
Saturn, the ancient Semitic nations offered human sacrifices (see Gesenius’ Lex. and Corem. in
loc.) The word ‘Balddan’ is also a compound word, and means ‘Bel is his lord.’ The name of this
idol, Merodach, was often incorporated into the proper names of kings, and of others. Thus we
have the names Evil-Merodach, Messi-Mordachus, Sisimor-dachus, Mardocentes, etc. In regard
to the statement of Isaiah in this verse, no small degree of difficulty has been felt by
commentators, and it is not until quite recently that the difficulty has been removed, and it has
been done in a manner to furnish an additional and most striking demonstration of the entire
and minute accuracy of the sacred narrative. The difficulty arose from several circnmstances:
1. This king of Babylon is nowhere else mentioned in sacred history.
2. The kingdom of Assyria was yet flourishing, and Babylon was one of its dependencies.
For, only nine years before, Salmanassar the Assyrian monarch is said to have transported the
inhabitants of Babylon to other parts 2Ki_17:24, and Manasseh, not many years after, was
carried captive to Babylon by the king of Assyria 2Ch_33:11. These instances incontestably prove
that at the time of Hezekiah, Babylon was dependent on the Assyrian kings. Who, then, it is
asked, was this Merodach-baladan, king of Babylon? If he was governor of that city, how could
he send an embassy of congratulation to the Jewish sovereign, then at war with his liege lord?
The canon of Ptolemy gives us no king of this name, nor does his chronology appear reeoncilable
with sacred history.
‘In this darkness and doubt,’ says Dr. Wiseman, ‘we must have continued, and the apparent
contradiction of this text to ether passages would have remaimed inexplicable, had not the
progress of modern Oriental study brought to light a document of the most venerable antiquity.

2. This is nothing less than a fragment of Berosus, preserved in the chronicle of Eusebius. This
interesting fragment informs us, that after Sennacherib’s brother had governed Babylon, as
Assyrian viceroy, Acises unjustly possessed himself of the supreme command. After thirty days
he was murdered by Merodach-baladan, who usurped the sovereignty for six months, when he
was in turn killed, and was succeeded by Elibus. But after three years, Sennacherib collected an
army, gave the usurper battle, conquered, and took him prisoner. Having once more reduced
Babylon to his obedience, he left his son Assordan, the Esarhaddon of Scripture, as governor of
the city.’
The only objection to this satement, or to the entire consistency of this fragment with the
Scripture narrative is, that Isaiah relates the murder of Sennacherib, and the succession of
Esarhaddon before Merodach-baladan’s embassy to Jerusalem. But to this Gesenius has well
replied, that this arrangement is followed by the prophet in order to conclude the history of the
Assyrian monarch, which has no further connection with the subject, so as not to return to it
again.
By this order, also, the prophecy of his murder is more closely connected with the history of its
fulfillment (Isa_37:7; compare Isa_37:38). And this solution, which supposes some interval to
have elapsed between Sennacherib’s return to Nineveh, and his death, is rendered probable by
the words of the text itself. ‘He went and returned, and dwelt in Nineveh; and it came to pass,’
etc. Isa_37:37-38)
Thus we have it certainly explained how there was a king, or rather a usurper in Babylon at
the time when it was really a provincial city of the Assyrian empire. Nothing was more probable
than that Merodach-baladan, having seized the throne, should endeavor to unite himself in
league and amity with the enemies of his master, against whom he had revolted. Hezekiah, who,
no less than himself, had thrown off the Assyrian yoke, and was in powerful alliance with the
king of Egypt, would be his first resource. No embassy, on the other hand, could be more
welcome to the Jewish monarch who had the common enemy in his neighborhood, and who
would be glad to see a division made in his favor by a rebellion in the very heart of that enemy’s
kingdom. Hence arose that excessive attention which he paid to the envoys of the usurper, and
which so offended Isaiah, or rather God, who, as a consequence, threatened the Babylonian
captivity (see Dr. Wiseman’s Lectures on Science and Revealed Religion, pp. 369-371 Ed. And.
1837).
Sent letters - The Septuagint adds, καᆳ πρέβεις kai presbeis - ‘and ambassadors.’
And a present - It was customary among the Orientals, as it is now, to send a valuable
present when one prince sent an embassage for any purpose to another. It is stated in
2Ch_32:31, that one object of their coming was to make inquiry ‘of the wonder that was done in
the land;’ that is, of the miracle in regard to the retrocession of the shadow on the sun-dial of
Ahaz. It is well known that, from the earliest periods, the Babylonians and Chaldeans were
distinguished for their attention to astronomy. Indeed, as a science, astronomy was first
cultivated on the plains of Chaldea; and there the knowledge of that science was scarcely
surpassed by any of the ancient nations. The report which they had heard of this miracle would,
therefore, be to them a matter of deep interest as an astronomical fact, and they came to make
inquiry into the exact truth of the report.
2. CLARKE, “At that time Merodach-baladan - This name is variously written in the
MSS. Berodach, Medorach, Medarech, and Medurach.
“And ambassadors” - The Septuagint add here και πρεσβεις; that is, ‫ומלאכים‬ umalachim. and
ambassadors; which word seems to be necessary to the sense, though omitted in the Hebrew

3. text both here and in the other copy, 2Ki_20:12. For the subsequent narration refers to them all
along, “these men, whence came they?” etc.; plainly supposing them to have been personally
mentioned before. See Houbigant.
3. GILL, “At that time Merodachbaladan, the son of Baladan, king of Babylon,....
The same is called Berodach, 2Ki_20:12 which, according to Hillerus (z), is the same with
Barmerodach, the son of Merodach; though it is generally took to be a slip of the scribe's there,
or a change of letter, as is common in names; he was either afterwards made a god of, or he had
his name from an idol of the Babylonians so called, Jer_50:1, which signifies "a pure lord."
Jerom observes it, as the opinion of the Jews, that he was the father of Nebuchadnezzar, which
is not probable. Kimchi takes him to be the same with Esarhaddon, the son of Sennacherib; but
he was king of Assyria, not of Babylon; it is most likely that he is the Assyrian king, whom
Ptolemy in his canon calls Mardocempad; his other name Baladan, which is compounded of two
words, "bal" and "adan", and both of them signify lord, he took from his father, for he is called
the son of Baladan; by Josephus (a) he is called Baladas, who says that Berosus the Chaldean
makes mention of a king of Babylon by this name. Bishop Usher (b) thinks he is the same that is
called by profane writers Belesis, and Belessus, and Nabonasarus; his name consists of the
names of three idols, Merodach, an idol of the Babylonians, as before observed, and Bal, the
contraction of Baal, and Adon, the same with Adonis:
he sent letters and a present to Hezekiah; by his ambassadors, which was always usual in
embassies and visits, and still is in the eastern countries; the purport of which embassy was to
congratulate him upon his recovery, and to inquire concerning the miracle that was wrought in
his land; either the destruction of the Assyrian army in one night by an angel, or rather the sun's
going back ten degrees, 2Ch_32:31 and, as Josephus (c) says, to enter into an alliance with him;
and this seems to be the true reason of sending these ambassadors; or the king of Babylon had
lately fallen off from the Assyrian monarch, and therefore was desirous of entering into a league
with Hezekiah the king of Assyria's enemy, in order to strengthen himself against him, and
secure his liberty he had just gained:
for he had heard that he had been sick, and was recovered; which both gives a reason
of the embassy, and points at the time when it was; very probably the same year of his sickness
and recovery.
4. HENRY 1-4, “Hence we may learn these lessons: - 1. That humanity and common civility
teach us to rejoice with our friends and neighbours when they rejoice, and to congratulate them
on their deliverances, and particularly their recoveries from sickness. The king of Babylon,
having heard that Hezekiah had been sick, and had recovered, sent to compliment him upon the
occasion. If Christians be unneighbourly, heathens will shame them. 2. It becomes us to give
honour to those whom our God puts honour upon. The sun was the Babylonians' god; and when
they understood that it was with a respect to Hezekiah that the sun, to their great surprise, went
back ten degrees, on such a day, they thought themselves obliged to do Hezekiah all the honour
they could. Will all people thus walk in the name of their God, and shall not we? 3. Those that do
not value good men for their goodness may yet be brought to pay them great respect by other
inducements, and for the sake of their secular interests. The king of Babylon made his court to

4. Hezekiah, not because he was pious, but because he was prosperous, as the Philistines coveted
an alliance with Isaac because they saw the Lord was with him, Gen_26:28. The king of Babylon
was an enemy to the king of Assyria, and therefore was fond of Hezekiah, because the Assyrians
were so much weakened by the power of his God. 4. It is a hard matter to keep the spirit low in
the midst of great advancements. Hezekiah is an instance of it: he was a wise and good man, but,
when one miracle after another was wrought in his favour, he found it hard to keep his heart
from being lifted up, nay, a little thing then drew him into the snare of pride. Blessed Paul
himself needed a thorn in the flesh, to keep him from being lifted up with the abundance of
revelations. 5. We have need to watch over our own spirits when we are showing our friends our
possessions, what we have done and what we have got, that we be not proud of them, as if our
might or our merit had purchased and procured us this wealth. When we look upon our
enjoyments, and have occasion to speak of them, it must be with humble acknowledgements of
our own unworthiness and thankful acknowledgements of God's goodness, with a just value for
the achievements of others and with an expectation of losses and changes, not dreaming that our
mountain stands so strong but that it may soon be moved. 6. It is a great weakness for good men
to value themselves much upon the civil respects that are paid them (yea, though there be
something particular and uncommon in them) by the children of this world, and to be fond of
their acquaintance. What a poor thing was it for Hezekiah, whom God has so dignified, to be
thus over proud of the respect paid him by a heathen prince as if that added any thing to him!
We ought to return the courtesies of such with interest, but not to be proud of them. 7. We must
expect to be called to an account for the workings of our pride, though they are secret, and in
such instances as we thought there was no harm in; and therefore we ought to call ourselves to
an account for them; and when we have had company with us that have paid us respect, and
been pleased with their entertainment, and commended every thing, we ought to be jealous over
ourselves with a godly jealousy lest our hearts have been lifted up. As far as we see cause to
suspect that this sly and subtle sin of pride has insinuated itself into our breasts, and mingled
itself with our conversation, let us be ashamed of it, and, as Hezekiah here, ingenuously confess
it and take shame to ourselves for it.
5. JAMISON, “Hence we may learn these lessons: - 1. That humanity and common civility
teach us to rejoice with our friends and neighbours when they rejoice, and to congratulate them
on their deliverances, and particularly their recoveries from sickness. The king of Babylon,
having heard that Hezekiah had been sick, and had recovered, sent to compliment him upon the
occasion. If Christians be unneighbourly, heathens will shame them. 2. It becomes us to give
honour to those whom our God puts honour upon. The sun was the Babylonians' god; and when
they understood that it was with a respect to Hezekiah that the sun, to their great surprise, went
back ten degrees, on such a day, they thought themselves obliged to do Hezekiah all the honour
they could. Will all people thus walk in the name of their God, and shall not we? 3. Those that do
not value good men for their goodness may yet be brought to pay them great respect by other
inducements, and for the sake of their secular interests. The king of Babylon made his court to
Hezekiah, not because he was pious, but because he was prosperous, as the Philistines coveted
an alliance with Isaac because they saw the Lord was with him, Gen_26:28. The king of Babylon
was an enemy to the king of Assyria, and therefore was fond of Hezekiah, because the Assyrians
were so much weakened by the power of his God. 4. It is a hard matter to keep the spirit low in
the midst of great advancements. Hezekiah is an instance of it: he was a wise and good man, but,

5. when one miracle after another was wrought in his favour, he found it hard to keep his heart
from being lifted up, nay, a little thing then drew him into the snare of pride. Blessed Paul
himself needed a thorn in the flesh, to keep him from being lifted up with the abundance of
revelations. 5. We have need to watch over our own spirits when we are showing our friends our
possessions, what we have done and what we have got, that we be not proud of them, as if our
might or our merit had purchased and procured us this wealth. When we look upon our
enjoyments, and have occasion to speak of them, it must be with humble acknowledgements of
our own unworthiness and thankful acknowledgements of God's goodness, with a just value for
the achievements of others and with an expectation of losses and changes, not dreaming that our
mountain stands so strong but that it may soon be moved. 6. It is a great weakness for good men
to value themselves much upon the civil respects that are paid them (yea, though there be
something particular and uncommon in them) by the children of this world, and to be fond of
their acquaintance. What a poor thing was it for Hezekiah, whom God has so dignified, to be
thus over proud of the respect paid him by a heathen prince as if that added any thing to him!
We ought to return the courtesies of such with interest, but not to be proud of them. 7. We must
expect to be called to an account for the workings of our pride, though they are secret, and in
such instances as we thought there was no harm in; and therefore we ought to call ourselves to
an account for them; and when we have had company with us that have paid us respect, and
been pleased with their entertainment, and commended every thing, we ought to be jealous over
ourselves with a godly jealousy lest our hearts have been lifted up. As far as we see cause to
suspect that this sly and subtle sin of pride has insinuated itself into our breasts, and mingled
itself with our conversation, let us be ashamed of it, and, as Hezekiah here, ingenuously confess
it and take shame to ourselves for it.
6. K&D, “From this point onwards the text of the book of Kings (2Ki_20:12-19, cf.,
2Ch_32:24-31) runs parallel to the text before us. Babylonian ambassadors have an interview
with the convalescent king of Judah. “At that time Merodach Bal'adan (K. Berodach Bal'adan),
son of Bal'adan king of Babel, sent writings and a present to Hizkiyahu, and heard (K. for he
had heard) that he (K. Hizkiyahu) had been sick, and was restored again.” The two texts here
share the original text between them. Instead of the unnatural ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ִ ַ‫ו‬ (which would link the cause
on to the effect, as in 2Sa_14:5), we should read ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ָ‫שׁ‬ ‫י‬ ִⅴ, whereas ‫זַק‬ ֶ‫ח‬ֶ ַ‫ו‬ in our text appears to be
the genuine word out of which ‫חזקיהו‬ in the other text has sprung, although it is not
indispensable, as ָ‫ל‬ ָ‫ח‬‫ה‬ has a pluperfect sense. In a similar manner the name of the king of
Babylon is given here correctly as ַ‫ּאד‬‫ר‬ ְ‫מ‬ְ‫ך‬ (Nissel, ַ‫ּד‬‫ר‬ ְ‫מ‬ְ‫ך‬ without ‫,א‬ as in Jer_50:2), whilst the book
of Kings has ַ‫ּאד‬‫ר‬ ְ (according to the Masora with ‫,)א‬ probably occasioned by the other name Bal'a
dan, which begins with Beth. It cannot be maintained that the words ben Bal'adan are a mistake;
at the same time, Bal'adan (Jos. Baladas) evidently cannot be a name by itself if Me
ro'dakh Bal'ada
n signifies “Merodach (the Babylonian Bel or Jupiter)
(Note: Rawlinson, Monarchies, i. 169.)
filium dedit.”
(Note: Oppert, Expédition, ii. 355.)
In the Canon Ptol. Mardokempados is preceded by a Jugaeus; and the inscriptions, according to
G. Rawlinson, Mon. ii. 395, indicate Merodach-Baladan as the “son of Yakin.” They relate that

6. the latter acknowledged Tiglath-pileser as his feudal lord; that, after reigning twelve years as a
vassal, he rose in rebellion against Sargon in league with the Susanians and the Aramaean tribes
above Babylonia, and lost everything except his life; that he afterwards rebelled against
Sennacherib in conjunction with a Chaldean prince named Susub, just after Sennacherib had
returned from his first
(Note: The inscription is mention two campaigns.)
Judaean campaign to Nineveh; and that having been utterly defeated, he took refuge in an
island of the Persian Gulf. He does not make his appearance any more; but Susub escaped from
his place of concealment, and being supported by the Susanians and certain Aramaean tribes,
fought a long and bloody battle with Sennacherib on the Lower Tigris. this battle he lost, and
Nebo-som-iskun, a son of Merodach Baladan, fell into the hands of the conqueror. In the midst
of these details, as given by the inscriptions, the statement of the Can. Ptol. may still be
maintained, according to which the twelve years of Mardokempados (a contraction, as Ewald
supposes, of Mardokempalados) commence with the year 721. From this point onwards the
biblical and extra-biblical accounts dovetail together; whereas in Polyhistor (Eus. chron. arm.)
the following Babylonian rulers are mentioned: “a brother of Sennacherib, Acises, who reigned
hardly a month; Merodach Baladan, six months; Elibus into the third year; Asordan,
Sennacherib's son, who was made king after the defeat of Elibus.” Now, as the Can. Ptolem. also
gives a Belibos with a three years' reign, the identity of Mardokempados and Marodach
Baladan is indisputable. The Can. Ptol. seems only to take into account his legitimate reign as a
vassal, and Polyhistor (from Berosus) only his last act of rebellion. At the same time, this is very
far from removing all the difficulties that lie in the way of a reconciliation, more especially the
chronological difficulties. Rawlinson, who places the commencement of the (second) Judaean
campaign in the year 698, and therefore transfers it to the end of the twenty-ninth year of
Hezekiah's reign instead of the middle, sets himself in opposition not only to Isa_36:1, but also
to Isa_38:5 and 2Ki_18:2. According to the biblical accounts, as compared with the Can. Ptol.,
the embassy must have been sent by Merodach Baladan during the period of his reign as vassal,
which commenced in the year 721. Apparently it had only the harmless object of congratulating
the king upon his recovery (and also, according to 2Ch_32:31, of making some inquiry, in the
interests of Chaldean astrology, into the mopheth connected with the sun-dial); but it certainly
had also the secret political object of making common cause with Hezekiah to throw off the
Assyrian yoke. All that can be maintained with certainty beside this is, that the embassy cannot
have been sent before the fourteenth year of Hezekiah's reign; for as he reigned twenty-nine
years, his illness must have occurred, according to Isa_38:5, in the fourteenth year itself, i.e., the
seventh year of Mardokempados. Such questions as whether the embassy came before or after
the Assyrian catastrophe, which was till in the future at the time referred to in Isa_38:4-6, or
whether it came before or after the payment of the compensation money to Sennacherib
(2Ki_18:14-16), are open to dispute. In all probability it took place immediately before the
Assyrian campaign,
(Note: A reviewer in the Theol. L. Bl. 1857, p. 12, inquires: “How could the prophet have
known that all that Hezekiah showed to the Babylonian ambassador would one day be
brought to Babylon, when in a very short time these treasures would all have been given by
Hezekiah to the king of Assyria?” Answer: The prophecy is so expressed in Isa_39:6-7, that
this intervening occurrence does not prejudice its truth at all.)
as Hezekiah was still able to show off the abundance of his riches to the Babylonian
ambassadors.

