A verse by verse commentary on Isaiah 66.

1. ISAIAH 66 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Judgment and Hope
1 This is what the LORD says:
“Heaven is my throne,
and the earth is my footstool.
Where is the house you will build for me?
Where will my resting place be?
1.BARNES, “The heaven is my throne - (See the notes at Isa_57:15). Here he is
represented as having his seat or throne there. He speaks as a king. heaven is the place where he
holds his court; from where he dispenses his commands; and from where he surveys all his
works (compare 2Ch_6:18; Mat_5:34). The idea here is, that as God dwelt in the vast and
distant heavens, no house that could be built on earth could be magnificent enough to be his
abode.
The earth is my footstool - A footstool is that which is placed under the feet when we sit.
The idea here is, that God was so glorious that even the earth itself could be regarded only as his
footstool. It is probable that the Saviour had this passage in his eye in his declaration in the
sermon on the mount, ‘Swear not at all; neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne; nor by the
earth, for it is his footstool’ Mat_5:34-35.
Where is the house that ye build unto me? - What house can you build that will be an
appropriate dwelling for him who fills heaven and earth? The same idea, substantially, was
expressed by Solomon when he dedicated the temple: ‘But will God indeed dwell on the earth?
Behold, the heaven, and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I
have builded!’ 1Ki_8:27. Substantially the same thought is found in the address of Paul at
Athens: ‘God, that made the world, and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and
earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands’ Act_17:24.
And where is the place of my rest? - It has already been intimated (in the analysis) that
this refers probably to the time subsequent to the captivity. Lowth supposes that it refers to the
time of the rebuilding of the temple by Herod. So also Vitringa understands it, and supposes
that it refers to the pride and self-confidence of those who then imagined that they were rearing
a structure that was worthy of being a dwelling-place of Yahweh. Grotius supposes that it refers
to the time of the Maccabees, and that it was designed to give consolation to the pious of those
times when they were about to witness the profanation of the temple by Antiochus, and the

2. cessation of the sacrifices for three years and a half. ‘God therefore shows,’ says he, ‘that there
was no reason why they should be offended in this thing. The most acceptable temple to him was
a pious mind; and from that the value of all sacrifices was to be estimated.’ Abarbanel supposes
that it refers to the times of redemption.
His words are these: ‘I greatly wonder at the words of the learned interpreting this prophecy,
when they say that the prophet in this accuses the people of his own time on account of
sacrifices offered with impure hands, for lo! all these prophecies which the prophet utters in the
end of his book have respect to future redemption.’ See Vitringa. That it refers to some future
time when the temple should be rebuilt seems to me to be evident. But what precise period it
refers to - whether to times not far succeeding the captivity, or to the times of the Maccabees, or
to the time of the rebuilding of the temple by Herod, it is difficult to find any data by which we
can determine. From the whole strain of the prophecy, and particularly from Isa_66:3-5, it
seems probable that it refers to the time when the temple which Herod had reared was finishing;
when the nation was full of pride, self-righteousness, and hypocrisy; and when all sacrifices were
about to be superseded by the one great sacrifice which the Messiah was to make for the sins of
the world. At that time, God says that the spirit which would be evinced by the nation would be
abominable in his sight; and to offer sacrifice then, and with the spirit which they would
manifest, would be as offensive as murder or the sacrifice of a dog (see the notes at Isa_66:3).
2. WESLEY, “Zion's sake - Zion and Jerusalem are both put for the church, Hebrews 12:22 . My peace
- These seem to be the words of the prophet strongly resolving, notwithstanding all difficulties, to solicit
God for the church's happiness, and constantly excite to the belief of it by his preaching, though it were
long before it came, for Isaiah lived near two hundred years before this was accomplished.
Righteousness - With reference to the Babylonians, understand it of the righteousness of God, who hath
promised his people deliverance, and he must be righteous, and so understand salvation before; or
rather, the vindicating of his people's cause in the eyes of the nations by the ruin of the Babylonians; he
will shew that his people have a righteous cause. Lamp - And to that purpose is set up where it may be
seen continually, to signify how eminently conspicuous this prosperous estate of the church should be
among the nations, and as it may particularly relate to revealing of Christ unto the world.
3. GILL, “Thus saith the Lord, the heaven is my throne,.... The third heaven, the heaven
of heavens, where angels and glorified saints are, and some in bodies, as Enoch and Elijah, and
where now Christ is in human nature; this is the seat of the divine Majesty, where he in a most
illustrious manner displays his glory; and therefore we are to look upwards to God in heaven,
and direct all our devotion to him there, and not imagine that he dwells in temples made with
hands; or is confined to any place, and much less to any on earth, as the temple at Jerusalem,
the Jews boasted of, and trusted in; and which were the unworthy notions they had of God in the
times of Christ and his disciples; to confute which these words are here said, and for this
purpose are quoted and applied by Stephen, Act_7:48. See Gill on Act_7:48, Act_7:49,
Act_7:50,