7. 7. CALVIN, “1.At that time. Some think that this was the first king of the Chaldee nation; for his
father, Baladin, had held the government over the Babylonians without the title of king. This Merodach,
therefore, after having reigned twelve years, subdued the Assyrians, and made them tributaries to the
Chaldeans; for it is a mistake to suppose that the war was begun by Nebuchadnezzar. It is indeed
possible that he completed the subjugation of them; but it is probable that already they were half
subdued, so that nothing else remained than to establish the royal power gained by the victory of his
predecessor.
Sent letters and a present to Hezekiah Although the Prophet simply relates that messengers were sent,
yet it is of importance to observe that this was done craftily by the Babylonian, in order to flatter and
cajole Hezekiah. He was at this time threatening the Assyrians, whom he knew to be justly disliked by the
Jews on account of their continual wars; and therefore, in order to obtain Hezekiah as an ally and partisan
in the war which was now waging against him, endeavors to obtain his friendship by indirect methods.
The mind of the good king was corrupted by ambition, so that he too eagerly accepted the false
blandishments of the tyrant, and swallowed the bait.
The pretence was, to congratulate Hezekiah on having recovered from his disease. And yet sacred
history appears to assign another reason, which was, that Merodach was induced by a miracle.
(2Ch_32:31.) There is certainly no doubt that the report of that prodigy, which took place when the sun
went back, was yew widely spread; and it might have produced an impression on many nations. Yet it can
hardly be believed that a heathen had any other object in view than to draw Hezekiah into his net; but
since, by a remarkable sign, God had shewn that he cared for the safety of Hezekiah, and since wicked
men commonly apply to a base purpose all the proofs of God’ favor, Merodach thought that, if he could
obtain the alliance of Hezekiah, he would carry on war under the protection and favor of heaven. (98)
The consequence was, that he sent messengers to Hezekiah with presents, for the sake of expressing
his good-will; for he wished to obtain his favor, believing that his friendship would be useful and
advantageous to him; and his intention was, to make use of him afterwards against the Assyrians, to
whom he knew well that the Jews entertained a deadly hatred. Such are the designs of kings and princes,
to transact their affairs by fraud and craftiness, and bysome means to gain as many allies as possible,
that they may employ their exertions against their enemies
(98) “Que la guerre qu’ entreprendoit de faire auroit heureuse issue, et seroit benite du ciel.” “ war which
he carried on would have a successful result, and would be blest of heaven.”
8. PULPIT, “This chapter is parallel with 2Ki_20:12-19, and scarcely differs from it at all. Verse I has the
additional words, "and was recovered;" 2Ki_20:2, the phrase, "was glad of them," for "hearkened unto
them;" 2Ki_20:5, "Lord of hosts," for "Lord" simply; and 2Ki_20:8 makes Hezekiah's last utterance an
observation instead of a question. Otherwise the two accounts are almost word for word the same. Both
relate the novel and important fact of ambassadors being sent to Hezekiah by the King of Babylon, shortly
after his illness, and tell of the reception which he gave them, of the message which Isaiah was
commissioned to deliver to him from God in consequence, and of Hezekiah's acquiescence in the terms
of the message when it was conveyed to him. The Isaianic authorship of the chapter is much disputed,
but solely from reluctance to admit that a prophet could predict the subjugation of Judaea by Babylon
more than a century before the event.

8. Isa_39:1
At that time. The embassy probably followed the illness of Hezekiah within a year. Merodach-Baladan.
This is a more correct form than the "Berodach-Baladan" of 2Ki_20:12. The name is one common to
several Babylonian kings, as to one who reigned about b.c. 1325, to a second who is placed about b.c.
900, and to a third who was contemporary with the Assyrian kings Sargon and Sennacherib. It is this last
of whom we have a notice in the present passage. He appears first in the Assyrian inscriptions as a petty
prince, ruling a small tract upon the seacoast, about the mouths of the Tigris and Euphrates. Tiglath-
Pileser takes tribute front him about b.c. 744. In b.c. 721 we find him advanced to a more prominent
position. Taking advantage of the troubles of the time, he shakes off the Assyrians yoke, and makes
himself King of Babylon, where he has a reign of twelve years—from b.c. 721 to b.c. 709. This reign is
recognized by Sargon in his inscriptions, and by the Greek chronologist, Ptolemy, in his 'Canon.' In b.c.
709 Sargon leads an expedition against him, and drives him out of Babylonia into the coast-tract,
Chaldea, where he besieges him in his ancestral town Bit-Yakin, takes the city, and makes him prisoner.
On the death of Sargon, in b.c. 705, Merodach-Baladan escapes from confinement, and hastens once
more to Babylon, where he is acknowledged as king, and has a second reign, which lasts six months
(Alex. Polyhist. ap. Euseb; 'Chronicles Can.,' 1. 5. § 1). He is then driven from the country by
Sennacherib, and, after various vicissitudes, obliged to become a refugee in Elam. The name of
Merodach-Baladau is composed of the three elements, Merodach (equivalent to "Marduk"), the
god, bal or pal, "son," and iddina, "has given," and thus signifies "Merodach has given (me) a son." The
son of Baladan. "Baladan" is scarcely a possible Babylonian name. "Beladan" would, however, be quite
possible, being a name formed on the model of Ishtardddin, Ninip-iddin, Ilu-iddin, etc. And the corruption
of Beladan into Baladan would be easy. Merodach-Baladan III. is called by Sargon "the son of Yakin;" but
this is perhaps a tribal or local rather than a personal name. Compare Jehu's appellation of "son of
Omri". Sent letters and a present to Hezekiah. Hezekiah's fourteenth year was b.c. 714. Merodach-
Baladan had then been King of Babylon for eight years, and, knowing that he might at any time be
attacked by Sargon, was naturally looking out for alliances with other powers, which Assyria equally
threatened. He had recently concluded a treaty with Khumbanigas, King of Elam, and had obtained the
support of several of the Aramaean tribes on the Euphrates. He now apparently thought that Judaea,
which Sargon was also threatening (ch. 38:6), might be induced to join him. Hezekiah's illness and "the
wonder done in the land" (2Ch_32:31) furnished him with pretexts for an embassy, which probably had
more serious objects than either congratulation or scientific inquiry.
9. W. KELLY, “This chapter, it would seem, owes its place here chiefly as a basis for the very weighty
place which Babylon (whither Judah was going into captivity) holds in the controversy which Jehovah
had with His people. Hezekiah had not walked softly, when the ambassadors of Merodach-baladan
came to congratulate him, but had sunk to their level. Wherefore Jehovah sent the threat of sure
judgement. All that David's son in his vanity had spread before the eyes of the strangers should be
swept into the city of confusion, the chastiser of Jerusalem's idolatry; only it should not fall in the
days of the pious king, notwithstanding his failure.
"At that time Merodach-baladan the son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent a letter and a present to
Hezekiah; for he heard that he had been sick, and was recovered. And Hezekiah was glad of them, and
showed them the house of his precious things, the silver and the gold and the spices and the precious
oil, and all the house of his armour, and all that was found in his treasures: there was nothing in his
house, nor in all his dominion, that Hezekiah showed them not. Then came Isaiah the prophet unto
king Hezekiah, and said unto him, What said these men? And from whence came they to thee? And
Hezekiah said, They are come from a far country to me, from Babylon. Then said he, What have they
seen in thine house? And Hezekiah answered, All that [is] in my house have they seen: there is
nothing among my treasures that I have not shown them. Then said Isaiah to Hezekiah, Hear the word
of Jehovah of hosts. Behold, days come, when all that [is] in thy house, and [that] which thy fathers
have laid up in store until this day, shall be carried to Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith Jehovah.

9. And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, whom thou shalt beget, shall they take away; and they
shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon. Then said Hezekiah unto Isaiah, Good [is] the
word of Jehovah which thou hast spoken. And he said, For there shall be peace and truth in my days"
(vv. 1-8).
The chapter is of special interest as the first plain indication in later times of a power destined to
overthrow the mighty kingdom of Assyria, to be then set up by the God of heaven, after the conquest
of Jerusalem, in the imperial seat of the world as thenceforward an unrivalled king of kings. It was as
yet the struggle of a province to be independent. This very man, whose name has been recognised in
the Assyrian inscriptions, as well as in a fragment of Polyhistor (Euseb. Chron. Can. i. v. 1), and in
Ptolemy's Canon, "sustained two contests with the power of Assyria, was twice defeated, and twice
compelled to fly his country. His sons, supported by the king of Elam or Susiana, continued the
struggle, and are found among the adversaries of Esar-Haddon, Sennacherib's son and successor. His
grandsons contend against Asshurbani-pal, the son of Esar-Haddon. It is not till the fourth generation
that the family seems to become extinct; and the Babylonians, having no champion to maintain their
cause, contentedly acquiesce in the yoke of the stranger" (Canon Rawlinson in Smith's Dictionary of
the Bible, ii. 332).
This outline by a competent hand may serve to show what an enormous gap of circumstances yet
more than of time severed the Babylon of Nebuchadnezzar from him who sent his envoys to
Hezekiah, still more from that Babylon whose downfall from the haughtiest seat on earth was
announced long before by Isaiah in two of his most remarkable "burdens" (Isa. 13 - 14 and Isa. 21).
But all was proved the more to be before God, Who deigned to disclose the end from the beginning.
On every ground Hezekiah should have known better; whereas he forgot even the lessons of his
sickness, as well as of God's dealing with Sennacherib's hosts, indulged in the things of men, and sunk
to the level of a worldly politician. But at least the solemn rebuke of Jehovah through Isaiah recalled
him humbly to accept the divine word with his wonted piety and thanksgiving, of which rationalism
has no experience, and so with evil eye sees nothing but despicable egotism in a soul that judged self
and bowed to God.
Reviewing the parenthetic history of Isa. 36-39 the believer can but acknowledge the divine wisdom
of their place between the first great division of the prophecy and the last. None could be so suited to
the work of introducing them at this point than the inspired waiter of the entire book. Although
strictly historical, they are very much more, for they are instinct with prophecy, and, on the judicial
check given to Assyria, prepare for the prominence given ere long to Babylon, little as this was then
expected, as the agent for sweeping Judah and the house of David into captivity. But they adumbrate
also the Son of David and David's Lord, Who, instead of being sick and healed would go down, for
God's glory and in His grace beyond all thought of man, Into death most real as an offering for sin, yet
rise again and make good an everlasting covenant for the blessing of Israel and all the earth, when
kings shall stop their mouths at Him, once marred more than any, then exalted and high exceedingly
Striking it is to read in Isa_35:4, "Behold, your God! vengeance cometh" (which in no way
characterises the gospel but the future kingdom fully), "the recompense of God. He will come himself
and save you"; and in Isa_40:9-10, "Behold your God! Behold, the Lord Jehovah will come with might,
and his arm shall rule for him; behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him." The
same Spirit, the same hand wrote both passages.

10. 10. COFFMAN, “Here we have the conclusion of the historical section, relating Hezekiah's vanity in the
display of his wealth to Merodach-Baladan's ambassadors, the Lord's rebuke through Isaiah, and the
predictive prophecy that Babylon would be the power that would capture Jerusalem, loot the city, and
deport the royal family to Babylon. The short chapter ends with the submissive resignation of Hezekiah to
the fate of his beloved city and the personal rejoicing that he would not live to see the disastrous
prophecy fulfilled. Also, he found great comfort in the assured time-lapse before the promised fulfillment
of it.
The great thing in the chapter, of course, is the clear, graphic prediction of the Babylonian captivity, which
in consideration of Isaiah's oft-repeated mention of "the remnant" that would return, conclusively shows
that this prophecy of the Babylonian captivity had long been anticipated; but only here is it boldly and
emphatically declared. To be sure, many critical writers refuse to admit that Isaiah wrote this; but as
Rawlinson pointed out, this denial is caused, "Solely by their reluctance to admit that a prophet could
predict the subjugation of Judah by Babylon more than a century before the event."[1]
The judicial
darkening of the human intelligence is clearly visible in such illogical unwillingness to see predictive
prophecy here. The prophecy is wedged into the historical situation so skillfully, carries so many dramatic
particulars, and so certainly belongs to the century preceding the events prophesied, that there cannot
possibly be any reasons whatever for alleging that the prophecy is a "post eventum" prediction.
As Hailey suggested, the only difficult thing about this chapter is the problem of dating it. Rawlinson set it
in the year 714 B.C.[2]
Cheyne located it in the era of Sargon's invasion;[3]
D. J. Wiseman placed it in the
year 705 B.C.[4]
We fully agree with Hailey who wrote that, "Determining dates for events in this chapter is
beyond our ability."[5]
Nevertheless, it is appropriate to ask, "What difference does it make"? We are
certain of the approximate time, and the exact date makes no difference at all.
Despite the uncertainty regarding the exact dates involved here, there are a few facts which we believe
shed light on exactly why this uncertainty persists. There is hardly any event in these historical chapters
that can be nailed down chronologically with absolute certainty.
"Merodach-baladan, the son of Baladan, king of Babylon ..." (Isaiah 39:1). Cheyne believed that there
were two monarchs of this name, one ruling in the period of Sargon's invasions of Judah, and the other
during the period of Sennacherib's invasions. "Merodach-baladan was not an uncommon name of
Babylonian kings."[6]
Thus, there is the problem of just "which" Merodach-baladan sent this embassy to
Hezekiah. Furthermore, Merodach-baladan's kingship of Babylon was ended in 710 B.C., when Sargon
removed him.[7]
It should be noted in this connection that our text flatly declares that Merodach-baladan
was "king of Babylon."
Now, take the reign of Hezekiah. Neither the beginning of it, nor the end of it, is actually dated in
scripture. "It seems best to assume that Hezekiah was co-regent with Ahaz from circa 729 B.C.,
becoming sole king circa 716 B.C."[8]
The end of Hezekiah's reign is just as uncertain. "His son Manasseh was probably, "Co-regent with him
from 696 to 686 B.C."[9]
Even the invasions of Judah are not at all certainly documented as to their dates. In fact, Sargon, in
inscriptions claims to have conquered Judah, but the Bible makes no mention of such a conquest.
In view of all these facts, there is little wonder that scholars do not know exactly what date to assign to
some given event in these chapters. For example, in the "sixth year of the reign" of some monarch means
nothing at all unless the knowledge of just "when" that reign started is also available.
After all, the big thing here is not exactly when the events of this chapter occurred, but that they did occur;
and that they precipitated the great prophecy of the Babylonian captivity of Israel. Here we turn our
attention to the text itself.

11. 11. Hezekiah's failure in ch. 39 is not the result of any fault that was peculiar to him alone. Any of us
would fail in exactly the same way, if deprived of the Lord's presence. As the Lord told his disciples,
after commanding them to abide in him, “without me ye can do nothing” (Joh 15:5).
God choose for this test the most righteous king of the Old Covenant, one who “clave to the LORD,
and departed not from following him, but kept his commandments” (1 Kings 18:6), in a way unlike any
king of Judah before or since. This passage is thus a cornerstone for the teaching of the new covenant.
It shows us the limits of the old covenant, and the tremendous power of the new, the linkage between
the indwelling Holy Spirit and our ability to walk in God's statutes and keep his commandments.
07/06/10 Copyright © 2010, H. Van Dyke Parunak. All Rights Reserved. Page 17
May be freely reprinted noncommercially with attribution and citation of www.cyber-chapel.org .
12. BI, “Merodach-baladan
Marduk-apal-iddina, son of Yakin, is the Chaldean ruler who more than any other vassal
embittered the life of the Assyrian suzerain, because as a rival suzerain he was always
renouncing obedience to one whom he felt to be a disgrace to the ancient renown of his country.
Lenormant, in his Anfangen der Cultur, has devoted a beautiful essay to him under the title, “A
Babylonian Patriot of the Eighth Century B.C.” The chief matter told about him by the
monuments is this: In the year 731 he did homage at Sapiya to the Assyrian ruler Tiglath-pileser
IV. In Sargon’s first year (721) he, who was properly king of South Babylonia only, brought also
North Chaldea into the range of his rule; war ensued, but although beaten, he still maintained
himself on the throne, and from that time count the twelve years given to him by the Ptolemaic
canon as king of Babylon. In Sargon’s twelfth year (710) he shook off the Assyrian yoke; only a
year afterwards (709) Sargon succeeded in capturing and burning to ashes the fort Dur-Yakin,
into which he had thrown himself; he himself, being required to surrender unconditionally,
vanished. (F. Delitzsch, D. D.)
Marduk-apal-iddina
The name means: Marduk (written also Maruduk) has given a son. (F. Delitzsch, D. D.)
The embassy to Hezekiah
The embassy to Hezekiah was in all probability one of those undertaken by Merodach-Baladan
for the purpose of providing himself with allies. Inasmuch now as there was at this time in
Judah a party straining its utmost to combine all elements antagonistic to Assyria, there is
nothing unreasonable in supposing that some understanding was arrived at between the
ambassadors from Babylon and Judah. Upon this view of the circumstances of the occasion,
Hezekiah’s motive in displaying his treasures will have been to satisfy the embassy that he had
resources at his disposal; and Isaiah’s rebuke gains in significance and force. (Prof. S. R. Driver,
D. D.)
Hezekiah and the embassy from Babylon

12. I. AFFLICTION OF BODY AND SORROW OF MIND ARE PRONE TO BE FORGOTTEN AND
UNIMPROVED BY THOSE WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED THEM 2Ch_32:25). The historian
says of Hezekiah, that “his heart was lifted up.” The very deliverances which God wrought for
him worked upon his vanity—the special mercies he had received elated his mind. What are we
without grace?
II. HEZEKIAH AT THIS TIME WAS ASSAILED BY PECULIAR TEMPTATIONS TO VANITY
AND AMBITION (2Ch_32:31)
III. HEZEKIAH PRESENTS AN INSTANCE OF STRANGE FORGETFULNESS OF DUTY TO
OTHERS BY NOT IMPARTING TO THEM RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE.
IV. HEZEKIAH WAS CONVINCED OF HIS SIN BY THE SPECIAL MESSAGE SENT TO HIM
BY GOD THROUGH THE PROPHET.
V. ALMIGHTY GOD, IN THE MIDST OF ALL HUMAN AFFAIRS AND DESPITE THE
CONDUCT OF INDIVIDUALS, IS CARRYING OUT HIS OWN INFINITE COUNSELS OF
WISDOM AND OF LOVE. (D. K. Shoebotham.)
Isaiah 39:4
What have they seen in thine house?
The disciple at home
1. The parties of whom the prophets inquired, “What have they seen?” were Babylonians.
Foreigners, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, ignorant of the true God, and,
therefore, parties before whom it was specially important to exhibit nothing which was
calculated to bring dishonour upon God. These strangers might have been greatly edified
had they remarked a deeply chastened and humble spirit in the king. There is nothing so
greatly hinders the propagation of the Christianity of England among foreigners as that
practical irreligion which they observe among the English.
2. The subject may suggest to us some general reflections upon the kind of aspect which the
house of a professing Christian should present to any stranger as a man of the world. What
would such a man naturally expect to see in a Christian’s house? Clearly that which he looks
for in other houses—namely, a general style and conformity with the particular profession
orcharacter of the inmates. He would reckon upon finding there, what St. Paul calls “the
Church that is in thy house”—the pervading air of heavenly-mindedness, and the symptoms
of devotional exercises in all its sanctified “chambers of imagery”—“the treasures” of
parental piety, of filial obedience and decorum; a well-ordered household extending its
influence and sanction, like the sacred comprehensions of the law of the Sabbath, from the
man himself, to his son and daughter, manservant and maidservant, and even cattle and
stranger. Night and morning, it would seem to him to be the natural and consistent rule, that
the offering of prayer and reading of the Word should be there presented to “the God of all
the families of the earth.” In every room and chamber of the house, the ready Bible should
suggest by its silent presence the privilege of secret study of the Holy Scriptures; some good
books, to the use of edifying, should strew the tables, like little trophies, in incidental
evidence of the triumph of religion in that place; the peace, and cheerfulness, and mutual
harmony of Christian influence should breathe its airs from Heaven on every happy,
thankful heart; the music of habitual concord should sound, like an AEolian psalm, in every
aisle of that homely church; and family love, the instinctive antepast of the universal love of
Heaven, should spread the sweet odour of its charity, like Aaron’s off, from the head of the

13. house down to the very skirts of the living garment with which his blessed heart is clothed.
This is what the worldly man should see in the house of the Christian; but, alas! is it always
to be seen there?
1. “What have they seen in thine house?” Have they seen there the spirit of the world, in the
shape of expensive apparel, or costly furniture, or ornaments beyond your means or your
station in society? A Christian man may adorn his house or apparel his person in moderation
with the accustomed decencies of life and even the beautiful things of art, for Christianity is
no enemy of taste nor patron of vulgarity. But when a man of the world observes in a
Christian professor that inordinate affectation of style and sumptuousness in furniture and
dress, which leaves no external mark of difference between “him that serveth God and him
that serveth Him not,” then such a professing Christian may well tremble for the stability of
his principles. The ambassadors of the spiritual Babylon are visiting him, and they will have
to report to their dark master that there is something to seize in the household of his divided
heart. The remark is equally applicable to the humbler classes. Sin is sin, and vanity is
vanity, whether it assume a vulgar or a refined shape.
2. “What have they seen in thine house?” Have they seen the continual eagerness to grasp
and hoard up money, the absorption of every abused faculty of the mind and every
overstrained energy of the body to extend business, increase capital, and multiply
speculations, though at the expense of a neglected soul and a forsaken God? And is this done
in the face of better convictions of duty and responsibility? Is the heart becoming hardened
as the very metal it grasps so eagerly? There is much in the proper and becoming habits of
Christian men which is calculated to aid their success in life, but this success should not be
permitted to become a snare to them.
3. “What have they seen in thine house?” Have they marked the professing disciple of the
self-denying religion of Jesus yielding to a habitual fretfulness and irritability at every
trifling trial of temper, keeping wife, children, and servants in a perpetual ferment tending to
the ultimate exacerbation of every temper in the household? Have they seen the man at one
time discoursing in quiet tone and serious terms on the meek and lowly one, “who, when He
was reviled, reviled not again,” at another time terrifying all around him with unrighteous
ebullitions of anger? The Babylonians, the strangers, see it, and shake their heads, saying,
“Deliver me from that man’s religion, if it cannot even curb his temper”; and thus a
stumbling-block is cast in the way, that offends some poor, “weak brother for whom Christ
died.” The children in such a house learn to despise a religion with the remembrance of their
early terrors and discomforts; and the servants, or others employed about it, thank God that
they have escaped their poor master’s supposed hypocrisy, even at the sacrifice of his real
Christianity. Whereas if, on the other hand, the irascible spirit were to be seen only to be
subdued before them; if its occasional outbreak is timely checked, and obviously striven
against, and candidly mourned over, if they mark the man struggling against the buffetings
of his infirmity, and honestly and earnestly doing painful violence to his besetment, there is
a natural sympathy kindled in their hearts which God may vouchsafe to deepen into the
conviction that the religion must be real which could generate such an inward contest, and
must be influential, too, which could obtain such I victory.
4. “What have they seen in thine house? Have they seen the immoderate banqueting, excess
of wine, revellings, and such like”?
5. “What have they seen in thine house?” Perhaps some of you have been mercifully restored
from a serious illness: what did those about you see as the effect of your being spared? Did
they see a thankful man, a subdued man, a man bearing the spiritual marks of the stripes of
the rod of chastisement, more in earnest for God, less inclined to murmur at his lot, to cavil
at religious obligations, or depreciate spiritual privileges, or to lower the personal standard

14. of Christian life and conversation? If the world saw this in your house, you have got good
yourself and done the world good; if they saw it not, in whatever degree it was not the visible
effect upon you, in that proportion you have yourself forfeited the grace of your personal
dispensation, missed and abused an ordinance of the Lord, and wronged your brotherhood.
6. And you, heads of families, who make no profession of religion, who have no particular
anxieties at stake either way, “what have they seen in your houses?” Have they marked no
family prayer, no godly conversation, no effort with the means of moral and evangelical
influence? Have they seen children growing up in carelessness and irreligion, whose parental
indulgence provoked that destructive judgment which the real love and tenderness of a
timely discipline might have averted? If so, consider, you who have the solemn responsibility
of a family of immortal souls laid upon you, how Hezekiah’s folly was visited upon his
children, and tremble at the prospect of the heartrending anguish you may be laying up in
store for yourselves in the spectacle of an ungodly and abandoned household.
7. “What have they seen in thine house?” Well, no matter what they have seen; be resolved
by the grace of God as to what shall be seen for the time to come. (J. B. Owen, M. A.)
2 Hezekiah received the envoys gladly and showed
them what was in his storehouses—the silver, the gold,
the spices, the fine olive oil—his entire armory and
everything found among his treasures. There was
nothing in his palace or in all his kingdom that
Hezekiah did not show them.
1.BARNES, “And Hezekiah was glad of them - Possibly he regarded himself as flattered
by an embassage from so great a distance, and so celebrated a place as Babylon. It is certain that
he erred in some way in regard to the manner in which he received them, and especially in the
ostentatious display which he made of his treasures 2Ch_32:31.
And showed them the house of his precious things - The Septuagint renders this, Νεχ
ωθᇰ Nechotha - ‘The house of Nechotha,’ retaining the Hebrew word. The Margin, ‘Spicery.’ The
Hebrew word (‫נכתה‬ ne
kotoh) properly means, according to Gesenius, a contusion, a breaking to
pieces; hence, aromatic powder, or spices reduced to powder, and then any kind of aromatics.

15. Hence, the word here may mean ‘the house of his spices,’ as Aquila, Symmachus, and the
Vulgate translate it; or ‘a treasury,’ ‘a storehouse,’ as the Chaldee and the Syriac here render it. It
was undoubtedly a treasure or store house; but it may have taken its name from the fact, that it
was mainly employed as a place in which to keep spices, unguents, and the various kinds of
aromatics which were used either in public worship, or for the purposes of luxury.
The silver and the gold - Possibly Hezekiah may have obtained no small quantity of silver
and gold from what was left in the camp of the Assyrians. It is certain that after he was delivered
from danger he was signally prospered, and became one of the most wealthy and magnificent
monarchs of the east; 2Ch_32:27-28 : ‘And Hezekiah had exceeding much riches and honor;
and he made himself treasuries for silver and for gold, and for precious stones, and for spices,
and for shields, and for all manner of pleasant jewels; storehouses also for the increase of grain,
and wine, and oil; and stalls for all manner of beasts, and cotes for flocks.’ A considerable part of
this wealth arose from presents which were made to him, and from gifts which were made for
the service of the temple 2Ch_32:23.
And the precious ointment - Used for anointing kings and priests. Or more probably the
ointment here referred to was that which was in more common use, to anoint the body after
bathing, or when they were to appear in public.
And all the house of his armor - Margin, ‘Vessels,’ or ‘instruments,’ or ‘jewels.’ The word
‫כלי‬ ke
lı y denotes any article of furniture, utensil, or vessel; any trapping, instrument, or tool;
and any implement of war, weapon, or arms. Probably it here refers to the latter, and denotes
shields, swords, spears, such as were used in war, and such as Hezekiah had prepared for
defense. The phrase is equivalent to our word arsenal (compare 2Ch_32:27). Solomon had an
extensive arsenal of this description 1Ki_10:16-17, and it is probable that these were regarded as
a part of the necessary defense of the kingdom.
Nor in all his dominion - Everything that contributed to the defense, the wealth, or the
magnificence of his kingdom he showed to them. The purpose for which Hezekiah thus showed
them all that he had, was evidently display. In 2Ch_32:25, it is stated that ‘Hezekiah rendered
not again according to the benefit done unto him, for his heart was lifted up;’ and in 2Ch_32:31,
it is said, that in regard to this transaction, ‘God left him, to try him, that he might know all that
was in his heart.’ The result showed how much God hates pride, and how certainly he will
punish all forms of ostentation.
2. PULPIT, “Hezekiah was glad of them. A more pregnant phrase than that which replaces it in 2
Kings, "hearkened unto them." Hezekiah, like Merodach-Baladan, was looking out for allies, and "was
glad," thinking that in Babylon he had found one which might render him important service. Sargon's
promptness, however, frustrated his hopes. In b.c. 709 that prince, regarding Merodach-Baladan's
proceedings as constituting a real danger to his kingdom, made a great expedition into Babylonia,
defeated Merodach-Baladan, and took him prisoner, after which he had himself crowned King of Babylon,
and during the remainder of his life ruled both countries.Showed them the house of his precious
things; i.e. his treasury, or store-house. The treasuries of ancient monarchs were actual store-
chambers, in which large quantities of the precious metals and valuable objects of various kinds were
deposited (see Herod; 2:121; Arrian, 'Exp. Alex.,' 2Ki_3:16, 2Ki_3:18, etc.). The flourishing state of the
treasury is an indication that the events here narrated are anterior to the great surrender of treasure to
Sennacherib. All the house of his armour (comp. Isa_22:8). If a warlike alliance was contemplated, it
was as important to show the possession of arms as of treasures. There was nothing in his house, nor in

16. all his dominion, that Hezekiah showed them not. We must allow for Oriental hyperbole. The meaning is,
that, without any reserve, Hezekiah showed all that he could show.
3. GILL, “And Hezekiah was glad of them,.... Not of the presents, for he was very rich, and
stood in no need of them, nor does it appear that he was covetous; but of the ambassadors, and
of the honour that was done him in having such sent to him from such a prince; his sin was vain
glory; and because he might hope that such a powerful ally would be a security to him against
any after attempt of the king of Assyria, in which he was guilty of another sin, vain confidence,
or trusting in an arm of flesh; and being lifted up with pride that his name was become so
famous abroad, and that he had got so good an ally: and in order to ingratiate himself the more
into his esteem and favour, he "showed" these his ambassadors
the house of his precious things; where his jewels and precious stones lay, and where were
the silver and the gold; large quantities of not only which he and his predecessors had laid
up, which had been very lately greatly exhausted by the demand of three hundred talents of
silver, and thirty talents of gold, by the king of Assyria; to answer which Hezekiah had given all
the silver in the temple, and in the treasures of the king's house, and was so drove by necessity,
that he cut off the gold from the doors and pillars of the temple, 2Ki_18:14, so that it might be
reasonable to ask, how came he so soon by all this treasure? it is possible that some part of the
royal treasure might be unalienable, and he might have since received presents from his own
nobles, and from foreign princes; but this was chiefly from the spoils found in the Assyrian
camp, after the angel had made such a slaughter of them, 2Ki_19:35, as a learned (d) man
observes:
and the spices, and precious ointment; which, as Jarchi notes, some say were oil of olives;
others the balsam which grew in Jericho; great quantities of this, with other spices, were laid up
in store for use, as occasion should require:
and all the house of his armour; where were all his military stores, shields, swords, spears,
arrows, &c.:
and all that was found in his treasures; in other places:
there was nothing in his house; in his royal palace:
nor in all his dominion; that was rare, curious, and valuable:
that Hezekiah showed them not; even the book of the law, as Jarchi says.
4. PULPIT 2-8, “Carnal joy the prelude to spiritual sorrow.
The Babylonian embassy, a grand affair doubtless, comprising envoys in their rich clothing and with their
jewelled arms, camels bearing valuable gifts, prancing steeds, and a vast train of slaves and attendants,
was to Hezekiah an inspiriting fact, a circumstance that gladdened and excited him. With his imperfect
knowledge of geography, the embassy seemed to him to come from the furthest limits of the earth's
circuit—from a remote, almost from an unknown, region (Isa_39:3). He had hitherto not thought of
attempting negotiations with any power further distant than Egypt. If the far-off Babylon courted his
alliance, where might he not expect to find friends? from what remote quarter might he not look for
overtures? What wonder that "his heart was lifted up" (2Ch_32:25)? that he rejoiced, though with a carnal

17. joy, that had no substantial spiritual basis? Isaiah had warned him against all "arms of flesh." Isaiah had
bidden him "trust in the Lord Jehovah," and in Jehovah only. No doubt he had been especially warned
against Egypt; but all the reasons that were valid against Egypt were valid against Babylon also. Babylon
was as idolatrous as Egypt; Babylon was as licentious as Egypt; Babylon was as selfish in her aims as
Egypt. Hezekiah's joy was thus a purely carnal joy, a rejoicing in his own honour, and in the prospect of
material aid from a tainted source. In the midst of his joy the prophet announces himself. "What said
those men?" he sternly asks. "Whence came they? What have they seen? Ah! they have seen thy
treasures, have they? All of them? Thou thinkest those treasures will make them thy friends. Nay; they
will make them thy bitterest enemies. It will not be forgotten at Babylon that thy temple and thy treasure-
house are worth plundering. The days will come when all the wealth of thy house, and of the temple, and
of the holy city will be carried off to enrich that city. The days will come when thou wilt have disgrace from
Babylon instead of honour. Thy descendants—they that have issued from thy loins—will serve the King of
Babylon, will be eunuchs, doing the menial offices in his palace." In a moment the king's joy is gone, and
replaced by sorrow. It is with a saddened spirit that he submits, and acquiesces in his punishment. "Good
is the word of the Lord"—he spares, even when he punishes; he chastens me with a milder chastening
than I deserved at his hands—"in his wrath he remembereth mercy" (Hab_3:2).
5. JAMISON, “glad — It was not the mere act, but the spirit of it, which provoked God
(2Ch_32:25), “Hezekiah rendered not again according to the benefit done unto him, for his
heart was lifted up”; also compare 2Ch_32:31. God “tries” His people at different times by
different ways, bringing out “all that is in their heart,” to show them its varied corruptions.
Compare David in a similar case (1Ch_21:1-8).
precious things — rather, “the house of his (aromatic) spices”; from a Hebrew root, to
“break to pieces,” as is done to aromatics.
silver ... gold — partly obtained from the Assyrian camp (Isa_33:4); partly from presents
(2Ch_32:23, 2Ch_32:27-29).
precious ointment — used for anointing kings and priests.
armour — or else vessels in general; the parallel passage (2Ch_32:27), “treasuries ... for
shields,” favors English Version. His arsenal.
6. K&D, ““And Hezekiah rejoiced (K. heard, which is quite inappropriate) concerning them,
and showed them (K. all) his storehouse: the silver, and the gold, and the spices, and the fine
oil (hasshamen,K. shemen), and all his arsenal, and all that was in his treasures: there was
nothing that Hezekiah had not shown them, in his house or in all his kingdom.” Although there
were spices kept in ‫נכת‬ ‫ית‬ ֵ , ‫נכת‬ is not equivalent to ‫ּאת‬‫כ‬ְ‫נ‬ (from ‫א‬ ָ‫כ‬ָ‫,נ‬ to break to pieces, to
pulverize), which is applied to gum-dragon and other drugs, but is the niphal ‫ּת‬‫כ‬ָ‫נ‬ from ‫וּת‬ⅴ (piel,
Arab. kayyata, to cram full, related to ‫וּס‬ⅴ (‫יס‬ ִⅴ), ‫ס‬ ַ‫כ‬ָ‫נ‬ (‫ס‬ ֶ‫כ‬ֶ‫,)נ‬ and possibly also to ‫ם‬ ַ‫ת‬ ָⅴ, katama (Hitzig,
Knobel, Fürst), and consequently it does not mean “the house of his spices,” as Aquila,
Symmachus, and the Vulgate render it, but his “treasure-house or storehouse” (Targ., Syr.,
Saad.). It differs, however, from beth keilim, the wood house of Lebanon (Isa_22:8). He was able
to show them all that was worth seeing “in his whole kingdom,” inasmuch as it was all
concentrated in Jerusalem, the capital.