3. and the earth is my footstool: on which he treads, is below him, subject to him, and at his
dispose; and therefore is not limited to any part of it, or included in any place in it; though he for
a while condescended to make the cherubim his throne, and the ark his footstool, in the most
holy place in the temple; which were all figurative of other and better things, and so no more
used:
where is the house that ye build unto me? what house can be built for such an immense
Being? and how needless as well as fruitless is it to attempt it? where can a place be found to
build one in, since the heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool? and therefore, if any
place, it must be some that is without them both, and that can hold both; but what space can be
conceived of that can contain such a throne and footstool, and much less him that sits thereon?
see 1Ki_8:27,
and where is the place of my rest? for God to take up his rest and residence in, as a man
does in his house? no such place can be found for him, nor does he need any; indeed the temple
was built for an house of rest for the ark of the Lord, which before was moved from place to
place; but then this was merely typical of the church, which God has chosen for his rest, and
where he will dwell, as well as of heaven, the resting place of his people with him to all eternity;
no place on earth is either his rest or theirs.
4. HENRY, “Here, I. The temple is slighted in comparison with a gracious soul, Isa_66:1,
Isa_66:2. The Jews in the prophet's time, and afterwards in Christ's time, gloried much in the
temple and promised themselves great things from it; to humble them therefore, and to shake
their vain confidence, both the prophets and Christ foretold the ruin of the temple, that God
would leave it and then it would soon be desolate. After it was destroyed by the Chaldeans it
soon recovered itself and the ceremonial services were revived with it; but by the Romans it was
made a perpetual desolation, and the ceremonial law was abolished with it. That the world
might be prepared for this, they were often told, as here, of what little account the temple was
with God. 1. That he did not need it. Heaven is the throne of his glory and government; there he
sits, infinitely exalted in the highest dignity and dominion, above all blessing and praise. The
earth is his footstool, on which he stands, over-ruling all the affairs of it according to his will. If
God has so bright a throne, so large a footstool, where then is the house they can build unto
God, that can be the residence of his glory, or where is the place of his rest? What satisfaction
can the Eternal Mind take in a house made with men's hands? What occasion has he, as we
have, for a house to repose himself in, who faints not neither is weary, who neither slumbers
nor sleeps? Or, if he had occasion, he would not tell us (Psa_50:12), for all these things hath his
hand made, heaven and all its courts, earth and all its borders, and all the hosts of both. All
these things have been, have had their beginning, by the power of God, who was happy from
eternity before they were, and therefore could not be benefited by them. All these things are (so
some read it); they still continue, upheld by the same power that made them; so that our
goodness extends not to him. If he required a house for himself to dwell in, he would have made
one himself when he made the world; and, if he had made one, it would have continued to this
day, as other creatures do, according to his ordinance; so that he had no need of a temple made
with hands. 2. That he would not heed it as he would a humble, penitent, gracious heart. He has
a heaven and earth of his own making, and a temple of man's making; but he overlooks them all,
that he may look with favour to him that is poor in spirit, humble and serious, self-abasing and
self-denying, whose heart is truly contrite for sin, penitent for it, and in pain to get it pardoned,
and who trembles at God's word, not as Felix did, with a transient qualm that was over when
the sermon was done, but with an habitual awe of God's majesty and purity and an habitual

4. dread of his justice and wrath. Such a heart is a living temple for God; he dwells there, and it is
the place of his rest; it is like heaven and earth, his throne and his footstool.
5. JAMISON, “Isa_66:1-24. The humble comforted, the ungodly condemned, at the Lord’s
appearing: Jerusalem made a joy on earth.
This closing chapter is the summary of Isaiah’s prophecies as to the last days, hence the
similarity of its sentiments with what went before.
heaven ... throne ... where is ... house ... ye build — The same sentiment is expressed,
as a precautionary proviso for the majesty of God in deigning to own any earthly temple as His,
as if He could be circumscribed by space (1Ki_8:27) in inaugurating the temple of stone; next, as
to the temple of the Holy Ghost (Act_7:48, Act_7:49); lastly here, as to “the tabernacle of God
with men” (Isa_2:2, Isa_2:3; Eze_43:4, Eze_43:7; Rev_21:3).
where — rather, “what is this house that ye are building, etc. — what place is this for My
rest?” [Vitringa].
6. K&D, “Although the note on which this prophecy opens is a different one from any that
has yet been struck, there are many points in which it coincides with the preceding prophecy.
For not only is Isa_65:12 repeated here in Isa_66:4, but the sharp line of demarcation drawn in
chapter 65, between the servants of Jehovah and the worldly majority of the nation with
reference to the approaching return to the Holy Land, is continued here. As the idea of their
return is associated immediately with that of the erection of a new temple, there is nothing at all
to surprise us, after what we have read in Isa_65:8., in the fact that Jehovah expresses His
abhorrence at the thought of having a temple built by the Israel of the captivity, as the majority
then were, and does so in such words as those which follow in Isa_66:1-4 : “Thus saith Jehovah:
The heaven is my throne, and the earth my footstool. What kind of house is it that ye would
build me, and what kind of place for my rest? My hand hath made all these things; then all
these thing arose, saith Jehovah; and at such persons do I look, at the miserable and broken-
hearted, and him that trembleth at my word. He that slaughtereth the ox is the slayer of a
man; he that sacrificeth the sheep is a strangler of dogs; he that offereth a meat-offering, it is
swine's blood; he that causeth incense to rise up in smoke, blesseth idols. As they have chosen
their ways, and their soul cheriseth pleasure in their abominations; so will I choose their ill-
treatments, and bring their terrors upon them, because I called and no one replied, I spake and
they did not hear, and they did evil in mine eyes, and chose that in which I took no pleasure."
Hitzig is of opinion that the author has broken off here, and proceeds quite unexpectedly to
denounce the intention to build a temple for Jehovah. Those who wish to build he imagines to
be those who have made up their minds to stay behind in Chaldea, and who, whilst their
brethren who have returned to their native land are preparing to build a temple there, want to
have one of their own, just as the Jews in Egypt built one for themselves in Leontopolis. Without
some such supposition as this, Hitzig thinks it altogether impossible to discover the thread
which connects the different vv. together. This view is at any rate better than that of Umbreit,
who imagines that the prophet places us here “on the loftiest spiritual height of the Christian
development.” “In the new Jerusalem,” he says, “there will be no temple seen, nor any sacrifice;
Jehovah forbids these in the strongest terms, regarding them as equivalent to mortal sins.” But
the prophet, if this were his meaning, would involve himself in self-contradiction, inasmuch as,
according to Isa_56:1-12 and 60, there will be a temple in the new Jerusalem with perpetual
sacrifice, which this prophecy also presupposes in Isa_66:20. (cf., Isa_66:6); and secondly, he
would contradict other prophets, such as Ezekiel and Zechariah, and the spirit of the Old

5. Testament generally, in which the statement, that whoever slaughters a sacrificial animal in the
new Jerusalem will be as bad as a murderer, has no parallel, and is in fact absolutely impossible.
According to Hitzig's view, on the other hand, v. 3a affirms, that the worship which they would
be bound to perform in their projected temple would be an abomination to Jehovah, however
thoroughly it might be made to conform to the Mosaic ritual. But there is nothing in the text to
sustain the idea, that there is any intention here to condemn the building of a temple to Jehovah
in Chaldaea, nor is such an explanation by any means necessary to make the text clear. The
condemnation on the part of Jehovah has reference to the temple, which the returning exiles
intend to build in Jerusalem. The prophecy is addressed to the entire body now ready to return,
and says to the whole without exception, that Jehovah, the Creator of heaven and earth, does not
stand in need of any house erected by human hands, and then proceeds to separate the penitent
from those that are at enmity against God, rejects in the most scornful manner all offerings in
the form of worship on the part of the latter, and threatens them with divine retribution, having
dropped in Isa_66:3-4 the form of address to the entire body. Just as in the Psalm of Asaph (Ps
50) Jehovah refuses animal and other material offerings as such, because the whole of the
animal world, the earth and the fulness thereof, are His possession, so here He addresses this
question to the entire body of the exiles: What kind of house is there that ye could build, that
would be worthy of me, and what kind of place that would be worthy of being assigned to me as
a resting-place? On maqom me
nuchathı̄, locus qui sit requies mea (apposition instead of genitive
connection). He needs no temple; for heaven is His throne, and the earth His footstool. He is the
Being who filleth all, the Creator, and therefore the possessor, of the universe; and if men think
to do Him a service by building Him a temple, and forget His infinite majesty in their concern
for their own contemptible fabric, He wants to temple at all. “All these” refer, as if pointing with
the finger, to the world of visible objects that surround us. ‫יוּ‬ ְ‫ה‬ִ ַ‫ו‬ (from ‫ה‬ָ‫י‬ ָ‫,ה‬ existere, fieri) is used
in the same sense as the ‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ְ‫י‬ַ‫ו‬ which followed the creative ‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ְ‫.י‬ In this His exaltation He is not
concerned about a temple; but His gracious look is fixed upon the man who is as follows (zeh
pointing forwards as in Isa_58:6), viz., upon the mourner, the man of broken heart, who is filled
with reverential awe at the word of His revelation.
We may see from Psa_51:9 what the link of connection is between Isa_66:2 and Isa_66:3. So
far as the mass of the exiles were concerned, who had not been humbled by their sufferings, and
whom the preaching of the prophet could not bring to reflection, He did not want any temple or
sacrifice from them. The sacrificial acts, to which such detestable predicates are here applied,
are such as end with the merely external act, whilst the inward feelings of the person presenting
the sacrifice are altogether opposed to the idea of both the animal sacrifice and the meat-
offering, more especially to that desire for salvation which was symbolized in all the sacrifices; in
other words, they are sacrificial acts regarded as νεκρᆭ ᅞργα, the lifeless works of men spiritually
dead. The articles of hasshor and hasseh are used as generic with reference to sacrificial animals.
The slaughter of an ox was like the slaying (makkeh construct with tzere) of a man (for the
association of ideas, see Gen_49:6); the sacrifice (zobheach like shachat is sometimes applied to
slaughtering for the purpose of eating; here, however, it refers to an animal prepared for
Jehovah) of a sheep like the strangling of a dog, that unclean animal (for the association of
ideas, see Job_30:1); the offerer up (me
‛oleh) of a meat-offering (like one who offered up) swine's
blood, i.e., as if he was offering up the blood of this most unclean animal upon the altar; he who
offered incense as an 'azkarah (see at Isa_1:13) like one who blessed 'aven, i.e., godlessness, used
here as in 1Sa_15:23, and also in Hosea in the change of the name of Bethel into Beth 'Aven, for
idolatry, or rather in a concrete sense for the worthless idols themselves, all of which, according

6. to Isa_41:29, are nothing but 'aven. Rosenmüller, Gesenius, Hitzig, Stier, and even Jerome, have
all correctly rendered it in this way, “as if he blessed an idol” (quasi qui benedicat idolo); and
Vitringa, “cultum exhibens vano numini” (offering worship to a vain god). Such explanations as
that of Luther, on the other hand, viz., “as if he praised that which was wrong,” are opposed to
the antithesis, and also to the presumption of a concrete object to ‫מברך‬ (blessing); whilst that of
Knobel, “praising vainly” ('aven being taken as an acc. Adv.), yields too tame an antithesis, and is
at variance with the usage of the language. In this condemnation of the ritual acts of worship,
the closing prophecy of the book of Isaiah coincides with the first (Isa_1:11-15). But that it is not
sacrifices in themselves that are rejected, but the sacrifices of those whose hearts are divided
between Jehovah and idols, and who refuse to offer to Him the sacrifice that is dearest to Him
(Psa_51:19, cf., Psa_50:23), is evident from the correlative double-sentence that follows in
Isa_66:3 and Isa_66:4, which is divided into two masoretic verses, as the only means of
securing symmetry. Gam ... gam, which means in other cases, “both ... and also,” or in negative
sentences “neither ... nor,” means here, as in Jer_51:12, “as assuredly the one as the other,” in
other words, “as ... so.” They have chosen their own ways, which are far away from those of
Jehovah, and their soul has taken pleasure, not in the worship of Jehovah, but in all kinds of
heathen abominations (shiqqutsehem, as in many other places, after Deu_29:16); therefore
Jehovah wants no temple built by them or with their co-operation, nor any restoration of
sacrificial worship at their hands. But according to the law of retribution, He chooses tha‛alule
hem, vexationes eorum (lxx τᆭ ᅚµπαίγµατα αᆒτራν: see at Isa_3:4), with the suffix of the object:
fates that will use them ill, and brings their terrors upon them, i.e., such a condition of life as
will inspire them with terror (me
guroth, as in Psa_34:5).
7. BI, “The eternal blessedness of the true Israel; the doom of the apostates
This chapter continues the antithesis that runs through chap.
65., carrying it onward to its eschatological issues. The connection of ideas is frequently
extremely difficult to trace, and no two cities are agreed as to where the different sections begin
and end. (Prof. J. Skinner, D. D.)
Temple building
Hitzig thinks (and with him Knobel, Hendewerk) that the author here begins quite abruptly to
oppose the purpose of building a temple to Jehovah; the builders are those who meditated
remaining behind in Chaldea, and wished also to have a temple, as the Jews in Egypt, at a later
time, built one in Leontopolis. (F. Delitzsch, D. D.)
The offerings of the impenitent offensive to God
The address, directed to the entire body ready to return, says without distinction that Jehovah,
the Creator of heaven and earth, needs no house made by men’s hands; then in the entire body
distinguishes between the penitent and those alienated from God, rejects all worship and
offering at the hand of the latter, and threatens them with just retribution. (F. Delitzsch, D. D.)