18. 7. CALVIN, “2.And Hezekiah was glad The Prophet performs the part of the historian; for he merely
relates what Hezekiah did, and will afterwards explain why he did it; that is, that Hezekiah, blinded by
ambition, made an ostentatious display to the messengers; while he censures an improper kind of joy,
which afterwards gave rise to an eager desire of treating them in a friendly manner.
Any person who shall barely read this history will con-elude that Hezekiah did nothing wrong; for it was an
act of humanity to give a cheerful and hospitable reception to the messengers, and to shew them every
proof of good-will; and it would have been the act of a barbarian to disdain those who had come to him on
a friendly visit, and to spurn the friendship of so powerful a king. But still there lurked in his heart a desire
of vain ostentation; for he wished to make a favorable display of himself, that the Babylonian might be led
to understand that this alliance would not be without advantage to him, and might ascertain this from his
wealth, and forces, and weapons of war. He deserved to be reproved on another ground, that he directed
his mind to foreign and unlawful aid, and to that extent denied honor to God, whom he had recently
known to be his deliverer on two occasions; for otherwise the Prophet would not have censured this act
so severely.
This is a remarkable example; and it teaches us that nothing’ is more dangerous than to be blinded by
prosperity. It proves also the truth of the old proverb, that “ is more difficult to bear prosperity than
adversity;” for when everything goes on to our wish, we grow wanton and insolent, and cannot be kept in
the path of duty by any advices or threatenings. When this happened to Hezekiah, on whom the Prophet
had bestowed the high commendation, that “ fear of God was his treasure,” (Isa_33:6,) we ought to be
very much afraid of falling into the same dangers. He is carried away by idle boasting, and does not
remember that formerly he was half-dead, and that God rescued him from death by an extraordinary
miracle. Formerly he made a solemn promise that he would continually celebrate the praises of God in
the assembly of the godly, (Isa_38:20,) and now, when he sees that his friendship is sought, and that a
powerful monarch sends to salute him, he forgets God and the benefits which he had received from him.
When we see that this good king’ so quickly falls and is carried away by ambition, let us learn to lay upon
ourselves the restraint of modesty, which will keep us constantly and diligently in the fear of God.
8. PULPIT, “The sin of presuming.
"And Hezekiah was glad of them, and showed them the house of his precious things." Presumption is
taking the ordering of our lives into our own hands, without consulting God or remembering our
dependence on him. It is the sin to which kings and rulers and men of masterful dispositions are specially
exposed. Therefore David prayed so earnestly, "Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let
them not have dominion over me." The singular thing, and the suggestive thing, in the case of Hezekiah is
that he took the insulting Assyrian letter and at once spread it before the Lord. Trouble drove him at once
to God, but flattery disarmed him, and he acted without consulting God. Not without good reason is it
urged that prosperity is a severer test of character than adversity; that "woe is unto us when all men
speak well of us;" and that added years after a serious illness are oftentimes a very doubtful blessing. The
writer of the Chronicles (2Ch_32:25) helps us to read the heart of Hezekiah. He says that Isaiah was
displeased with him because "his heart was lifted up." Vanity is indicated in this exhibition of all his
treasures. Cheyne finds all the excuse that can be found for Hezekiah. He says, 'Was it merely vanity
which prompted the king thus to throw open his treasuries? Surely not. It was to satisfy the emissaries of
Baladan that Hezekiah had considerable resources, and was worthy of becoming his ally on equal terms.
To Isaiah, as a prophet of Jehovah, the king's fault was principally in allowing himself to be courted by a
foreign potentate, as if it were not true that 'Jehovah had founded Zion,' and that 'the afflicted of his

19. people could find refuge therein.'" Matthew Henry says of Hezekiah, "He was a wise and good man, but
when one miracle after another was wrought in his favour, he found it hard to keep his heart from being
lifted up, nay, a little thing then drew him into the snare of pride. Blessed Paul himself needed a thorn in
the flesh to keep him from being lifted up with the abundance of revelations." The sin of presumption is a
more common, and a more serious, sill than we are wont to consider it. It is one that finds frequent
illustration in Holy Scripture. The sin that lost Eden was presumption. Jacob's grasping at the birthright
was presumption. Moses' smiting the rock twice was presumption. Saul's forcing himself to sacrifice when
Samuel tarried was presumption. David's numbering the people was presumption. Peter striking off the
ear of Malchus was presumption. These are but specimen cases, readily recalled. A careful estimate of
many sins will reveal presumption at the root of them. Still, if we read our lives aright, we shall find that we
are constantly presuming on what God would have us to do, and acting without making due inquiries of
him.
I. TEMPTATIONS TO PRESUMPTION.
1. These come partly out of natural disposition. There is an evil of over-meekness; sometimes we find a
lack of energy and self-assertion which prevents men from impressing themselves on any sphere of life
which they may be called to occupy. But there is much more frequently the evil of over-assertion, that
belongs to energetic, enterprising natures, that take life with a strong grip. Many men cannot wait. They
form their judgments quickly, and want them immediately acted on. And such persons are constantly
tempted to presume. If good men, they act first, and ask of God the approval of their actions. Oftentimes
this strong self-willedness is a hereditary disposition, which the Christian spirit has to battle with and
overcome. Oftentimes it is sadly fostered by the pettings of childhood, and the false education of youth;
and then it is the serious confirmed evil that is hardly overcome even in a lifelong struggle.
2. The temptations come partly out of circumstances. In the desperateness of business pressure, the
almost bankrupt man presumes on his friends, acts wilfully, and even brings others down in his ruin. But
circumstances of success prove even greater temptations. Nebuchadnezzar is the type of the presumers,
as he stands in the midst of his city, saying, "Is not this great Babylon, that I have built?"
II. SIN OF PRESUMPTION.
1. It is sin against man's creaturehood. Man is not an independent being. He cannot stand alone. "No
man can keep alive his own soul." He has nothing of his own. Then he has no right to presume.
2. It is a sin against a man's childhood. Parents have to repress this spirit in their children, because it is
subversive of true home-life. And so must the great Father.
3. It is especially sin in man as redeemed. Because, as redeemed, man is the humbled sinner, who is
made a monument of grace, and ought to walk humbly with God, always coming after him, and never
pressing on before. The evil of this sin is seen in the deterioration of Christian character which follows
whenever it is indulged.
III. PUNISHMENT OF PRESUMPTION. Usually this comes by the failure of the self-willed plans; or the
sad results that follow the self willed course that is taken. In the case of Hezekiah God sends a vision of
what will follow out of that embassy of which the king was so proud. It was the thin end of a wedge.
Driven home, by-and-by, it meant the destruction of Jerusalem, and the captivity of Judah, by those very
Babylonians. Hezekiah boasted in order to get a worldly alliance. His boastings excited cupidity, which

20. presently led to the carrying away of the exhibited treasures. "Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed
lest he fall" into the sin of presumption.—R.T.
9. COFFMAN, “The proper understanding of what happened here must be derived from what is recorded
in 2 Chronicles 32:25,26. After his illness, "Hezekiah rendered not again according to the benefits done
unto him; for his heart was lifted up: therefore there was wrath upon him, and upon Judah and Jerusalem.
Notwithstanding Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart, both he and the inhabitants of
Jerusalem, so that the wrath of Jehovah came not upon them in the days of Hezekiah."
Hailey's comment here is appropriate:
"Hezekiah's ancestor, David, had yielded to the lust of the flesh; and Solomon had yielded to vanity and
pomp; and now Hezekiah, one of Judah's most admired kings, had yielded to flattery and pride. The flesh
is terribly weak."[10]
Human beings are simply not structured to be rulers. The old proverb that "Power corrupts; and total
power corrupts totally" has grown out of the distilled experience of mankind throughout the ages.
The flourishing state of Hezekiah's treasury cannot help us with the problem of the date, because, his
treasury was full, not only before Sennacherib exacted that huge tribute, but again after the recovery of all
that loot and more upon the death of the Assyrian army.
Before leaving these two verses, it should be noted that the occasion of this visit from Babylon was the
recovery of Hezekiah, also an inquiry into that astronomical miracle which had accompanied it (2
Chronicles 32:31). This strongly indicates that the miracle was not a worldwide event, but one localized in
Jerusalem. Behind this, however, the scheme of the Babylonian monarch to form an alliance with
Hezekiah looms as the principal reason for the visit.
10. 2 And Hezekiah was glad of them,--That is, he found pleasure in them. They were the object of his
joy. It's not hard to understand why, since it would be very flattering to receive an embassy from such a
far distance.
and shewed them the house of his precious things, the silver, and the gold, and the spices, and the
precious ointment, and all the house of his armour, and all that was found in his treasures: there
was nothing in his house, nor in all his dominion, that Hezekiah shewed them not.--The Chronicler
offers an expanded description of the prosperity that Hezekiah enjoyed:
2Ch 32:27-29 And Hezekiah had exceeding much riches and honour: and he made himself
treasuries for silver, and for gold, and for precious stones, and for spices, and for shields, and
for all manner of pleasant jewels; 28 Storehouses also for the increase of corn, and wine, and

21. oil; and stalls for all manner of beasts, and cotes for flocks. 29 Moreover he provided him cities,
and possessions of flocks and herds in abundance: for God had given him substance very much.
The wealth he had available to show the Babylonians is taken by some as evidence that the illness and
subsequent visit preceded the Assyrian invasion, since
2Ki 18:15-16 Hezekiah gave [Sennacherib] all the silver that was found in the house of the
LORD, and in the treasures of the king's house. 16 At that time did Hezekiah cut off the gold
from the doors of the temple of the LORD, and from the pillars which Hezekiah king of Judah
had overlaid, and gave it to the king of Assyria.
But note:
• The only item Hezekiah took from his personal treasury at that time was silver. The gold came
from the temple, which he did not show to the Babylonians.
• Hezekiah would have been enriched by the spoil of the defeated Assyrian army, as promised in
Isaiah ch. 33:
33:1 when thou shalt cease to spoil, thou shalt be spoiled;
33:4 And your spoil shall be gathered like the gathering of the caterpiller:
33:23 then is the prey of a great spoil divided; the lame take the prey.
• In addition, 2 Chr 32:23 describes the gifts brought by other nations after the defeat of Assyria
2Ch 32:22-23 Thus the LORD saved Hezekiah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem from the
hand of Sennacherib the king of Assyria, and from the hand of all other, and guided them
on every side. 23 And many brought gifts unto the LORD to Jerusalem, and
presents to Hezekiah king of Judah: so that he was magnified in the sight of all
nations from thenceforth.
In fact, if his riches included the spoil of the Assyrians and the tribute of other nations, he would
naturally be motivated even more strongly to show it to the ambassadors. “This ring came from the
hand of an Assyrian general; these golden bowls were a personal present from the Egyptian Pharaoh.”

22. A godly person always seeks parallels between his life and episodes that the Holy Spirit has recorded in
07/06/10 Copyright © 2010, H. Van Dyke Parunak. All Rights Reserved. Page 18
May be freely reprinted noncommercially with attribution and citation of www.cyber-chapel.org .Isaiah 38-
39
Compare first the motives for the visits. In both cases, the visitor has heard of something
remarkable:
Solomon's wisdom, the wonder in Jerusalem of the reversed shadow in connection with
Hezekiah's
healing. The historian in 1 Kings 10 adds his own note that Solomon's fame actually
belongs to the
Lord, because Solomon's wisdom was due to the Lord (1 Kings 3:12). In both cases the
visitors come
with an open heart, impressed at the news they have heard and eager for an explanation.
Next, compare what the king shows his visitor. Solomon, like Hezekiah, shows his visitor all
his
glory. But the climax of the tour has no parallel in Hezekiah's history: “his ascent by which
he went up
unto the house of the LORD” (v. 5). Solomon crowned the entire exhibit by drawing her
attention to the
fact that he was a worshiper of the Lord. He gave the Lord the glory for his
accomplishments.
How easy it would have been for Hezekiah to follow Solomon's example. Yet, without God's
presence,
the flesh takes over. He behaves as though God were completely out of the picture. The
Chronicler
says,
2 Ch 32:25b his heart was lifted up:
Hezekiah's focus on his wealth, and his neglect to glorify the Lord, is symptomatic of his
moral failing.
After recounting his healing, the Chronicler records,

23. 2Ch 32:25a But Hezekiah rendered not again according to the benefit done unto
recompense
incumbent upon him;
The word rendered “benefit” (‫)גמול‬ deserves further attention. In general, it means
“recompense,” and it
comes from a verb that means “repay.” Only twice in the OT8
, here and Ps 103:3, is it translated
““““benefit,” as though it described an unmotivated blessing from God. But in both cases it
makes
excellent sense to retain the more common meaning “recompense,” referring to what we
owe him in
exchange for his blessings.
• In Ps 103:2, the Psalmist is reminding himself to bless the Lord, and not to forget the
repayment
of thanks that he owes God, the one who has bestowed on him the blessings of vv. 3-5. The
definite participles of 3-5 describe, not the “benefits,” but the benefactor one to whom
“recompense” is due. “Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his recompenses [the
recompenses that you owe to him], the one who forgives all your iniquities, who heals all
your
diseases, ....”
• In our passage, the sense “recompense” rather than “benefit” is confirmed by two details.
◦ The preposition “unto” (‫)על‬ is very commonly used to express an obligation or duty, in the
sense of “incumbent upon.”9
So “the benefit unto him” is naturally read, “the recompense
incumbent upon him,” “the recompense that he owed.”
◦ This meaning is reinforced by the association of the noun with the verb “render” ‫שׁוב‬ C.
Everywhere else (Ps. 28:4; 94:2; Prov. 12:14; Lam. 3:64; Joel 4:4,7; Obad. 1:15), ‫גמול‬ in this

24. association means “repayment, recompense.”
We cannot earn God's blessings. There is no sense in which he owes them to us. They are
never a
recompense to us. However, they place us under a powerful obligation. Hezekiah owed God
a debt for
the healing he had experienced. He had an opportunity to repay that obligation by exalting
the Lord
before the ambassadors. Instead, he glorified only himself.
3 Then Isaiah the prophet went to King Hezekiah and
asked, “What did those men say, and where did they
come from?” “From a distant land,” Hezekiah replied.
“They came to me from Babylon.”
1.BARNES, “Then came Isaiah - Isaiah was accustomed to declare the will of God most
freely to monarchs (see Isa. 7)
What said these men? - What proposition have they made? What is the design of their
coming? It is implied in the question that there had been some improper communication from
them. To this question Hezekiah returned no answer.
And from whence came they? - It was doubtless known in Jerusalem that ambassadors
had come, but it would not be likely to be known from what country they had come.
From a far country - Probably this was said in order to palliate and excuse his conducts, by
intimating to the prophet that it was proper to show respectful attention to foreigners, and that
he had done nothing more than was demanded by the laws of hospitality and kindness.
2. PULPIT, “Then came Isaiah the prophet. Isaiah comes, unsent for, to rebuke the king. This bold
attitude was one which prophets were entitled to take by virtue of their office, which called upon them to
bear testimony, even before kings, and to have no respect of persons. A similar fearlessness is apparent
in Isa_7:1-17, where the king with whom Isaiah has to deal was the wicked Ahaz. What said these

25. men? "These men" is contemptuous. The demand to know what they said is almost without parallel.
Diplomacy, if it is to be successful, must be secret; and Isaiah can scarcely have been surprised that his
searching question received no answer. But he was zealous of God's honour, and anxious that Hezekiah
should rely on no "arm of flesh," whether it were Egypt or Babylon. Such dependence would straiten
God's arm, and prevent him from giving the aid that he was otherwise prepared to give. The desire of the
prophet is to warn the king of the danger which he runs by coquetting with human helpers. From whence
came they? Isaiah does not ask this question for the sake of information, Doubtless all Jerusalem was
agog to see the strange envoys "from a far country," who had now for the first time penetrated to the city
of David. All knew whence they had come, and suspected why. Isaiah asks, to force the king to a
confession, on which he may base a prophecy and a warning. And Hezekiah said, They are come from
a far country. Embassies from distant lands to their courts are made a con-slant subject of boasting by
the Assyrian monarchs. Hezekiah, perhaps, is "lifted up" (2Ch_32:25) by the honour paid him, and
intends to impress Isaiah with a sense of his greatness—"The men are come all the way from Babylon to
see me!"
3. GILL, “Then came Isaiah the prophet unto King Hezekiah,.... Quickly after the
ambassadors had been with the king, and he had shown them all his treasures; the prophet did
not come of himself, but was sent by the Lord, though he was not sent for by the king; in the
time of his distress and illness he could send for him, but now being well, and in prosperity, he
forgot the prophet, to send for him, and have his advice, how he should behave towards these
men, as not to offend the Lord:
and said unto him, what said these men? what was their errand to thee, and their business
to thee? what did they communicate to thee, or request of thee?
and from whence came they unto thee? from what country? these questions the prophet
put to the king, not as ignorant of the men, and their business, and country, but in order to have
everything from the king himself, and to lead on to further conversation with him on these
things:
and Hezekiah said, they are come from a far country unto me, even from Babylon;
he makes no answer to the first question, but at once replies to the second, as being what his
heart was lifted up with; that ambassadors should come to him from a very distant country, and
from so famous and renowned a place as Babylon; which showed that his name was great in
foreign parts, and was in high esteem in distant countries, and even so great a prince as the king
of Babylon courted his friendship.
4. COFFMAN, “It seems nearly incredible that Hezekiah should have been so naive as to have turned
his palace wrong-side out to display it to any foreign power, much less to one such as Babylon. There
seems to be a very pleased vanity exhibited by Hezekiah here as he tells Isaiah that "This embassy has
come all the way from Babylon to see me!" "Thus the faith of Hezekiah, proof against the heaviest blows,
melts at the touch of flattery; and the world claims another victim by its friendship."[11]
5. JAMISON, “What ... whence — implying that any proposition coming from the
idolatrous enemies of God, with whom Israel was forbidden to form alliance, should have been
received with anything but gladness. Reliance on Babylon, rather than on God, was a similar sin
to the previous reliance on Egypt (Isaiah 30:1-31:9).
far country — implying that he had done nothing more than was proper in showing
attention to strangers “from a far country.”

26. 6. K&D 3-8, “The consequences of this coqueting with the children of the stranger, and this
vain display, are pointed out in Isa_39:3-8 : “Then came Isaiah the prophet to king Hizkiyahu,
and said to him, What have these men said, and whence come they to thee? Hizkiyahu said,
They came to me from a far country (K. omits to me), out of Babel. He said further, What have
they seen in thy house? Hizkiyahu said, All that is in my house have they seen: there was
nothing in my treasures that I had not shown them. Then Isaiah said to Hizkiyahu, Hear the
word of Jehovah of hosts (K. omits tse
bha'oth); Behold, days come, that all that is in thy house,
and all that thy fathers have laid up unto this day, will be carried away to Babel (‫ל‬ ֶ‫ב‬ ָ , K. ‫ה‬ ָ‫ל‬ ֶ‫ב‬ ָ ):
nothing will be left behind, saith Jehovah. And of thy children that proceed from thee, whom
thou shalt beget, will they take (K. chethib, 'will he take'); and they will be courtiers in the
palace of the king of Babel. Then said Hizkiyahu to Isaiah, Good is the word of Jehovah which
thou hast spoken. And he said further, Yea (‫י‬ ִⅴ, K. ‫ם‬ ִ‫א‬ ‫לוֹא‬ ֲ‫,)ה‬ there shall be peace and stedfastness
in my days.” Hezekiah's two candid answers in vv. 3 and 4 are an involuntary condemnation of
his own conduct, which was sinful in two respects. This self-satisfied display of worthless earthly
possessions would bring its own punishment in their loss; and this obsequious suing for
admiration and favour on the part of strangers, would be followed by plundering and enslaving
on the part of those very same strangers whose envy he had excited. The prophet here foretells
the Babylonian captivity; but, in accordance with the occasion here given, not as the destiny of
the whole nation, but as that of the house of David. Even political sharp-sightedness might have
foreseen, that some such disastrous consequences would follow Hezekiah's imprudent course;
but this absolute certainty, that Babylon, which was then struggling hard for independence,
would really be the heiress to the Assyrian government of the world, and that it was not from
Assyria, which was actually threatening Judah with destruction for its rebellion, but from
Babylon, that this destruction would really come, was impossible without the spirit of prophecy.
We may infer from Isa_39:7 (cf., Isa_38:19, and for the fulfilment, Dan_1:3) that Hezekiah had
no son as yet, at least none with a claim to the throne; and this is confirmed by 2Ki_21:1. So far
as the concluding words are concerned, we should quite misunderstand them, if we saw nothing
in them but common egotism. ‫י‬ ִⅴ (for) is explanatory here, and therefore confirmatory. ִ‫אם‬ ‫לוֹא‬ ַ‫,ה‬
however, does not mean “yea, if only,” as Ewald supposes (§324, b), but is also explanatory,
though in an interrogative form, “Is it not good (i.e., still gracious and kind), if,” etc.? He
submits with humility to the word of Jehovah, in penitential acknowledgement of his vain,
shortsighted, untheocratic conduct, and feels that he is mercifully spared by God, inasmuch as
the divine blessings of peace and stability (‫ת‬ ֶ‫מ‬ ֱ‫א‬ a self-attesting state of things, without any of
those changes which disappoint our confident expectations) would continue. “Although he
desired the prosperity of future ages, it would not have been right for him to think it nothing
that God had given him a token of His clemency, by delaying His judgment” (Calvin).
Over the kingdom of Judah there was now hanging the very same fate of captivity and exile,
which had put an end to the kingdom of Israel eight years before. When the author of the book
of Kings prefaces the four accounts of Isaiah in 2Ki_18:13-20, with the recapitulation in
2Ki_18:9-12 (cf., Isa_17:5-6), his evident meaning is, that the end of the kingdom of Israel, and
the beginning of the end of the kingdom of Judah, had their meeting-point in Hezekiah's time.
As Israel fell under the power of the Assyrian empire, which foundered upon Judah, though only
through a miraculous manifestation of the grace of God (see Hos_1:7); so did Judah fall a victim
to the Babylonian empire. The four accounts are so arranged, that the first two, together with
the epilogue in Isa_37:36., which contains the account of the fulfilment, bring the Assyrian
period of judgment to a close; and the last two, with the eventful sketch in Isa_39:6-7, open the