7. The inward and spiritual preferred by God to the outward and material
[These great words] are a declaration, spoken probably in view of the approaching restoration of
the temple (which, in itself, the prophet entirely approves, Isa_44:28, and expects, Isa_56:7;
Isa_55:7; Isa_62:9),reminding the Jews of the truth which a visible temple might readily lead
them to forget, that no earthly habitation could be really adequate to Jehovah’s majesty, and
that Jehovah’s regard was not to be won by the magnificence of a material temple, but by
humility and the devotion of the heart. How needful the warning was history shows. Jeremiah
(Jer_7:1-15) argues at length against those who pointed, with a proud sense of assurance, to the
massive pile of buildings that crowned the height of Zion, heedless of the moral duties which
loyalty to the King, whose residence it was, implied. And at a yet more critical moment in their
history, attachment to the temple, as such, was one of the causes which incapacitated the Jews
from appropriating the more spiritual teaching of Christ: the charge brought against Stephen
(Act_6:13-14)is that he ceased not “to speak words against this holy place and the law;” and, the
argument of Stephen’s defence (Act_7:1-60.) is just to show that in the past God’s favour had
not been limited to the period during which the temple of Zion existed. Here, then, the prophet
seizes the occasion to insist upon the necessity of a spiritual service, passing on (verses 3-5) to
denounce, in particular, certain superstitious usages which had apparently, at the time, infected
the worship of Jehovah. (Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.)
The inwardness of religion
1. The tendency to make religion consist in external actions, apart from the inward
dispositions which should accompany them, is very common. The reason for this is
discovered from the fact that outward actions are easier than inward. It is easier, for
instance, to become outwardly poor than to become poor in spirit; easier to adore with the
body than to worship with the soul. The tendency is observable in all dispensations. For
instance, whatever other differences there may have been between the sacrifices of Cain and
Abel, we are expressly told that it was “by faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent
sacrifice ‘ (Heb_11:4). The outward act was linked with the right inward disposition. So,
again, in the time of the Levitical Law, the tendency often manifested itself to put ceremonial
above moral obligations (Psa_1:1-6.). And Isaiah, in his first chapter (verses 11-18), shows
how an outward service, without the putting away of evil, is an abomination to God. In the
same way our Lord condemned the Pharisees Mat_15:8).
2. This closing prophecy of Isaiah seems to contain a warning against formalism. It is not
that the outward is unimportant, for this would be to run from one extreme to the other, but
that the outward will not avail. The return of Israel from captivity will be followed by the
building of a new temple, as the event has shown; and the warning of the text is twofold—
one, to remind the Israelites that Jehovah had no need of a temple; the other, to impress
them with a truth they were very apt to forget, that religion must be a matter of the heart.
I. A REVELATION OF GOD. “Heaven is My throne, and the earth is My footstool.”
1. These words, or the substance of them, are again and again repeated in Holy Scripture
(1Ki_8:27; Mat_5:34; Act_7:49). Repetitions in the Bible show the importance of a truth, or
our difficulty in remembering it.
2. What is the truth? That God is incomprehensible. He is everywhere and cannot be
localized (Jer_23:24). There is nowhere where Cod’s power and essence and presence do not
reach. He knows no limit of space or time, of knowledge or love.
II. THE REFERENCE TO THE EXTERNAL TEMPLE. “Where is the house that ye build unto
Me?”

8. 1. These words are not intended to deter Israel from building a material temple when they
had returned to their own land. The prophet would be contradicting himself (Isa_56:5-7;
Isa_60:7); and he would be running counter to the solemn injunctions of other prophets,
such as Haggai and Zechariah, who were in part raised up by God to further the work of
building the temple. What the words are intended to rebuke is the falseness of the ideas that
God requires a temple, and that His presence can be restricted to its walls. God does not
need a temple, but we do. In heaven there will be no necessity for any temple (Rev_21:22),
where the glory of God and of the Lamb floods with its radiance the whole place.
2. Here the church, with its sacred objects and associations, appeals to us and excites our
devotion; here in the sacred place there is a distinct promise to prayer; here God acts upon
us, and we upon God, through prescribed ordinances; here He promises to be present in
some especial manner; here we act upon one another, and kindle fervour, and therefore
must not forsake “the assembling of ourselves together” in the house of Heb_10:25).
III. BUT THE TEXT ALLUDES TO THE INTERNAL TEMPLE—THE DISPOSITIONS OF THE
SOUL OF THE WORSHIPPER, WHICH ATTRACT THE FAVOUR OF GOD. “To this man will I
look,. . . who is poor,. . . contrite, and who trembleth at My word.”
1. Poor, not merely outwardly, but poor in spirit (Psa_138:6). The man who at all realizes
the Divine majesty will have a sense of his own nothingness.
2. Of a contrite spirit. A perception” of the Divine holiness brings self-humiliation by force of
contrast (Job_42:6).
3. “Trembleth at My word. Fear is ever an element of the spirit of worship. A sense of the
Divine justice and judgments fills the soul with awe in approaching God. The Word or
revelation of God is received, not in the spirit of criticism, but with reverence and godly fear.
IV. LESSONS.
1. The remembrance of the all-pervading presence of God should be a deterrent from evil,
and an incentive to good.
2. The obligation of regularity in attendance at Divine worship ought to be insisted upon,
both as a recognition of God and our relations with Him, and for the sake of the subjective
effects on human character.
3. But outward worship is of no avail without inward. There are tests, in the text, of the
presence of the spirit of worship—lowliness, contrition, and awe, as products of the
realization of God’s presence and perfections. (The Thinker.)
God’s elevation and condescension
1. The subject of remark—God Himself. “Thus saith the Lord, The heaven is My throne, the
earth is My footstool.” The attention is turned simply to God—His grandeur, His
magnificence, His immensity, His omnipresence. He abides in heaven, He puts the earth
under His feet.
2. The manner in which the remark about God is conducted, is that of a kind of contrast
betwixt Him and men. “Where is the house that ye build unto Me, and where is the place of
My rest?” God is unlike man. He challenges any comparison. “The heaven, even the heaven
of heavens, cannot contain Him. Ancient kings aimed often to Impress their subjects with an
idea of their magnificence, and surrounded themselves with a solemn and salutary awe, by
rearing palaces of the most imposing splendour and magnificence. They wished to overawe
the multitude. On this ground, God Himself, seems to have ordered the unequalled grandeur

9. of the ancient temple. But in doing it, He took care that its dazzling beauty and stateliness
should only be an aid, a stepping-stone, to assist the imagination in its upward reach
towards the grandeur of God. In the prayer of the dedication, Solomon’s devotion soars
infinitely above the temple.
Here, the majesty of God, and the littleness of man, stand side by side. After mentioning the
earth and the heaven, God says, “All these things hath My hand made.”
3. But yet, lest dread should too much terrify the worshipper, or a high and just idea of God’s
infinite majesty lead the humble into the error of supposing that such an august Being would
not regard such an insignificant creature as man, he adds, “To this man will I look, even to
him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at My word.” A turn of thought well
worthy of our admiration. A contrite sinner has nothing to fear from God. His very majesty
need not terrify him. Indeed, His majesty constitutes the very ground for his encouragement.
It can condescend. Just as much does the King of kings and Lord of lords glorify Himself,
when He consoles, by the whisperings of His Spirit, the poorest and most unworthy sinner
that ever felt the pangs of a bruised heart, as when He thunders in the heavens as the most
High, and gives His voice, hail-stones and coals of fire. With this idea, sinners should-
approach Him and meditate His grandeur. (I. S. Spencer, D. D.)
The magnificence of God
I. THE STYLE OF THE TEXT. God speaks of Himself. “The heaven is My throne, the earth is My
footstool.” This style of religious address is especially common in the Scriptures (Psa_137:1-9.;
Job_11:7-8; Job_26:6-14; Isa_40:1-31.). These passages all speak of God in a style which we
cannot attempt to analyze. Their aim appears to be twofold.
1. To lead us to make the idea of God Himself the leading idea in religion.
2. To have this idea, which we are to entertain about God, an idea of the utmost grandeur, of
the most amazing magnificence, and solemn sublimity.
II. THE DESIGN IN VIEW CANNOT EASILY BE MISTAKEN. They would give us just ideas of
God. The impression they aim to make is simply this, that God is incomparably and
inconceivably above us—an infinite and awful mystery!
III. THE NECESSITY OF THIS MAY EXIST OH DIFFERENT GROUNDS.
1. Our littleness. In the nature of the case, there can be no comparison betwixt man and God.
All is contrast—an infinite contrast.
2. Our sinfulness. Sin never exists aside from the mind’s losing a just impression of the
Deity; and wherever it exists, there is a tendency to cleave to low and unworthy ideas of Him.
3. Our materiality, the connection of our minds with material and gross bodies. This
connection renders it difficult for us to soar beyond matter. We are in danger of introducing
the imperfections of our existence into our religion, even into our ideas of God.
Consequently, when God speaks to us of Himself, He speaks in a manner designed to guard
us from error. He says to us, “The heaven is ,My throne, and the earth is My footstool. Where
is the house ye build unto Me? We are limited to the world. We cannot get foothold
anywhere else. We are circumscribed within very narrow limits. But God asks, “Where is the
place of My rest?” He would elevate our conceptions of Him beyond matter, out of the reach
of its bounds.
4. The nature of God. Man is only a creature. He owes his existence to a cause without him.
That cause still rules him. That cause allows him to know but little, and often drops the veil

10. of an impenetrable darkness before his eyes just at the point, the very point, where he is
most desirous to look further, and it drops the veil there, in order to do him the twofold
office of convincing him of the grandeur of God and his own littleness, and of compelling
him, under the influence of those convictions, to turn back to a light which concerns him
more than the darkness beyond the veil can, to a light where are wrapped up the duties and
interests of his immortal soul. God would repress his curiosity, and make him use his
conscience. Therefore, He makes darkness preach to him.
IV. APPLICATION.
1. Let us be admonished to approach the study of religion with a solemnity of mind which
belongs to it. It is the study of God. The voice comes from the burning bush, “Draw not nigh
hither, put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the ground whereon thou standest is holy
ground.’ How unlike all other subjects is religion! How differently we should approach it!
2. This mode in which God teaches us—this grandeur and magnificence which belong to
Him—ought to remove a very common difficulty from our minds, and prepare us to receive
in faith, those deep and dark doctrines, whose mystery is so apt to stagger us. What can we
expect?
3. Since God is so vast a being, how deep should be our humility!
4. How deep should be our homage.!
5. The greatness of God should gauge the depth of our repentance. Our sin is against Him.
6. The greatness of God should invite our faith. “ If God be for us, who can be against us?”
7. The magnificence of God should be a motive to our service. He is able to turn our smallest
services to an infinite account.
8. The greatness of God ought to encourage the timid. Because He is great, His regard
reaches to every one of your annoyances. Your enemies cannot hurt you.
9. The grandeur of God ought to rebuke our reliance upon creatures. (I. S. Spencer, D. D.)
What God does not, and what He does, regard
I. WHAT THE LORD DOES NOT REGARD. He speaks quite slightingly of this great building.
But is it not said elsewhere that “the Lord loved the courts of Zion”? Did He not expressly tell
King Solomon when his temple was completed, “Mine eyes and Mine heart shall be on it
perpetually”? He did; but in what sense are we to understand those words? Not that He
delighted in the grandeur of the house, but in as much of spiritual worship as was rendered
there. The temple itself was no otherwise well pleasing to Him than as it was raised in obedience
to His orders, and as it served, in its fashion and its furniture, for “an example and a shadow of
heavenly things;” but the Lord “loved the gates of Zion” because the prayers of Zion were
presented there. He points out to us two things—His throne, and His footstool! and then He
leaves it to ourselves to say whether any building man can raise to Him can be considerable in
His eyes.
II. Hear from the Lord’s own lips THE DESCRIPTION OF THE MAN WHO DRAWS HIS EYE.
“To this man,” etc.
1. The sort of character described.
(1) He is “poor”—humble towards God. He is humble, too, towards his fellow-creatures;
carrying himself meekly towards all men, and “in lowliness of mind, esteeming others