27. way for the great bulk of the prophecies which now follow in chapters 40-66, relating to the
Babylonian period of judgment. This Janus-headed arrangement of the contents of chapters 36-
39 is a proof that this historical section formed an original part of the “vision of Isaiah.” At any
rate, it leads to the conclusion that, whoever arranged the four accounts in their present order,
had chapters 40-66 before him at the time. We believe, however, that we may, or rather,
considering the prophetico-historical style of chapters 36-39, that we must, draw the still further
conclusion, that Isaiah himself, when he revised the collection of his prophecies at the end of
Hezekiah's reign, or possibly not till the beginning of Manasseh's, bridged over the division
between the two halves of the collection by the historical trilogy in the seventh book.
7. CALVIN, “3.Then came Isaiah the Prophet He continues the same narrative, but likewise adds
doctrine. Although he does not say that God had sent him, yet it is certain that he did this by the influence
of the Holy Spirit and by the command of God; and, therefore, he bestows on himself the designation
of the Prophet, by which he intimates that he did not come as a private individual, but to perform an office
which God had enjoined on him, that Hezekiah might clearly see that he had not to deal with a mortal
man.
Now, when he says that he came, we ought to infer that he was not sent for, but was allowed to remain
quietly at home, while Hezekiah was making’ a boastful display of his treasures; for prophets are not
usually invited to consultations of this sort. But formerly, while he was weighed down by extreme distress,
while Rabshakeh insulted him so fiercely, and uttered such daring’ blasphemies against God, he sent, to
Isaiah, and requested him to intercede with God, and to soothe his anguish by some consolation.
(Isa_37:2.) Thus in adversity and distress the prophets are sought, but in prosperity are disregarded or
even despised; because they disturb our mirth by their admonitions, and appear to give occasion of grief.
But Isaiah came, though he was not invited; and in this we ought to observe and praise his steadfastness,
and are taught by his example that we ought not to wait till we are sent for by men who need the
discharge of our duty, when they flatter themselves amidst the heaviest distresses, and bring danger on
themselves either by levity, or by ignorance, or even by malice; for it is our duty to gather the wandering
sheep, and we ought to do this diligently, even though we be not requested by any person.
Though Hezekiah may be justly blamed for having been corrupted by the flatteries of the king of Babylon
so as not to ask counsel of God, yet it is a manifestation of no ordinary modesty, that he does not drive
away or despise the Prophet, as if he had found fault without reason, but replies gently, and at length
receives calmly and mildly a very severe reproof. It would have been better that he had, from the
beginning’ inquired at the mouth of God, as it is said in the psalm,
“ commandments are the men of my counsel,”
(Psa_119:24;)
but, having committed a mistake, it was his next duty to receive submissively the remedy for the fault.
What did those men say? The Prophet does not immediately inflict on him the pain of a severe reproof,
but wounds him gently, so as to lead him to a confession of his sin; for Hezekiah flattered himself, and
thought that all was going well with him, and, therefore, needed to be gradually aroused from his
slothfulness. Still these words gave a sharp wound; as if he had said, “ have you to do with those
men? Ought you not to keep at the greatest distance from a plague so contagious?” He likewise inquires

28. about the contents of the message, in order to make Hezekiah ashamed of not having perceived the
deceit that was practiced on him; forthere is reason to believe that he would not have censured the
congratulation, if there had not been some poison mingled with it, but he points out those snares in which
the Babylonians wished to entangle him.
And yet it is evident from the reply, that Hezekiah was not yet struck by that gentle reproof; for he is still
on good terms with himself, and boasts that those men came from a distant country, from Babylon There
is reason to believe that Isaiah was not ignorant of that country, so that Hezekiah did not need to express
the distance in such magnificent language; but he boasts in this manner, because he was under the
influence of ambition. It was therefore necessary that he should be more keenly pressed, and that
sharper spurs should be applied.
8. 3-7, Isaiah's Rebuke
3 Then came Isaiah the prophet unto king Hezekiah, and said unto him, What said these men?
and from whence came they unto thee?--Isaiah's first question has two parts. V. 1 says that MB “sent
letters.” Were they proposing an alliance? Were they offering congratulations on the victory over
Sennacherib, or on Hezekiah's recovery, or asking about the backwards sundial? Isaiah is curious about
their motives.
We in fact know their motives—curiosity about the supernatural events that have just taken place in
Judah. In the protocol of the ancient court, they would have begun their visit by reading their letters
aloud to the king. This opening statement would be an excellent open door for Hezekiah to return
praise to the Lord. We can imagine how the interchange might have gone:
Ambassadors: Great king Hezekiah, we have heard of the wonder done in your land. Our own
wise men were terrified when their sundials ran backwards. We have come to learn more about
what happened [2 Chr 32:31 “to enquire of the wonder”]
Hezekiah: You are welcome to our court. A great wonder was indeed done here. In fact, there
have been many wonders here—not only the sundial, but my healing, and the defeat of the
Assyrians. These wonders show the power of our God, the Lord who created heaven and earth.
Come, see his people. See his temple. Listen to his law.
That's how the exchange might have gone—but it did not. A more likely reconstruction is:
Hezekiah: You are welcome to our court. A great wonder was indeed done here. In fact, my
9 HALOT paragraph 1d

29. 07/06/10 Copyright © 2010, H. Van Dyke Parunak. All Rights Reserved. Page 20
May be freely reprinted noncommercially with attribution and citation of www.cyber-chapel.org .Isaiah 38-
39
kingdom is full of wonders—not only the sundial, but my healing, and the defeat of the
Assyrians. Come, let me show you the great spoil that we have gathered from our defeated
enemy, and the tribute that nations are now bringing unto me.
God shows his glory throughout the creation, but faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of
the Lord. This is why Isaiah wants to know what the men said. What did the visitors say? How did
Hezekiah respond?
And Hezekiah said, They are come from a far country unto me, even from Babylon.--Hezekiah's
answer is defective in two ways.
First, he only answers the second part of the question. Far from taking advantage of their opening
speech to glorify the Lord, he passes by it entirely. He is not looking for ways to exalt the Lord.
Perhaps Hezekiah is ashamed of how he mishandled the visitors' greetings, and thus skips over Isaiah's
first question.
Second, note in particular how he picks up Isaiah's “unto thee.” He emphasizes, “They are come
unto me.” He sees himself as the center of their interest, even though the “wonder” about which they
came to inquire was done by the Lord. The wonder really “belonged to the Lord,” as the writer of 1
Kings 10:1 says of the fame of Solomon. They would have been primed to hear an explanation in
spiritual terms. Yet Hezekiah deflects their interest to himself.
This is the natural reaction of a person without the Lord's presence. The flesh naturally wants to claim
all the credit. “His heart was lifted up” (2 Chr 32:25).
4 Then said he, What have they seen in thine house? And Hezekiah answered, All that is in mine
house have they seen: there is nothing among my treasures that I have not shewed them.--If our
chronology is correct, these treasures are due largely to the divine defeat of Assyria and the gifts that
other nations sent him to recognize that defeat. They, like his healing, are a divine blessing. Yet he
focuses the attention of the ambassadors on the gifts and not on the giver.
5 Then said Isaiah to Hezekiah, Hear the word of the LORD of hosts: 6 Behold, the days come,

30. that all that is in thine house,--The very phrase Hezekiah used in v. 4, that of which he was so proud.
and that which thy fathers have laid up in store until this day, shall be carried to Babylon:
nothing shall be left, saith the LORD. 7 And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou
shalt beget, shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.--
Note the two directions of the judgment: the fruit of his fathers' toil, and the continuance of his sons.
• Both were products of the Lord's grace: the wealth remained with him only because the Lord
destroyed Assyria, and he had sons only because his life was extended 15 years (Manasseh took
the throne at 12, 2 Ki 21:1, and therefore was born after the healing).
• Both are cut off.
The Chronicler comments,
2 Ch 32:25c his heart was lifted up; therefore there was wrath upon him, and upon Judah and
Jerusalem.
07/06/10 Copyright © 2010, H. Van Dyke Parunak. All Rights Reserved. Page 21
May be freely reprinted noncommercially with attribution and citation of www.cyber-chapel.org .
4 The prophet asked, “What did they see in your
palace?” “They saw everything in my palace,”
Hezekiah said. “There is nothing among my treasures
that I did not show them.”
1.BARNES, “What have they seen? - It is probable that the fact that Hezekiah had
showed them the treasures of his kingdom was known in Jerusalem. Such a fact would be likely
to attract attention, and to produce inquiry among the people into the cause.
All that is in mine house - Here was the confessions of a frank, an honest, and a pious
man. There was no concealment; no disguise. Hezekiah knew that he was dealing with a man of
God - a man too to whom he had been under great obligations. He knew that Isaiah had come
commissioned by God, and that it would be in vain to attempt to conceal anything. Nor does he

31. seem to have wished to make any concealment. If he was conscious that what he had done had
been improper, he was willing to confess it; and at any rate he was willing that the exact truth
should be known. Had Hezekiah been like Ahaz, he might have spurned Isaiah from his
presence as presenting improper inquiries. But Hezekiah was accustomed to regard with respect
the messengers of God, and he was therefore willing to submit his whole conduct to the divine
adjudication and reproof. Piety makes a man willing that all that he has done should be known.
It saves him from double-dealing and subterfuges, and a disposition to make vain excuses; and
it inclines him to fear God, to respect his ambassadors, and to listen to the voice of eternal truth.
2. PULPIT, “What have they seen? Isaiah had, no doubt, heard of what Hezekiah had done (verse 2);
but he wished to have the confession of it from his own mouth before delivering his sentence. Hezekiah
tells him the truth, since he is not ashamed of his act, but rather glories in it. He has shown the
ambassadors everything, and has thereby made them eager to secure his alliance.
3. GILL, “Then said he, what have they seen in thine house?.... Coming nearer to the
point he had in view, and which was the thing that was displeasing to the Lord; not that he had
received the ambassadors, and used them in such a manner as persons in such a quality ought to
be used; but that he had shown them what he ought not to have done, and especially from such a
principle of pride and vanity as he did:
and Hezekiah answered without any reserve, very openly, not suspecting that the prophet
was come with a reproof to him, or to blame him, or would blame him for what he had done:
all that is in my house have they seen; the several royal apartments, and the furniture of
them:
there is nothing among my treasures that I have not showed them: which were more
secret, laid up in cabinets, under lock and key; his gold, silver, jewels, and precious stones,
spices, and ointments. Jerom thinks he showed them the furniture and vessels of the temple,
though he does not mention them.
4. PULPIT, “The home, seen though not shown.
No doubt the ambassadors of the King of Babylon saw many things in the palace of Hezekiah which he
did not exhibit to them; more things are seen than those which are displayed. It is so in every house; and
it may be that the visitor goes away more impressed with some things which no one pointed out to him
than with anything to which his attention was called. If any one were to ask him what he has seen in the
house, he would mention that which its master had not thought to show him. What would any visitor to our
house see, though we did not show it to him?
I. ORDER OR DISORDER? The manifest presence of a strong hand keeping every one in order and
everything in its place; or the painful absence of it?
II. OBEDIENCE OR DISOBEDIENCE? Filial readiness and even eagerness to comply at once with the
parents' wish; or the lingering step or even the entire disregard of that desire?

32. III. COURTESY OR DISCOURTESY? Habitually becoming behaviour at the table and the hearth; or the
unwise neglect of those smaller observances which minister to the beauty and the sweetness of daily life?
IV. LOVE OR INDIFFERENCE, OR POSITIVE DISLIKE? The presence of that warm affection which
should bind husband and wife, parent and child, brother and sister, in the bonds of happy and enduring
fellowship; or a cold and sad indifference to one another's well-being; or a still sadder animosity and
persecution?
V. SELFISHNESS OR SYMPATHY? The confinement of thought and care to the four walls of the home
establishment; or a considerate and generous regard for the wants and wishes of neighbours and fellow-
citizens?
VI. PIETY OR WORLDLINESS? Family worship, and—what is better still—a prevailing religious tone, as
if parents and children all felt that temporal success was a very small thing in comparison with spiritual
worth; or the language and habits of an ignoble and degrading worldliness?—C.
5. JAMISON, “All — a frank confession of his whole fault; the king submits his conduct to
the scrutiny of a subject, because that subject was accredited by God. Contrast Asa (2Ch_16:7-
10).
6. CALVIN, “4.Then he said. Isaiah proceeds in his indirect admonition, to see if Hezekiah shall be
moved by it and displeased with himself. But still he does not succeed, though it can hardly be believed
that the king was so stupid as not to feel the punctures of the spur; for he knew that the Prophet had not
come, as persons addicted to curiosity are wont to do, for the purpose of hunting out news; and he knew
also that the Prophet had not come to jest with him, but to state something of importance. However that
may be, we ought to put a favorable construction on his mild reply; for he does not break out against the
Prophet, but modestly confesses the state of the fact, though he does not yet acknowledge that he has
sinned, or at least is not brought to repentance; for he does not judge of his sin from that concealed
disposition. Ambition deludes men so much, that by its sweetness it not only intoxicates but drives them
mad, so that, even when they have been admonished, they do not immediately repent. When, therefore,
we see the godly Hezekiah struck with such stupidity as not to perceive that he is reproved, or at least not
to be stung by it so as to know himself, we ought carefully to guard against so dangerous a disease.
5 Then Isaiah said to Hezekiah, “Hear the word of the
Lord Almighty:
1.BARNES, “Hear the word of the Lord of hosts - Hear what the mighty God that rules
in heaven says of this. This is an instance of great fidelity on the part of the prophet. He felt

33. himself sent from God in a solemn manner to rebuke sin in a monarch, and a pious monarch. It
is an instance that strikingly resembles the boldness and faithfulness of Nathan when he went to
David, and said, ‘Thou art the man’ 2Sa_12:7.
2. PULPIT, “Hear the word of the Lord of hosts. Either the prophet had been specially charged with a
Divine message to the king before he sought his presence, or the prophetic afflatus now came on him
suddenly. The former is, on the whole, more probable.
3. GILL, “Then said Isaiah to Hezekiah,.... Now he begins to let him know that he came not
of himself, and that he did not ask these questions to gratify his own curiosity, but that he came
from the Lord, and with a word of rebuke from him:
hear the word of the Lord of hosts; a greater King than thou art, who art so elated with thy
riches, and grandeur, and fame; or than the king of Babylon, whose ambassadors these are; even
the King of kings, and Lord of armies above and below, and who is able to make good every word
that is spoken by him, and therefore should be solemnly attended to.
4. HENRY 5-8, “Hence let us observe, 1. That, if God love us, he will humble us, and will find
some way or other to pull down our spirits when they are lifted up above measure. A mortifying
message is sent to Hezekiah, that he might be humbled for the pride of his heart, and be
convinced of the folly of it; for though God may suffer his people to fall into sin, as he did
Hezekiah here, to prove him, that he might know all that was in his heart, yet he will not suffer
them to lie still in it. 2. It is just with God to take that from us which we make the matter of our
pride, and on which we build a carnal confidence. When David was proud of the numbers of his
people God took a course to make them fewer; and when Hezekiah boasts of his treasures, and
looks upon them with too great a complacency, he is told that he acts like the foolish traveller
who shows his money and gold to one that proves a thief and is thereby tempted to rob him. 3. If
we could but see things that will be, we should be ashamed of our thoughts of things that are. If
Hezekiah had known that the seed and successors of this king of Babylon would hereafter be the
ruin of his family and kingdom, he would not have complimented his ambassadors as he did;
and, when the prophet told him that it would be so, we may well imagine how he was vexed at
himself for what he had done. We cannot certainly foresee what will be, but are told, in general,
All is vanity, and therefore it is vanity for us to take complacency and put confidence in any
thing that goes under that character. 4. Those that are fond of an acquaintance or alliance with
irreligious men will first or last have enough of it, and will have cause to repent it. Hezekiah
thought himself very happy in the friendship of Babylon, though it was the mother of harlots
and idolatries; but Babylon, who now courted Jerusalem, in process of time conquered her and
carried her captive. Leagues with sinners, and leagues with sin too, will end thus; it is therefore
our wisdom to keep at a distance from them. 5. Those that truly repent of their sins will take it
well to be reproved for them and will be willing to be told of their faults. Hezekiah reckoned that
word of the Lord good which discovered sin to him, and made him sensible that he had done
amiss, which before he was not aware of. The language of true penitents is, Let the righteous
smite me; it shall be a kindness; and the law is therefore good, because, being spiritual, in it sin
appears sin, and exceedingly sinful. 6. True penitents will quietly submit, not only to the
reproofs of the word, but to the rebukes of Providence for their sins. When Hezekiah was told of
the punishment of his iniquity he said, Good is the word of the Lord, not only the mitigation of
the sentence, but the sentence itself; he has nothing to object against the equity of it, but says