11. better than himself.” He is “slow to wrath”—patient under provocation—anxious not to
be “overcome of evil” but rather to “overcome evil with good.”
(2) Another quality which marks the man to whom the Lord looks is contrition.
(3) He “trembleth at My word.” But what kind of trembling is meant? Felix trembled at
God’s word; and many a wicked man from his days to the present has trembled at it also.
And yet it has been but a momentary pang—a sudden fright that has come over them, but
which they have soonlaughed off again. Now it is certainly not this sort of trembling
which the Lord regards. The man who “trembleth” at God’s word is one who entertains a
deep and abiding reverence for every word which hath proceeded from God’s lips.
2. What does the Lord mean when He saith, “To this man will I look? He evidently means,
“To this man will I look with an eye of notice and regard.” The Lord’s favourable look, be it
remembered, is quite another thing from man’s; there is help, and comfort, and support
conveyed by it Isa_57:15). The Lord but looked on Gideon, and Gideon, weak before, was
wonderfully strengthened (Jdg_6:14). (A. Roberts, M. A.)
God’s greater glory
Here are described two phases of the Divine greatness, one material, and the other moral; the
superiority of the latter being clearly implied.
I. THE MATERIAL GREATNESS OF GOD. “Thus saith the Lord, The heaven is My throne, and
the earth is My footstool.” Here God represents Himself as a mighty potentate, leaving us to
infer the measure of His kingly glory and the extent of His dominion from these two things—His
throne and His footstool. Thus the glory of the whole is indicated by the glory of the part.
1. The throne. We must note carefully the full extent and purport of the figure, “The heaven
is My throne. It is not that the heaven is the place of His throne, but that the heaven is itself
the throne. The conception, bold as it is, strikingly agrees with another figure used by
inspiration to set forth the transcendent majesty of God, “Behold, the heaven and heaven of
heavens cannot contain Thee.” The figure is a bold one. The human imagination, daring as
its flights often are, could never have conceived it. It is purely a Divine conception, and the
text is careful to say so, “Thus saith the Lord.”
2. His footstool. “The earth. ‘ We know very little of the heaven. We know a great deal about
the earth. Men have taken its dimensions, explored its resources, and discovered its glories.
Yet this magnificent object is but His footstool. The footstool is the humblest article of
furniture in the household; so needless is it deemed that thousands of houses dispense with
it altogether. Others easily convert the thing nearest to hand into a footstool, as occasion
may require. Nevertheless, some have expended no little skill and expense upon the
construction even of footstools. There is preserved as a relic in Windsor Castle such an
article, once belonging to the renowned Hindoo prince, Tippoo Sahib. It is in the form of a
bear’s head, carved in ivory, with a tongue of gold, teeth of crystal, and its eyes a pair of
rubies. This article is adjudged worth £10,000. It is after all but a footstool. If Tippoo Sahib’s
footstool were so magnificent, what must have been the splendour of his throne! Yet, were
all the thrones of the world collected together into one vast pile, they would form but a heap
of rubbish as compared with God’s footstool.
II. THE TEXT PRESENTS US WITH ANOTHER PHASE OF HIS GLORY—THE MORAL,
WHICH IS ALSO HIS GREATER GLORY. “But to this man will I look, even to him that is poor
and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at My word.” What a contrast we have presented to us
here. God, the Mighty Potentate, from the height of His heavenly throne, looking down with