34. Amen to the threatening. Those that see the evil of sin, and what it deserves, will justify God in
all that is brought upon them for it, and own that he punishes them less than their iniquities
deserve. 7. Though we must not be regardless of those that come after us, yet we must reckon
ourselves well done by if there be peace and truth in our days, and better than we had reason to
expect. If a storm be coming, we must reckon it a favour to get into the harbour before it comes,
and be gathered to the grave in peace; yet we can never be secure of this, but must prepare for
changes in our own time, that we may stand complete in all the will of God, and bid it welcome
whatever it is.
5. JAMISON, “Lord of hosts — who has all thy goods at His disposal.
6. COFFMAN, “As Rawlinson observed that, "Concerning the exact times and seasons, the prophets
generally knew nothing. They were mouth-pieces to deliver the Divine will. They were not keen-witted
politicians, forecasting results by the exercise of sharpsightedness and sagacity."[12]
No human wisdom could have supplied such information as this to Isaiah. Babylon, at the time of this
prophecy, was a rebellious portion of the Assyrian Empire; and it would be only a few years until
Esarhaddon, the son of Sennacherib, would be on the throne of Babylon. What an unlikely prophecy this
must have appeared to be! Nevertheless, in about 120 years, all of this prophecy was completely fulfilled
in Babylon's rape of Jerusalem and the deportation of the royal family first, and later, the whole population
to Babylon.
As Jamieson pointed out this is "the very first place in the Bible where the place of Israel's punishment is
announced."[13]
It is particularly important, however, that this is by no means the first prophecy of Israel's
being plucked off of `their land.' Moses prophesied, "Ye shall be plucked off the land; and Jehovah will
scatter thee among all peoples" (Deuteronomy 28:63,64). Ahijah prophesied against Jeroboam: "Jehovah
will root up Israel out of this good land which he gave to their fathers, and will scatter them beyond the
River, because they have made their Asherim, provoking Jehovah to anger" (1 Kings 14:15). "Therefore
will I cause you to go into captivity beyond Damascus, saith Jehovah, whose name is the god of hosts"
(Amos 5:27). Here, at last in the prophecy of Isaiah, God finally revealed the very city into which Israel
would be carried captive. Although it had been known from the beginning by the Father that Babylon
would be the place of Israel's captivity, it was only in this chapter that God at last revealed it through
Isaiah. Yet, it is clear enough that "Babylon" was actually intended in those other prophecies.
7. CALVIN, “5.Then Isaiah said to Hezekiah. From this judgment of God we perceive that the sin of
Hezekiah was not small, though common sense judges differently; for since God always observes the
highest moderation in chastising men, we may infer from the severity of the punishment that it was no
ordinary fault, but a highly aggravated crime. Hence also we are reminded that men judge amiss of words
or actions, but that God alone is the competent judge of them. Hezekiah shewed his treasures. Had they
been heaped up, that they might always lie hidden in the earth? He received the messengers kindly.
Should he have driven them away? He lent an ear to their instructions. But that was when the rival of the
Assyrian voluntarily desired his friendship. Ought he to have rejected so valuable an advantage? In a
word, so far as appearances go, we shall find nothing for which an apology may not be offered.
But God, from whom nothing is hidden, observes in Hezekiah’ joy, first, ingratitude; because he is

35. unmindful of the distresses which lately pressed him down, and, in some respects, substitutes the
Chaldeans in the room of God himself, to whom he ought to have dedicated his own person and all that
he possessed. Next, he observes pride; because Hezekiah attempts too eagerly to gain reputation by
magnificence and riches He observes a sinful desire to enter into an alliance which would have been
destructive to the whole nation. But the chief fault was ambition, which almost entirely banishes the fear
of God from the hearts of men. Hence Augustine justly exclaims, “ great and how pernicious is the poison
of pride, which cannot be cured but by poison!” For he has his eye on that passage in one of Paul’
Epistles, in which he says that “ messenger of Satan had been given to buffet him, that he might not be
puffed up by the greatness of revelations.” (2Co_12:7.) Hezekiah was unshaken, when all was nearly
ruined; but he is vanquished by these flatteries, and does not resist vain ambition. Let us, therefore,
attentively and diligently consider what a destructive evil this is, and let us be so much the more careful to
avoid it.
Hear the word of Jehovah of hosts Being about to be the bearer of a harsh sentence, he begins by saying
that he is God’ herald, and a little afterwards, he again repeats that God has commanded him to do this,
not merely for the purpose of protecting himself against hatred, (99) but in order to make a deep
impression on the heart of the king’ Here again we see his steadfastness and heroic courage. He does
not dread the face of the king, or fear to make known his disease, and to announce to him the judgment
of God; for although, at that time as well as now, kings had delicate ears, yet, being fully aware that God
had enjoined this duty upon him, he boldly executes his commission, however much it might be disliked.
Prophets were, indeed, subject to kings, and claimed nothing for themselves, unless when it was their
duty to speak in the name of God; and in such cases there is nothing so lofty that it ought not to be
abased before the majesty of God. And if his object had been to gain the good graces of his prince, he
would have been silent like other flatterers; but he has regard to his office, and endeavors to discharge it
most faithfully.
(99) “Non pas que pour crainte d’ mal voulu, il se descharge sur le Seigneur.” “ that, through fear of
bringing ill-will on himself, he throws the blame on the Lord.”
6 The time will surely come when everything in your
palace, and all that your predecessors have stored up
until this day, will be carried off to Babylon. Nothing
will be left, says the Lord.
1.BARNES, “Behold, the days come - The captivity of the Jews in Babylon commenced
about one hundred and twenty years after this prediction (compare Jer_20:5).

36. That all that is in thine house - That is, all the treasures that are in the treasure-house
Isa_39:2.
And that which thy fathers have laid up in store - In 2Ki_18:15-16, we are told that
Hezekiah, in order to meet the demands of the king of Assyria, had cut off even the ornaments of
the temple, and taken all the treasures which were in ‘the king’s house.’ It is possible, however,
that there might have been other treasures which had been accumulated by the kings before him
which he had not touched.
Nothing shall be left - This was literally fulfilled (see 2Ch_36:18). It is remarkable, says
Vitringa, that this is the first intimation that the Jews would be carried to Babylon - the first
designation of the place where they would be so long punished and oppressed. Micah Mic_4:10,
a contemporary of Isaiah, declares the same thing, but probably this was not before the
declaration here made by Isaiah. Moses had declared repeatedly, that, if they were a rebellious
people, they should be removed from their own to a foreign land; but he had not designated the
country Lev_26:33-34; Deu_28:64-67; Deu_30:3. Ahijah, in the time of Jeroboam 1Ki_14:15,
had predicted that they should be carried ‘beyond the river,’ that is, the Euphrates; and Amos
Amo_5:27 had said that God would carry them ‘into captivity beyond Damascus.’ But all these
predictions were now concentrated on Babylon; and it was for the first time distinctly
announced by Isaiah that that was to be the land where they were to suffer so long and so
painful a captivity.
2. CLARKE, “To Babylon - ‫בבלה‬ babelah, so two MSS., (one ancient); rightly, without
doubt as the other copy (2Ki_20:17) has it. This prediction was fulfilled about one hundred and
fifty years after it was spoken: see Dan_1:2, Dan_1:3-7. What a proof of Divine omniscience!
3. GILL, “Behold, the days come,.... Or, "are coming (e)"; and which quickly came; after a
few reigns more, even in Jehoiakim's time:
that all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers have laid up in store until
this day, shall be carried to Babylon; as it was, when Jehoiakim king of Judah, his mother,
servants, princes, and officers, were taken by the king of Babylon, and carried captive, and along
with them the treasures of the king's house, and also all the treasures of the house of the Lord,
2Ki_24:12,
nothing shall be left, saith the Lord; this was, as Jarchi says, measure for measure; as there
was nothing that was not shown to the ambassadors, so nothing should be left untaken away by
the Babylonians.
4. PULPIT, “Behold, the days come; literally, the days [are] coming, or [are] approaching. Of the exact
"times and seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power" (Act_1:7), the prophets generally knew
nothing. They were mouth-pieces, to declare the Divine will, not keen-witted politicians, forecasting
results by the exercise of sharp-sightedness and sagacity. To suppose that Isaiah foresaw by mere
human wisdom the Babylonian conquest of Judaea, as Charles the Great did the ravages of the
Northmen, is to give him credit for a sagacity quite unexampled and psychologically impossible. The
kingdom of Babylon was one among many that were struggling hard to maintain independence against

37. the grasping and encroaching Assyria. From the time of Tiglath-Pileser IX. she had been continually
losing ground. Both Sargon and Sennacherib trampled her underfoot, overran her territory, captured her
towns, and reduced her under direct Assyrian government. Till Assyria should be swept away, a
Babylonian conquest of Palestine was impossible. To suppose it was like supposing a Russian conquest
of Holland, while Germany bars the way. Nothing short of the true prophetic afflatus, which is God the
Holy Ghost speaking by the mouth of his servants, could have made such an anticipation. And with
Isaiah, as Mr. Cheyne says, it is "not a mere presentiment; it is a calm and settled conviction, based on a
direct revelation, and confirmed by a deep insight into the laws of the Divine government." All that is in
thine house. Not, of course, exactly all that was there when Isaiah spoke, but all the wealth that should
be in the royal palace when the time of the Babylonian captivity arrived. (For the fulfilment,
see 2Ch_36:18.) That which thy fathers have laid up in store. A portion of this was carried off by
Sennacherib in his first expedition (2Ki_18:14-16); but the bulk of the temple treasures—the gifts of many
kings—remained untouched until they were removed to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar
(Dan_1:2; Dan_5:2; 2Ki_24:13; 2Ki_25:13-17)
5. JAMISON, “days come — one hundred twenty years afterwards. This is the first
intimation that the Jews would be carried to Babylon - the first designation of their place of
punishment. The general prophecy of Moses (Lev_26:33; Deu_28:64); the more particular one
of Ahijah in Jeroboam’s time (1Ki_14:15), “beyond the river”; and of Amo_5:27, “captivity
beyond Damascus”; are now concentrated in this specific one as to “Babylon” (Mic_4:10). It was
an exact retribution in kind, that as Babylon had been the instrument of Hezekiah and Judah’s
sin, so also it should be the instrument of their punishment.
6. PULPIT, “The dangers of prosperity.
I. THE OSTENTATION OF HEZEKIAH. The Chronicler passes a censure upon him. After his recovery he
"rendered not again according to the benefit done unto him; for his heart was lifted up: therefore was
there wrath upon him, and upon Judah and Jerusalem" (2Ch_32:25). He gives a picture of his treasuries,
and store-houses, his cities, his flocks and herds. An embassy comes from Babylon, partly to
congratulate him on his recovery, partly to inquire concerning the portent of the sun-dial or step-clock.
Under these pretexts political views were doubtless concealed. And Hezekiah delighted to receive the
embassy, and displayed to them the whole of his treasures and the resources of his armoury, his palaces
and his kingdom.
II. THE REBUKE OF THE PROPHET. The prophet, in virtue of his Divine call and his insight into the heart
of things, assumes an authority over the monarch, and, coming to him, inquires, "What have these men
said? and whence came they to thee?" "He challenges the king to explain his conduct. Jehovah's will is
opposed to all coquetting with foreign powers." It is "weaving a web without his Spirit" (Isa_30:1). The
answer of the king is indirect, perhaps evasive: "They have come from a far country, from Babylon"—as if
hinting that hospitality to them was a duty. A second stem question follows: "What have they seen in the
house of the king?" And the king replies that he has shown them all his treasures. There is that in the very
manner and questions of the prophet which implies censure. What he sees in the act of the king is an
uplifting of the heart; not merely pride in his resources and wealth as such, but reliance on worldly
resources—a desire to match himself with the great Eastern power on its own ground. And this is an
affront to the Divine King in Zion, who had founded it that the afflicted of his people might find refuge
therein (Isa_14:32). "Not by might nor by power, but by the Spirit of the Lord of hosts" is ever the word,
the principle, on which the kingdom must stand. If Hezekiah has violated this, there must be retribution,

38. either in his person or in the persons of those he represents.
III. THE PUNISHMENT. It was to correspond to his sin. "He thought to subscribe his quota to a profane
coalition, and his treasures should be violently laid hold of by wolves in sheep's clothing." Babylon had
solicited friendship; she would end by enforcing slavery. Calm and dispassionate is the tone in which the
prophet speaks. Charles the Great could not help weeping at the sight of the Northmen's vessels, thinking
of the calamities which those fell pirates would bring on the flourishing coasts of the Franks. Jeremiah
weeps at the thought of the cruelty of the Babylonians. In Isaiah contentment with the patent will of God
overcomes his emotional susceptibility. All the boasted treasures of the king are to be carried away to
Babylon, and his descendants are to become servants in the palace there. The king bows before the
authority of the prophet, recognizing his word as the word of Jehovah, and as good. And further, he is
thankful for the respite granted—for the promise that peace and steadfastness shall remain in his days.
The chronicler says that he humbled himself for the pride of his heart, both he and the inhabitants of
Jerusalem, so that the wrath of Jehovah came not upon them in the days of Hezekiah. The picture of
Hezekiah is that of a king who prospered in all his works. But the incident clearly teaches the danger
prosperity brings to character and principle. It is but a "bad nurse to virtue; a nurse who is like to starve it
in its infancy, and to spoil it in its growth." "The corrupt affection which has lain dead and frozen in the
midst of distracting business or under adversity, when the sun of prosperity has shined upon it, then, like
a snake, it presently recovers its former strength and venom. When the channels of plenty run high, and
every appetite is plied with abundance and variety, so that satisfaction is a mean word to express its
enjoyment, then the inbred corruption of the heart shows itself pampered and insolent, too unruly for
discipline and too big for correction. Prosperity, by fomenting a man's pride, lays a certain train for his
ruin; Scripture and experience teach what a spite Providence constantly owes to the proud person. He is
the very eyesore of Heaven; and God even looks upon his own supremacy as concerned to abase him.
Prosperity attracts the malice and envy of the world; and it is impossible for a man in a wealthy and
flourishing condition not to feel the stroke of men's tongues, and of their hands too, if occasion serves.
Stones are only thrown at the fruit-laden tree. What made the King of Babylon invade Judaea but the
royal stores and treasures displayed and boasted of by Hezekiah before the ambassadors, to the
supplanting of his crown and the miserable captivity of his prosperity?" (South). In the day of
prosperity consider! Let
"Consideration like an angel come,
And whip th' offending Adam out of us."
Perishing things.
"Nothing shall be left." How true is this of all things of earth, as contrasted with essential being—with the
life of our own souls! We can look at nothing material without being able to say, as we look to the inner
world of personal consciousness, "They shall perish, but thou remainest."
I. COMPREHENSIVE LOSS. "Nothing shall be left." "All that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers
have laid up in store until this day, shall be carded to Babylon." Exactly. There is always a Babylon which
itself becomes a ruin. Grecian art is taken to Rome, there to be demolished in the sacking of the city.
Treasures are taken in after years to Paris, there to be lost in flames. How few relics of any time or
nation remain! and in due course these are lost to the possessors. If this is true on the great scale of
nations, how manifestly true it is of ourselves! Let us look around on all the present possessions of earth,

39. and remember that, so far as we are concerned, "nothing shall be left." "Thou fool, this night thy soul shall
be required of thee: then whose shall those things be?"
II. IMMORTAL GAIN. The prophet is true in this revelation of loss. So is the apostle true when he says,
"All things are yours." All that a man is remains, and all that a man does in loyal service remains. So there
is permanence amid impermanence. The tabernacle totters, but the tenant lives. "The outward man
perisheth, but the inward man is renewed day by day." All that is in thine house is lost, but all that is
in thine heart is immortal. It behoves us, therefore, to remember that the true jewels are soul-jewels; the
true ornament is in the hidden man of the heart; the imperishable wealth is in the sanctities of Heaven
and the smile of God. "Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven."—W.M.S.
7. CALVIN, “6.And nothing shall be left It is proper to observe the kind of punishment which the Lord
inflicts on Hezekiah; for he takes from his successors those things of which he vaunted so loudly, in order
that they may have no ground for boasting of them. Thus the Lord punishes the ambition and pride of
men, so that their name or kingdom, which they hoped would last for ever, is blotted out, and they are
treated with contempt, and the remembrance of them is accursed. In a word, he overthrows their foolish
thoughts, so that they find by experience the very opposite of those inventions by which they deceive
themselves.
If it be objected that it is unreasonable, that the sacking of a city and the captivity of a nation should be
attributed to the fault of a single man, while the Holy Spirit everywhere declares (2Ch_36:14) that general
obstinacy was the reason why God delivered up the city and the country to be pillaged by the
Babylonians; I answer, that there is no absurdity in God’ punishing the sin of a single man, and at the
same time the crimes of a whole nation. For when the wrath of the Lord overspread the whole country, it
was the duty of all to unite in confessing their guilt., and of every person to consider individually what he
had deserved; that no man might throw the blame on others, but that every man might lay it on himself.
Besides, since the Jews were already in many ways liable to the judgment of God, he justly permitted
Hezekiah to fail in his duty to the injury of all, that he might hasten the more his own wrath, and open up a
way for the execution of his judgment. In like manner we see that it happened to David; for Scripture
declares that it was not an accidental occurrence that David numbered the people, but that it took place
by the fault of the nation itself, whom the Lord determined to punish in this manner.
“ anger of the Lord was kindled against the nation, and he put it into the heart of David to number the
people.” (2Sa_24:1.)
Thus in this passage also punishment is threatened against Hezekiah; but his sin, by which he provoked
God’ anger, was also the vengeance of God against the whole nation.
7 And some of your descendants, your own flesh and
blood who will be born to you, will be taken away, and
they will become eunuchs in the palace of the king of
Babylon.”

40. 1.BARNES, “And of that sons - Thy posterity (see the note at Mat_1:1).
That shall issue from thee - Of the royal family. The captivity at Babylon occurred more
than a hundred years after this, and of course those who were carried there were somewhat
remote descendants of Hezekiah.
And they shall be eunuchs - The word used here (‫סריסים‬ sariysiym) denotes properly and
strictly eunuchs, or such persons as were accustomed to attend on the harems of Oriental
monarchs Est_2:3, Est_2:14-15. These persons were also employed often in various offices of
the court Est_1:10, Est_1:12, Est_1:15, and hence, the word often means a minister of court, a
court-officer, though not literally an eunuch Gen_37:6; Gen_39:1. It is not easy, however, to tell
when the word is to be understood literally, and when not. The Targum understands it of those
who should be nurtured, or become great in the kingdom of Babylon. That the Jews were
advanced to some offices of trust and power in Babylon, is evident from the case of Daniel
Dan_1:2-7. It is by no means improbable, also, that the king of Babylon would have a pride in
having among the attendants at his court, or even over the harem, the descendants of the once
magnificent monarchs of the Jews.
2. PULPIT, “Of thy sons that shall issue from thee. Hezekiah had at the time, probably, no son, since
Manasseh, who succeeded him upon the throne, was not born till two years later. Besides Manasseh, he
appears to have had a son, Amariah, who was an ancestor of the Prophet Zephaniah (Zep_1:1). He may,
of course, have also had others. His descendants, rather than his actual sons, seem to be here intended;
and the fulfilment of the prophecy is to be found in Dan_1:3, where certain "of the king's seed" are
mentioned among the Israelites who served as eunuchs in the palace of Nebuchadnezzar.
3. GILL, “And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt beget, shall
they take away,.... Manasseh his immediate son was taken and carried to Babylon, though
afterwards released; nor does it appear that he was made a eunuch or an officer there; this had
its fulfilment in Jeconiah and his children, and in others that were of the seed royal, as Daniel,
Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, to whom the Jewish commentators apply this; this is expressed
in different words, signifying much the same, to affect the mind of Hezekiah the more:
and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon; or "chamberlains"; and
who very often were castrated for that purpose, though it does not necessarily signify such, being
used of officers in general. The Targum renders it "princes" (f); and such an one was Daniel in
the court of the king of Babylon; and his three companions were also promoted, Dan_2:48.
4. PULPIT, “Shadows projected from coming trouble.
Almost our worst troubles are the things we fear. They loom so large and seem so terrible, like distant
figures in a fog. The mind is so long occupied with them before it can do anything in relation to them. Our
Saviour's life was darkened with the shadows of his coming woe. As he talked with heavenly visitants, he
"spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem." He cried, "Now is my soul
troubled Father, save me from this hour." The shadow seemed easier to bear when it darkened down

41. into an actual present conflict and woe. Most men are "all their life in bondage through fear of death," and
thousands of men are almost hypochondriacal in their anxieties about troubles that always seem to 'be
coming, but seldom really come.
I. FUTURE THINGS THAT FLING SHADOWS OVER THE PRESENT.
1. The fear of the young Christian that he will not hold out to the end, Often a morbid fear; always an
unworthy fear, because it really means our doubting whether God can keep us safely to the end.
2. Fears born of the difficulties of times of business depression. Parents often talk, in their homes, about
the workhouse, in a joking way, which nevertheless means that the shadow of it lies upon their lives. A
dread of failure and bankruptcy broods over many a business man. Unworthy dread, in view of the
promise, "Verily thou shalt be fed."
3. Fears growing out of conditions of health. The exaggeration of this is observed in cases of religious
mania or nervous depression. Then all the future is black and hopeless, and the soul immovably accepts
the idea that it is for ever lost. These fears, alas! often inspire the suicide to his self-murderous deed.
4. Fears that gather about the certainty of judgment when the conscience bears testimony to guilt. A
whole life may be shadowed by a crime. It is not the memory of the crime that flings the shadows; it is the
conviction that the crime must come up again to view some day, and make its appeal for vengeance. In
one way or another shadows lie on all our lives.
II. PRESENT THINGS THAT RELIEVE THE SHADOWS FLUNG BY THE FUTURE.
1. Human hope. The most indestructible thing in human breasts.
2. Right estimate of life; as the sphere in which a great moral purpose is being wrought out: character is
being moulded by the mingled influence of things evil and things good.
3. The comforting promises of God; which assure us of Divine overcomings and overrulings.
4. And the assurance of the abiding Divine presence, which is a constant sweet light that, falling on the
very shadows, touches them with golden glowing, even as dark evening clouds are kindled into glory at
the after-sunset.—R.T.
5. JAMISON, “sons ... from thee — The sons which Hezekiah (as Josephus tells us)
wished to have (see on Isa_28:3, on “wept sore”) will be among the foremost in suffering.
eunuchs — fulfilled (Dan_1:2, Dan_1:3, Dan_1:7).
6. STEDMAN, “Would God do such a remarkable thing merely to encourage this king's faith?
Obviously it was meant to be more than that. Recall that when Rabshakeh spoke to the deputation from
Jerusalem he stood at an extremely significant and historic spot before the wall of the city "the conduit of
the upper pool on the highway to the Fuller's Field" the exact spot where Isaiah had given the sign of the
virgin's son. That sign also was not designed only for the benefit of Ahaz, but for the benefit of the whole
world, the whole universe. Here then was another sign that would be manifest throughout the whole

42. world, for to cause the shadow of the sun to turn backward on a sundial meant that some major physical
change had to occur on the earth.
Certain critics hold that the earth must have stopped its rotation, and there is no record that that
phenomenon ever occurred. But the sign given to Hezekiah did not require that. Scientists now know that
a shift in the axis of the earth would have such a result. Doubtless that is what happened for science has
also discovered that at various times in the past the axis of the earth (the slant of the earth in relationship
to the sun) has suddenly changed. That would cause the shadow on the sundial to turn back.
This miracle links also with Chapter 39, the closing chapter of this section, which describes a visit by
ambassadors from Babylon to Hezekiah. According to Second Chronicles 32, they came because they
saw the sign which was given to Hezekiah and they wanted to investigate what was going on in Israel that
resulted in such dramatic changes in the course of nature. This indicates the tremendous interest God
has in what happens to the house of David. Hezekiah, a son of David, is here in the spotlight of God's
concern, and God is willing to adjust the forces of nature to encourage his faith. Now we learn of the
embassy from Babylon.
7. CALVIN, “7.Of thy sons It might be thought that this was far more distressing to Hezekiah, and
therefore it is put last for the sake of heightening the picture. Even though any calamity spread widely in a
nation, it is commonly thought that kings and their families will be exempted, as if they were not placed in
the same rank with other men. When he understood, therefore, that his sons would be made captives and
slaves, this must have appeared to him to be exceedingly severe. Hence again we may learn how much
God was displeased with Hezekiah for seeking aid from earthly wealth, and boasting of it in the presence
of wicked men, when God by a dreadful example punishes it as an unpardonable crime, that Hezekiah
made an ambitious display of his wealth in presence of unbelievers.
8. COFFMAN, “This is good news and bad news combined. The good news is that Hezekiah would not
die childless as he had feared; but the bad news was the prophetic fate of his sons. The prospect of their
being eunuchs in the place of the king of Babylon was indeed a terrible destination. Furthermore,
Manasseh who would succeed him in the throne was indeed an evil son of the devil until near the very
end of his life.
In the Book of Daniel, we read that, "Among the princes of Judah were Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and
Azaraiah; and the prince of the eunuchs gave names unto them (Daniel 1:6,7). It was usually true in that
era that "eunuchs" were men who had been emasculated; and although it was also true that sometimes
"eunuchs" were "officers of the king." This was by no means true of the princes of Judah in Babylon. They
were not officers of the king, but captives; and here, they even endured the humiliation of having their
names changed. We not only agree with Culver that, "There is a great possibility that Daniel and his
friends were emasculated,"[14]
but we, through the influence of Isaiah's prophecy here, believe that that is
the only proper understanding of the fate of those princes of the royal household of Judah. Many agree
with this interpretation. "The descendants of Hezekiah, rather than his actual sons, seem to be intended
here; and the fulfillment of this prophecy is to be found in Daniel 1:3, where certain of `the king's seed' are
mentioned among the Israelites who served as eunuchs in the palace of Nebuchadnezzar."

43. 8 “The word of the Lord you have spoken is good,”
Hezekiah replied. For he thought, “There will be peace
and security in my lifetime.”
1.BARNES, “Good is the word of the Lord - The sense of this is, ‘I acquiesce in this; I
perceive that it is right; I see in it evidence of benevolence and goodness.’ The grounds of his
acquiescence seem to have been:
1. The fact that he saw that it was just. He felt that he had sinned, and that he had made an
improper display of his treasures, and deserved to be punished.
2. He felt that the sentence was mild and merciful. It was less than he deserved, and less than
he had reason to expect.
3. It was merciful to him, and to his kingdom at that time. God was not coming forth to cut
him off, or to involve him in anymore calamity.
4. His own reign and life were to be full of mercy still.
He had abundant cause of gratitude, therefore, that God was dealing with him in so much
kindness. It cannot be shown that Hezekiah was regardless of his posterity, or unconcerned at
the calamity which would come upon them. All that the passage fairly implies is, that he saw that
it was right; and that it was proof of great mercy in God that the punishment was deferred, and
was not, as in the case of David (2 Sam. 13-14 ff), to be inflicted in his own time. The nature of
the crime of Hezekiah is more fully stated in the parallel passage in 2Ch_32:25-26, 2Ch_32:30-
31.
For there shall be peace - My kingdom shall not be disturbed during my reign with a
foreign invasion.
And truth - The truth of God shall be maintained; his worship shall be kept up; his name
shall be honored.
In my days - During my reign. He inferred this because Isaiah had said Isa_39:7 that his
posterity would be carried to Babylon. He was assured, therefore, that these calamities would
not come in his own time. We may learn from this:
1. That we should submit to God when he punishes us. If we have right feelings we shall
always see that we deserve all that we are called to suffer.
2. In the midst of severest judgments we may find some evidence of mercy. There are some
considerations on which the mind may fix that will console it with the evidence of the
compassion of God, and that will not only make it submissive, but fill it with gratitude.
3. We should accustom ourselves to such views of the divine dealings, and should desire to
find in them the evidence of goodness and mercy, and not the evidence of wrath and severity.
It is of infinite importance that we should cherish right views of God; and should believe that
he is holy, good. and merciful. To do this, we should feel that we deserve all that we suffer; we
should look at what we might have endured; we should look at the mercies spared to us, as well
as at those which are taken away; and we should hold to the belief, as an unwavering principle
from which we are never to depart, that God is good, supremely and wholly good. Then our
minds will have peace. Then with Hezekiah we may say, ‘Good is the word of Yahweh.’ Then
with the suffering Redeemer of the world we may always say, ‘Not my will, but thine be done’
Luk_22:42.

44. 2. CLARKE, “Then said Hezekiah - The nature of Hezekiah’s crime, and his humiliation
on the message of God to him by the prophet, is more expressly declared by the author of the
book of the Chronicles: “But Hezekiah rendered not again according to the benefit done unto
him; for his heart was lifted up; therefore there was wrath upon him, and upon Judah and
Jerusalem. Notwithstanding, Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart, both he and
the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of the Lord came not upon them in the days of
Hezekiah. And Hezekiah prospered in all his works. Howbeit, in the business of the
ambassadors of the princes of Babylon, who sent unto him to inquire of the wonder that was
done in the land, God left him, to try him, that he might know all that was in his heart.”
2Ch_32:25, 2Ch_32:26, 2Ch_32:30, 2Ch_32:31.
There shall be peace and truth in my days - I rather think these words should be
understood as an humble inquiry of the king, addressed to the prophet. “Shall there be
prosperity, ‫שלום‬ shalom, and truth in My days? - Shall I escape the evil which thou predictest?”
Understood otherwise, they manifest a pitiful unconcern both for his own family and for the
nation. “So I be well, I care not how it may go with others.” This is the view I have taken of the
passage in 2Ki_21:19. Let the reader judge whether this, or the former, should be preferred. See
the concluding notes on 2 Kings 20.
3. GILL, “Then said Hezekiah to Isaiah, good is the word of the Lord which thou
hast spoken,.... Hezekiah was at once convinced of his sin, acknowledged it and repented of it,
and owned that the sentence pronounced was but just and right; and that there was a mixture of
mercy and goodness in it, in that time was given, and it was not immediately executed:
he said moreover, for there shall be peace and truth in my days; or a confirmed peace,
lasting prosperity, peace in the state, and truth in the church, plenty of temporal mercies, and
the truth of doctrine and worship, which he understood by the prophet would continue in his
days, and for which he was thankful; not that he was unconcerned about posterity, but inasmuch
as it must be, what was foretold, and which he could not object to as unjust, he looked upon it as
a mercy to him that there was a delay of it to future times; or it may be considered as a wish, "O
that there were peace" (g), &c.
4. PULPIT, “Good is the word. While there is resignation, there is no doubt something also of
selfishness, in Hezekiah's acceptance of the situation. "Apres mot le deluge" is a saying attributed to a
modern Frenchman. Hezekiah's egotism is less pronounced and less cynical. He thinks with gratitude of
the "peace and steadfastness" which are to be "in his day;" he does not dwell in thought on the coming
"deluge." The "word of the Lord" is "good" to him in more ways than one. It has assured him of coming
male offspring—of sons to sit upon his throne, and save him from the curse of childlessness. And it has
assured him of a rest for his nation—a respite, so that the Babylonian struggle shall not follow
immediately upon the Assyrian; but there shall be a "breathing-space" (Ezr_9:8), a tranquil time, during
which Israel may "dwell in a peaceable habitation, and in sure dwellings, and in quiet resting-places"
(Isa_32:18).

45. 5. JAMISON, “peace ... in my days — The punishment was not, as in David’s case
(2Sa_24:13-15), sent in his time. True repentance acquiesces in all God’s ways and finds cause of
thanksgiving in any mitigation.
6. PULPIT, “The best blessings.
"There shall be peace and truth in my days." These are God's twin blessings. There can be no peace
without truth. There is veracity in ,God's universe everywhere. It is only a seeming blessedness which
exists apart from these things, for the flowers have no root. The dancing smile is only like
phosphorescence on the face of the dead, if we are not at peace with God.
I. CHRIST'S LEGACY WAS PEACE. "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you." This is not
peace of condition, but peace of conscience. The ocean, like Christ's life, may be troubled outwardly, but
there is rest at the heart of it. We cannot judge by the surface-features of life. We must enter within to
know if there be really peace. We must see the man in trouble, trial, solitude, and death. Then we shall
see how true the acclamation is, "There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked." Bunyan had peace in
Bedford Gaol; so had the confessors and martyrs of olden time.
II. CHRIST'S ATONEMENT GIVES PEACE. "Having made peace through the blood of his cross." We
may be unable to give a theory of the atonement that can cover all its meaning—from the days of Anselm
until now men have debated about that; but in depths of agony about sin we feel the need of a Saviour,
and rejoice to sing—
"Nothing in my hands I bring.
Simply to thy cross I cling."
III. CHRIST GIVES PEACE THROUGH TRUTH. He tells the truth about our moral state and condition. He
reveals the truth concerning the nature and purposes of God. He unveils the immortal life, not only as a
doctrine, but in himself, in heavenly beauty of the earthly life. "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life." How
comfortable it is to rest on this gracious promise, and to know that the True One cannot lie!—W.M.S.
7. CALVIN, “8.Good is the word of Jehovah From this reply we learn, that Hezekiah was not a
stubborn or obstinately haughty man, since he listened patiently to the Prophet’ reproof, though he was
little moved by it at the commencement. When he is informed that the Lord is angry, he unhesitatingly
acknowledges his guilt, and confesses that he is justly punished. Having heard the judgment of God, he
does not argue or contend with the Prophet, but conducts himself with gentleness and modesty, and thus
holds out to us an example of genuine submissiveness and obedience.
Let us therefore learn by the example of the pious king’ to listen with calmness to the Lord, not only when
he exhorts or admonishes, but even when he condemns and terrifies by threatening just punishment.
When he says that “ word of God is good,” he not only gives him the praise of justice, but patiently
acquiesces in that which might have been unwelcome on account of its harshness; for even the reprobate
have sometimes been compelled to confess their guilt; while their rebellion was not subdued so as to

46. refrain from murmuring against their Judge. In order, therefore, that God’ threatenings may be softened to
us, we must entertain some hope of mercy, otherwise our hearts will always pour forth unavailing
bitterness; but he who shall be convinced that God, when he punishes, does not in any degree lay aside
the feeling of a father’ affection, will not only confess that God is just, but will calmly and mildly bear his
temporary severity. In a word, when we shall have a powerful conviction of the grace of God, so as to
believe that he is our Father, it will not be hard or disagreeable to us to stand and fall according to his
pleasure; for faith will assure us that nothing is more advantageous to us than his fatherly chastisement.
Thus David, having been very severely reproved by Nathan, humbly replies, “ is the Lord, let him do
whatever is right in his eyes;” (100) for undoubtedly the reason why he is dumb is, not only because it
would be of no use to murmur, but because he willingly submits to the judgment of God. Such is also the
character of Saul’ silence, when he is informed that the kingdom shall be taken from him. (1Sa_28:20.)
But because it is only punishment that terrifies him, and he is not moved by repentance for his sin, we
need not wonder if he be full of cruelty within, though apparently he acquiesces, because he cannot
resist, which otherwise he would willingly do, like malefactors who, while they are held bound by chains or
fetters, are submissive to their judges, whom they would willingly drag down from the place of authority
and trample under their feet. But while David and Hezekiah are “ under the mighty hand of God,”
(1Pe_5:6,) still they do not lose the hope of pardon, and therefore choose rather to submit to the
punishment which he inflicts than to withdraw from his authority.
Which thou hast spoken. It is worthy of notice that he acknowledges not only that the sentence which God
has pronounced is just, but that the word which Isaiah has spoken is good; for there is great weight in this
clause, since he does not hesitate to receive the word with reverence, though it is spoken by a mortal
man, because he looks to its principal Author. The freedom used by Isaiah might undoubtedly be harsh
and unpleasant to the king; but acknowledging him to be the servant of God, he allows himself to be
brought to obedience. So much the more insufferable is the delicacy of those who are offended at being’
admonished or reproved, and scornfully reply to teachers and ministers of the word, “ not you men as well
as we?” As if it were not our duty to obey God, unless he sent angels from heaven, or came down
himself.
Hence also we learn what opinion we ought to form concerning fanatics, who, while they pretend to adore
God, reject the doctrine of the prophets; for if they were ready to obey God, they would listen to him when
he spoke by his prophets, not less than when he thundered from heaven. I admit that we ought to
distinguish between true and false prophets, between “ voice of the shepherd (Joh_10:3) and the voice of
the stranger;” but we must not reject all without distinction, if we do not wish to reject God himself; and we
ought to listen to them, not only when they exhort or reprove, but also when they condemn, and when
they threaten, by the command of God, the just punishment of our sins.
At least (101) there shall be peace The particle ‫כי‬ (ki) sometimes expresses opposition, but, here it
denotes an exception, and therefore I have translated it at least; for Hezekiah adds something new, that
is, he gives thanks to God for mitigating the punishment which he had deserved; as if he had said, “ Lord
might have suddenly raised up enemies, to drive me out of my kingdom; but he now spares me, and, by
delaying, moderates the punishment which might justly have been inflicted on me.” Yet this clause may
be explained as a prayer, (102) expressing Hezekiah’ desire that the punishment should be delayed till a
future age. But it is more probable that what the Prophet had said about the days that were to come,
Hezekiah applied for soothing his grief, to encourage himself to patience, because sudden vengeance
would have alarmed him still more. This exception, therefore, is highly fitted to induce meekness of
spirit, “ least God will spare our age.” But if any person prefer to view it as assigning a reason, “For there
shall be peace,” (103) him enjoy his opinion.