12. yearning, compassionate regard upon such objects as are here described, the very dust of His
footstool. There is a moral grandeur in this far transcending the power of language to describe.
In order to appreciate fully the beauty and glory of this act, we must notice particularly the
characters which are its special objects. They are described as those who are “poor” and are “of a
contrite spirit,” and that “tremble at His word.” These several expressions do not describe one
and the same condition. They indicate three distinct and progressive stages of spiritual
experience.
1. Destitution. “Poor.” It is not physical poverty that is meant, for the wealthiest, those who
abound most in worldly possessions, are equally with the most destitute in the condition
here indicated by the term “poor. It describes a spiritual condition—the spiritual poverty into
which all men are reduced through sin—the wretched, the miserable, the oppressed of sin
and guilt—the poor in the sense of being without hope, destitute of true peace and
happiness.
2. The second stage indicated is one of conviction—the misery becoming a felt fact. “ And of
a contrite spirit.” In these words we have indicated that condition of the mind when the all-
crushing fact of its poverty and wretchedness has come home with overwhelming conviction.
3. The third stage is one of hope. “Trembleth at My word.” God, out of the infinite depth of
His compassion, hath spoken to this poor, wretched, sin-convicted creature, and the word
spoken is a word of hope. The “trembling” at the word does not mean regarding it with fear,
terror, or dismay, but solemnly, feelingly, and trustingly. It is the trembling of gratitude and
of an awakened hope—an exquisite thrill of gratitude piercing the whole soul, causing it to
vibrate with responsive joy to the message of hope. This wonderful condescension of God in
relation to sinful men is His greater glory, it redounds to His honour far more than His
conversion of the heavens into His throne and of the earth into His footstool. (A. J. Parry.)
Worship and ritual
The desire for Divine communion has ever been strong in man. This desire was originated by
God Himself. If not from God, whence could it come? We have no right to suppose it to be self-
originated. That finite man should conceive an infinite Deity is an incredible supposition, for, to
use the words of Pascal, “the infinite God is infinitely inconceivable.” The manner in which God
has thus revealed Himself in response to the passionate desire which He originated in man is a
study fraught with a singular interest. He made Himself known to our first parents in Eden’s
garden, and in our first Scriptures we have several examples recorded of revelations made by
Him after the banishment to the fathers of our race. By tradition these revelations were spread
throughout the earth, and so we find the earliest religious faiths of our world abounding in
sublime truths. But He specially revealed Himself to a chosen people. Israel lived under the very
shadow of Jehovah, for God dwelt in that temple ann specially manifested His presence in it. But
that presence did not restrain the people from rebellion. When not open followers of the
idolatries of the surrounding nations, they left worship for ritual and forsook God for
observances, and so made that temple to be at once their glory and their shame. It was at such
time as this that the words of our text were uttered. Thus are we taught that Divine worship is
not material, but spiritual, and that the habitation of God is not the building, but the soul.
I. THE NATURE OF THE BEING WHOM WE WORSHIP. Our text brings before as His
omnipresence. He is in heaven, and He is on earth. We have a revelation also of the Divine
omnipotence. Not only is He in heaven, not’ only is He on earth, but He has a throne. Of course
the one includes the other. If He be the omnipresent One, He is also the omnipotent One. That
which is Infinite must be Absolute. We, however, distinguish, so as to obtain clearer

13. conceptions. We are in danger of supposing that amidst all this vastness we can be but of little
consequence. But mind is greater than matter, and such ideas immediately vanish when we
remember that the vastest material substance can never outweigh a holy thought, a feeling of
devotion, a thrill of love. The man who can tell the motions of the stars is greater than the stars.
And thus looking at the question, what shall we say of that man in whom God dwells? He who
lives in a palace is greater than the palace, no matter how gorgeous it may be; and in the
presence of a holy man the whole material creation is dwarfed into nothingness.
II. THE NATURE OF THAT WORSHIP WHICH THIS GREAT GOD REQUIRES. It must be
something more than outward. Of all ceremonialism the Jewish was the most gorgeous. It was
also of Divine appointing. The temple was built according to Divine plan and under Divine
direction. The services were divinely commanded. The priests belonged to a Divinely set apart;
tribe. Tokens of the Divine presence were given. But although this ceremonial was thus
gorgeous, and of Divine appointment, yet God rejected it so soon as it lost its spiritual
significance. All true religion begins in poverty of spirit. There must be a sense of natural defect
and a consciousness of our own inability either to atone for the past or to deliver in the future.
And with this poverty of spirit there must be contriteness. The heart needs to be broken before it
can be bound up. (Allan Rees.)
A transcendent existence and a transcendent doctrine
I. AN EXISTENCE THAT STANDS IN CONTRAST WITH ALL THAT IS CREATED.
1. Here is an omnipresent Existence. One whose throne is heaven, whose footstool is earth,
and to whom all places are alike. One who fills heaven and earth, not merely with His
influence, but with His actual presence, as much at all times in one point of space as in
another. The incommensurable One, not only everywhere, as the pantheists teach, as a
substance, but everywhere as a Personality, free, conscious, active. All created existences are
limited by the laws of space, and those that occupy the largest space are mere specks in
immensity. Concerning the stupendous fact of God’s Omnipresence, observe—
(1) This fact is agreeable to reason. The denial of it would involve a contradiction. It
enters into our very conception of God. A limited God would in truth be no God.
(2) This fact is essential to worship. It is essential to the spirit of worship. Worship
implies mystery. It is essential to constancy of worship. True worship is not an occasional
or specific service confined to times and places, it is an abiding attitude of the soul. “God
is a Spirit,” etc.
(3) This fact is promotive of holiness. Let men realize the constant presence of God, and
how strongly will they feel restraint from sin and stimulation to virtue and holiness.
(4) This fact is assurative of retribution. Who can hide himself from the Lord?
(5) This fact is illustrative of heaven. There is nothing local or formal in the worship of
heaven. “ I saw no temple in heaven, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the
temple of it. He is felt to be everywhere, and He is worshipped everywhere.
2. Here is a creative Existence. “For all those things hath Mine hand made,” etc. Because He
made all, He owns all. Creatorship implies Eternity, Sovereignty, Almightiness, and
Proprietorship.
II. A DOCTRINE THAT TRANSCENDS HUMAN DISCOVERY. “To this man will I look,” etc.
The doctrine is this,—that this Infinite Being, who is everywhere, who created the universe and
owns it, feels a profound interest in the individual man whose soul is in a humble, contrite, and