47. Peace and Truth. Some think that ‫,אמת‬ (emeth,) Truth, denotes the worship of God and pure religion, as if
he were thanking God that, when he died, he would leave the doctrine of godliness unimpaired. But I
consider it to denote “” or a peaceful condition of the kingdom; if it be not thought preferable to view it as
denoting, by the substitution of one word for another, that there will be certain and long-continued
prosperity.
But it may be thought that Hezekiah was cruel in taking no care about posterity, and not giving himself
much trouble about what should happen afterwards. Such sayings as, ( ἐµοῦ θανόντος γαῖα µιχθήτω
πυρί,) “ I am dead, let the earth be committed to the flames,” that is, “ I am dead, all are dead;” and other
sayings of the same kind, which are now in the mouths of many swine and Epieureans, are profane and
shocking. But Hezekiah’ meaning was quite different; for, while he wished well to those who should live
after him, yet it would have been undutiful to disregard that token of forbearance which God gave by
delaying his vengeance; for he might have been led by it to hope that this mercy would, in some degree,
be extended to posterity.
Some reply that he rejoiced at the delay, because
“ ought not to be anxious about to-morrow, seeing that sufficient for the day is its own affliction.”
(Mat_6:34.)
But this does not apply to the present passage; for Hezekiah does not disregard posterity, but, perceiving
that God moderates the punishment by forbearance, he gives thanks to God, as we have already said; for
although this punishment awaited a future age, still it was his duty to acknowledge the present favor. And
indeed we ought to labor most for our own age, and to pay our chief regard to it. The future ought not to
be overlooked; but what is present and immediate has stronger claims on our services; for we who live at
the same time are bound by God with a stronger tie, in order that, by mutual intercourse, we may assist
each other, as far as shall be in our power. It ought likewise to be observed that, while the Lord had
formerly promised a lengthened life to hezekiah, when he was very near death, there was now strong
reason to fear that he would again cut short his life on account of that sin. When he is informed that the
promise is ratified, he gives thanks to God, and bears more patiently the calamity which was to come,
though he felt it to be grievous and distressing.
(100) Our author, quoting from memory, relates the words, not of David to Nathan, (2Sa_12:12,) but of Eli
to Samuel. (1Sa_3:18) — Ed.
(101) “ there shall be peace.” — Eng. Ver.
(102) “Au moins qu’ y ait paix.” “ least let there be peace.”
(103) Car il y aura paix.
8. STEDMAN, “Hezekiah's whining response to this terrible prophecy follows: "Well, the word of the Lord
is good. But thank God it will not happen in my day, at any rate."
What this is meant to teach us, of course, is that prosperity is a greater threat than adversity. When we
are challenged, attacked and insulted, we naturally run to the Lord as our defender. Ah, but when we are
offered a new position, with a higher salary, and to take it we must remove ourselves and our families

48. from the influences that have shaped us morally and spiritually; or when our work is of such a nature that
we are taken away from time we should spend "seeking first the kingdom of God and his righteousness"
Matthew 6:33), it is then we are being exposed to the subtle trap of Babylon. We have all known people
who have fallen into this trap, losing spiritual vitality sometimes for years because they failed to heed
warnings concerning the allurements of the world.
Alexander Solzhenitsyn tells of having once a very close friend while he was imprisoned in the Gulag.
They saw eye to eye on everything. They enjoyed the same things, they liked to discuss the same
subjects. Solzhenitsyn thought their friendship would last a lifetime. To his astonishment, however, when
his friend was offered a privileged position in the prison system he accepted it. That was the first step in a
change in his friend that ultimately saw him end up as a torturer who devised horrible and cruel torments
against Soviet prisoners. Solzhenitsyn described the fear in his own heart when he realized that simple
decisions, made in a moment, in the face of an offer of prosperity, could wreck a life, though attack and
personal insult were unable to shake one's faith.
The great test of faith comes not when we receive news that offends us, insults us, or seems to threaten
our lives. Rather, we ought to take offers of prosperity and blessing and spread these before the Lord,
and listen to his wise words in evaluating what we are being offered.
9. PULPIT, “Our submissions may be selfish.
"He said moreover, For there shall be peace and truth in my days." "Hezekiah not only acquiesces in the
will of Jehovah. like Eli (1Sa_3:18), but congratulates himself on his own personal safety. It would, no
doubt, have been the nobler course to beg that he alone might bear the punishment, as he alone had
sinned. But the principle of the solidarity of the forefather and his posterity, and of the king and his people,
prevails almost throughout the Old Testament." Self-delusion is very common in the matter of submission.
I. SOME THINK THEY SUBMIT WHEN THEY HAVE ONLY CEASED TO CARE. The two things are
quite distinct. A man only truly submits while he keeps his care, and has his personal desire and wish still
vigorous. True submission is the voluntary giving up of one's own wish because we accept the wish of
another. The glory of it is that it is hard. It is easy enough when we have ceased to care.
II. SOME THINK THEY SUBMIT WREN THEY ONLY LIE DOWN UNDER GOD. As dying people, if
asked whether they submit, will often say, "Oh yes; there is nothing else I can do." God is too big for
them—that is all. If he were not, they would still struggle against him. This is the Mohammedan form of
submission. "Allah Akbar!"—"God is great!" "Islam"—"We must submit to him." The exaggeration of this
kind of submission is found in the Eastern doseh. Men lie down on the ground side by side, and let the
king ride on horseback over their shoulders. Our God asks for no such submission as that.
III. SOME THINK THEY SUBMIT WHEN THE BURDEN IS LIFTED FROM THEM TO REST ON OTHER
S. A very comfortable, but very mean, sort of submission. A selfish submission that acquiesces in a will of
God that shields ourselves, whatever others may have to suffer. This was Hezekiah's submission. "Good
is the will of the Lord in judgment, for he has shifted it over to make things comfortable for me." It is
impossible to give Hezekiah much credit for so poor a submission as that.
IV. TRUE HEARTS THINK THEY SUBMIT ONLY WHEN THEY LOVINGLY ACCEPT THE HOLY WILL,
WHATEVER THAT WILL MAY INVOLVE. Submission is the expression of confidence, the breath of
trust, the sign of perfect love. It is the uttered child-heart. It cannot make any qualifications. Its unceasing
refrain is, "My Father knows." The one sublime example of submission is the Lord Jesus Christ, who,
though the holy will involved bitterest personal suffering, could sincerely say, "Not as I will, but as thou

49. wilt." After Christ the world's great figure of submission is the venerable Moses, ascending Nebo to
receive the kiss of God and die, "with Canaan's goodly land in view."—R.T.
10. Hezekiah's Response
8 Then said Hezekiah to Isaiah, Good is the word of the LORD which thou hast spoken. He said
moreover, For there shall be peace and truth in my days.--These words can be understood in two
ways.
Some think that Hezekiah is exhibiting callous indifference to the oracle of judgment that he has just
heard, like Louis XV of France, whose financial mismanagement bankrupted France and led to the
revolution 15 years after his death. When asked how the country could survive, he is reported to have
proclaimed, “After me, the deluge.”
But the Chronicler has a more positive view on what is going on.
2 Ch 32:26 Notwithstanding Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart, both he and
the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of the LORD came not upon them in the days of
Hezekiah.
Remember our conclusion from 2 Chr 32:31 that God is using Hezekiah as a case study of what
happens to Israel's most righteous king when left with only the resources of the flesh. Once this
demonstration is accomplished, the Lord tenderly grants him “the spirit of grace and of supplications”
(cf. Zech 12:10). His statement, “Good is the word of the Lord,” should be understood as an
acknowledgment of his sin, and the recognition of the delay is thanksgiving for the measure of grace
that the Lord has bestowed on him.
There is an important principle here for us. Though the Lord may chastise us and test us, in the end he
will restore us to a better relationship with him than we had before.
Psa 103:9 He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger for ever.
Mic 7:18 he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy.
Isa 54:7-8 For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee. 8

50. In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have
mercy on thee, saith the LORD thy Redeemer.
Isa 57:16 For I will not contend for ever, neither will I be always wroth: for the spirit should fail
before me, and the souls which I have made.
Lam 3:31-32 For the Lord will not cast off for ever: 32 But though he cause grief, yet will he
have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies.
Notes
These notes collect other OT parallels to understand the Chronicler's interpretation of Hezekiah's
failing:
2Ch 32:31 Howbeit in the business of the ambassadors of the princes of Babylon, who sent unto
him to enquire of the wonder that was done in the land, God left ‫עזב‬ G εγκαταλειπω him, to try
‫נסה‬ D πειραζω him, that he might know all that was in his heart.
07/06/10 Copyright © 2010, H. Van Dyke Parunak. All Rights Reserved. Page 22
May be freely reprinted noncommercially with attribution and citation of www.cyber-chapel.org
God Leaves his People
Vocabulary for “leave” (2 Chr 32:31)
The Hebrew is ‫עזב‬ and the LXX εγκαταλειπω. Εγκαταλειπω is by far the dominant translation of ‫עזב‬ at
129x; next most frequent is καταλειπω at 45x; ‫עזב‬ appears 216x in all. It is also a devoted translation,
reflecting no other verb more than 6x ‫.בגד‬
In the references below, we will other terms used as well, notable ‫נטׁש‬ and ‫.סור‬
References
Other examples of God leaving people:
God withdrew his presence from Israel's armies after they refused to enter the land:
Num 14:42 Go not up, for the LORD is not among you; that ye be not smitten before your

51. enemies.
The failure at Ai was accompanied by the warning,
Jos 7:12 neither will I be with you any more, except ye destroy the accursed from among you.
The language of abandonment is also used to describe the disciplinary periods under the judges:
Jdg 6:13 but now the LORD hath forsaken ‫נטׁש‬ us, and delivered us into the hands of the
Midianites.
Jdg 16:20 And she said, The Philistines be upon thee, Samson. And he awoke out of his sleep,
and said, I will go out as at other times before, and shake myself. And he wist not that the
LORD was departed ‫סור‬ from him.
Psa 78:60 So that he forsook ‫נטׁש‬ the tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent which he placed among
men;
The departure of the Lord from Saul when David was anointed is a key milestone in the monarchy:
1Sa 16:13-14 Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren:
and the Spirit of the LORD came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and
went to Ramah. 14 But the Spirit of the LORD departed ‫סור‬ from Saul, and an evil spirit
from the LORD troubled him.
1Sa 18:12 And Saul was afraid of David, because the LORD was with him, and was departed
‫סור‬ from Saul.
Isaiah observed this in general:
Isa 2:6 Therefore thou hast forsaken ‫נטׁש‬ thy people the house of Jacob, because they be
replenished from the east, and are soothsayers like the Philistines, and they please themselves in
the children of strangers.
07/06/10 Copyright © 2010, H. Van Dyke Parunak. All Rights Reserved. Page 23
May be freely reprinted noncommercially with attribution and citation of www.cyber-chapel.org .Isaiah 38-
39
During the reign of Manasseh, the prophets warned of such an outcome:

52. 2Ki 21:11, 14 Because Manasseh king of Judah hath done these abominations, 14 I will
forsake ‫נטׁש‬ the remnant of mine inheritance,
And Jeremiah records its fulfillment in the Babylonian captivity:
Jer 7:29 Cut off thine hair, O Jerusalem, and cast it away, and take up a lamentation on high
places; for the LORD hath rejected ‫מאס‬ and forsaken ‫נטׁש‬ the generation of his wrath.
Jer 12:7 I have forsaken ‫עזב‬ mine house, I have left ‫נטׁש‬ mine heritage; I have given the
dearly beloved of my soul into the hand of her enemies.
Jer 23:33 And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest, shall ask thee, saying, What is the
burden of the LORD? thou shalt then say unto them, What burden? I will even forsake ‫נטׁש‬
you, saith the LORD.
Jer 23:39 Therefore, behold, I, even I, will utterly forget you, and I will forsake ‫נטׁש‬ you, and
the city that I gave you and your fathers, and cast you out of my presence:
David, perhaps looking back on earlier experiences, twice prays that the Lord would not leave him:
Psa 27:9 (unknown occasion) Hide not thy face far from me; put not thy servant away in anger:
thou hast been my help; leave ‫נטׁש‬ me not, neither forsake ‫עזב‬ me, O God of my salvation.
Psa 51:11 (When Nathan rebuked him for his sin with Bathsheba) Cast me not away from thy
presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.
Solomon blesses the people during the dedication of the temple:
1Ki 8:57 The LORD our God be with us, as he was with our fathers: let him not leave ‫עזב‬ us,
nor forsake ‫נטׁש‬ us:
During the reign of the good king Asa, Azariah the son of Oded exhorts him and the nation as they
return from victory over Ethiopian invaders,
2Ch 15:2 And he went out to meet Asa, and said unto him, Hear ye me, Asa, and all Judah and
Benjamin; The LORD is with you, while ye be with him; and if ye seek him, he will be found of
you; but if ye forsake him, he will forsake ‫עזב‬ you.

53. In these cases, as in 2 Chr 32:31, God's presence is essential to success, and his absence brings
disaster.
But there is an important contrast between these cases and Hezekiah. In all these cases, God's
withdrawal is the result of some sin. By contrast, in 32:31, the forsaking is a test that leads to a failing,
rather than a consequence of a previous sin.
Can or will God leave his people now?
Red font in negatives indicates ου µη plus subjunctive, a very strong negative (Wallace p. 468)
We naturally think of the promise in Heb 13:5-6,
Heb 13:5-6 Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as
ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave ανιηµι thee, nor forsake εγκαταλειπω thee. 6 So
07/06/10 Copyright © 2010, H. Van Dyke Parunak. All Rights Reserved. Page 24
May be freely reprinted noncommercially with attribution and citation of www.cyber-chapel.org .Isaiah 38-
39
that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me.
Importantly, this is a quotation from the OT, thus not a difference of covenant. Here's the data:
Gen 28:15 (Jacob) And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou
goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave ‫עזב‬ εγκαταλειπω thee, until
I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.
Deut 4:30-31 (Israel) When thou art in tribulation, and all these things are come upon thee,
even in the latter days, if thou turn to the LORD thy God, and shalt be obedient unto his voice;
(For the LORD thy God is a merciful God;) he will not forsake ‫רפה‬ εγκαταλειπω thee,
neither [ουδε µη + indicative] destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which he
sware unto them.
Deut 31:6 (Israel) Be strong and of a good courage, fear not, nor be afraid of them: for the
LORD thy God, he it is that doth go with thee; he will not fail ‫רפה‬ ανιηµι thee, nor forsake
‫עזב‬ εγκαταλειπω thee.
Deut 31:8 (Joshua) And the LORD, he it is that doth go before thee; he will be with thee, he

54. will not fail ‫רפה‬ ανιηµι thee, neither forsake ‫עזב‬ εγκαταλειπω thee: fear not, neither be
dismayed.
Josh 1:5 (Joshua) There shall not any man be able to stand before thee all the days of thy life:
as I was with Moses, so I will be with thee: I will not fail ‫רפה‬ εγκαταλειπω thee, nor [ουδε
µη + indicative] forsake ‫עזב‬ υπεροραω thee.
1 Chr 28:20 (Solomon) And David said to Solomon his son, Be strong and of good courage,
and do it: fear not, nor be dismayed: for the LORD God, even my God, will be with thee; he
will not fail ‫רפה‬ ανιηµι thee, nor forsake ‫עזב‬ εγκαταλειπω thee, until thou hast finished all
the work for the service of the house of the LORD.
There are other such OT promises as well:
1Sa 12:22 (Samuel's valedictory) For the LORD will not forsake ‫נטׁש‬ his people for his great
name's sake: because it hath pleased the LORD to make you his people.
Psa 94:14 For the LORD will not cast off his people, neither will he forsake ‫נטׁש‬ his
inheritance.
Observations:
• The Hebrews quotation is conflate. The first person is from Gen 28:15, while the paired verbs
are from numerous others (and the use of ου µη plus the subjunctive of ανιηµι rather than ου
plus the future points to Moses' exhortation to Israel, Deut 31:6). Exactly the same conflation
appears in Philo's quotation of the passage in De confusione linguarum 1:166.
• Note the “until” of Gen 28:15 and 1 Chr 28:20, and the conditional in Deut 4:30-31. This
promise could be temporary in the OT. But the promise to Joshua (1:5) is “all the days of thy
life.”
• All the OT passages are with respect to specific people or groups in specific settings. The
statements that God could and did leave individuals shows that the promise is not universal, and
07/06/10 Copyright © 2010, H. Van Dyke Parunak. All Rights Reserved. Page 25

55. May be freely reprinted noncommercially with attribution and citation of www.cyber-chapel.org .Isaiah 38-
39
the Lord is never said to leave someone to whom he promised that he would not leave them.
• Relation of this concept to the Holy Spirit as the pledge of the New Covenant (Ezek 36:27; Eph
1:13, 14) (compare the role of the Spirit in the Lord's presence with Saul and David); John 15
(abide in me). Perseverance of the saints ...
God Tries his People
Other Examples
Gen 22:1 And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt ‫נסה‬ D πειραζω Abraham,
and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.
Deu 8:2 And thou shalt remember all the way which the LORD thy God led thee these forty
years in the wilderness, to humble thee, and to prove ‫נסה‬ D εκπειραζω thee, to know what
was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no.
Deu 8:16 Who fed thee in the wilderness with manna, which thy fathers knew not, that he might
humble thee, and that he might prove ‫נסה‬ D εκπειραζω thee, to do thee good at thy latter end;
Deu 13:3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for
the LORD your God proveth ‫נסה‬ D πειραζω you, to know whether ye love the LORD your
God with all your heart and with all your soul.
Joh 6:5-6 When Jesus then lifted up his eyes, and saw a great company come unto him, he saith
unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? 6 And this he said to prove
πειραζω him: for he himself knew what he would do.
General Principles
Psa 139:23 Search me, O God, and know my heart: try ‫בחן‬ εταζω me, and know my thoughts:
Pro 17:3 The fining pot is for silver, and the furnace for gold: but the LORD trieth ‫בחן‬ the
hearts.
1Ch 28:9 And thou, Solomon my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a

56. perfect heart and with a willing mind: for the LORD searcheth ‫דרׁש‬ G εταζω all hearts, and
understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts:
1Ch 29:17 I know also, my God, that thou triest ‫בחן‬ G εταζω the heart, and hast pleasure in
uprightness.
Jer 17:10 I the LORD search the heart, I try ‫בחן‬ G εταζω the reins, even to give every man
according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.
1Pe 1:7 That the trial δοκιµιον of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that
perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the
appearing of Jesus Christ:
07/06/10 Copyright © 2010, H. Van Dyke Parunak. All Rights Reserved. Page 26
May be freely reprinted noncommercially with attribution and citation of www.cyber-chapel.org .
11. COFFMAN, “In 2 Chronicles 32:26, we learn that, "Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his
heart, both he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of Jehovah came not upon them in the
days of Hezekiah." This information was also, in all probability, imparted to Hezekiah at the same time
with the message here; and it was for this that Hezekiah was especially glad.
We deeply appreciate the discernment of Kidner who saw in this little chapter the explanation of the rest
of the great Prophecy of Isaiah:
"To Hezekiah there was comfort in the postponement of the disaster awaiting Israel, but not to Isaiah.
Evidently, he took this burden home with him, and so lived under its weight that when God spoke to him
again it was to one who in spirit had already lived long years in Babylon (Isaiah 40:2), and who could
speak "to the heart" of a generation of exiles yet to be born."[16]
Here then, is the explanation of Isaiah's focus upon the problems of later generations featured in the next
division of his prophecy.
Some have read a certain trait of selfishness into Hezekiah's words of thankfulness here; but we believe
Dummelow was correct in the statement that, "On the contrary, his spirit at this time seemed rather to
have been one of humble contrition."[17]

57. New International Version (NIV)
Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978,
1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved
worldwide.