14. reverent state. Could reason ever have discovered such a truth as this? Never. Although this
doctrine transcends reason it does not contradict it. (Homilist.)
Living temples for the living God
I. GOD’S REJECTION OF ALL MATERIAL TEMPLES. There was a time when it could be said
that there was a house of God on earth. That was a time of symbols, when as yet the Church of
God was in her childhood. She was being taught her A B C, reading her picture-book, for she
could not as yet read the Word of God, as it were in letters. She had need to have pictures put
before her, patterns of the heavenly things. Even then, the enlightened amongst the Jews knew
well that God did not dwell between curtains, and that it was not possible that He could be
encompassed in the most holy place within the veil It was only a symbol of His presence. But the
time of symbols is now passed altogether. In that moment when the Saviour bowed His head,
and said “It is finished! “ the veil of the temple was rent in twain, so that the mysteries were laid
open. So, one reason why God saith He dwelleth not in temples made with hands, is, because He
would have us know that the symbolical worship is ended and the reign of the spiritual worship
inaugurated at this day (Joh_4:21; Joh_4:23). But our text gives,from God’s own mouth,
reasons why there can be no house at the present time in which God can dwell; and, indeed,
there never was any house of the kind in reality—only in symbol For, say now, where is the place
to build God a house? In heaven? It is only His throne, not His house! On earth? What, on His
footstool? Will ye put it where He shall put His foot upon it and crush it? Fly through infinite
space, and ye shall not find in any place that God is not there. Time cannot contain Him, though
it range along its millenniums! Space cannot hold Him, for He that made all things greater than
all the things that He has made. Yea, all the things that are do not encompass Him. But then, the
Lord seems to put it,—What kind of a house (supposing we had a site on which to erect it) would
we build God? Sons of men of what material would ye make a dwelling-place for the Eternal and
the Pure? Would ye build of alabaster? The heavens are not clean in His sight, and He charged
His angels with folly! Would ye build of gold? Behold, the streets of His metropolitan city are
paved therewith, not indeed the dusky gold of earth, but transparent gold, like unto clear glass.
And what were gold to Deity? Find diamonds, as massive as the stones whereof Solomon built
his house on Zion, and then lay on rubies and jaspers - pile up a house, all of which shall be most
precious. What were that to Him? God is a Spirit. He disdaineth your materialism. And yet men
think, forsooth, when they have put up their Gothic or their Grecian structures, “This is God’s
house.” And then the Lord shows that the earth and the heavens themselves, which may be
compared to a temple, are the works of His hand. How often I have felt as if I were compassed
with the solemn grandeur of a temple, in the midst of the pine forest, or on the heathery hill, or
out at night with the bright stars looking down through the deep heavens, or listening to the
thunder, peal on peal, or gazing at the lightning as it lit up the sky! Then one feels as if he were
in the temple of God! Afar out on the blue sea, where the ship is rocking up and clown on the
waves foam—then it seems as if you were somewhere near to God—amidst the sublimities of
nature. But what then? All these objects of nature He has made, and they are not a house for
Him.
II. GOD’S CHOICE OF SPIRITUAL TEMPLES. “To this man will I look, even to him that is poor
and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at My word.”
III. THOSE THAT ARE OF THIS CHARACTER SECURE A GREAT BLESSING. God says He
will “look” to them. That means several things.
1. Consideration.
2. Approbation.

15. 3. Acceptance.
4. Affection.
5. Benediction. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The greatness and condescension of God
That is an excellent answer which was given by a poor man to a sceptic who attempted to
ridicule his faith. The scoffer said, “Pray, sir, is your God a great God or a little God? The poor
man replied, “Sir, my God is so great that the heaven of heavens cannot contain Him; and yet He
condescends to be so little, that He dwells in broken and contrite hearts. Oh, the greatness of
God, and the condescension of God! (C. H. Spurgeon.)
8. KELLY, “The concluding chapter of our prophet pursues what was begun in Isa. 65. - the answer
of Jehovah to the supplication which precedes them both.
"Thus saith Jehovah, the heavens [are] my throne, and the earth [is] my footstool: what [is] the house
that ye will build unto me? and where [is] the place of my rest? Even all those [things] hath my hand
made, and all those [things] have been, saith Jehovah" (vv. 1, 2). It is not that God did not accept the
house which king David desired, and his son Solomon was given, to erect for His glory. It is not that He
will not have a sanctuary in the midst of Israel in the glorious land; for He has revealed it minutely,
with the feasts, sacrifices, priests, and appurtenances, by Ezekiel (Ezek. 40 - 48).
But it is another thing when His people, despising the only Saviour and Lord, their own Messiah, rest
in the sanctuary, as of old in the ark to their own shame and discomfiture before their enemies. So it
was when the Lord left the temple - no longer God's house but theirs, and left to them desolate,
Himself its true glory being despised and rejected. So Stephen charged home on them these very
words (Act_7:48-50). It was not he nor Luke, but Isaiah who declared that the Most High dwells not in
temples made with hands: and this in full view of the "exceeding magnifical" temple which Solomon
built. Heaven is His throne, earth is His footstool. What can man do worthily for Him to rest in? He
needs nothing of human resources. His own hand has made all these things, in comparison with which
man's greatest exertions are puny indeed.
Once more among the Jews at the end of the age shall be the state of things which draws out this
rebuke of their own prophet. Trusting in the house that they are at length allowed to build in

16. Jerusalem, they must prove afresh that an unbelieving idolatrous heart desecrates a temple, and that
not thus can sin be settled between God and the sinner. Earthly splendour in such circumstances is
but gilding over iniquity. It is real hypocrisy. They may seek in unbelief to restore "all these things that
have been"; but God has a controversy with the people about idolatry and the rejected Messiah not
yet judged; and His elect own their sins and look for the new estate He will create in honour of
Messiah. The heart must be purified by faith in order to worship acceptably.
9. CALVIN, “1.This saith Jehovah. This discourse is different from the preceding one; for here the
Prophet exclaims against the Jews, who, puffed up with vain confidence in the sacrifices and the temple,
indulged freely in their pleasures, and flattered themselves in their sins under this pretense. He shews
that this confidence is not only foolish and groundless, but diabolical and accursed; for they grossly mock
God who endeavor to serve and appease him by outward ceremonies. Accordingly, he reproaches them
with endeavoring to frame an idol in place of God, when they shut him up in the temple. Next, he speaks
of the renovation of the Church, and of the extension of it throughout the whole world.
Heaven is my throne. His aim being to shake off the self-complancency of the pretended or hypocritical
worshippers of God, he begins with his nature. By assigning “” for his habitation, he means that the
majesty of God fills all things, and is everywhere diffused; and that he is so far from being shut up in the
temple, that he is not shut up or confined within any place whatever. The Scripture often teaches that God
is in heaven; not that he is shut up in it, but in order that we may raise our minds above the world, and
may not entertain any low, or carnal, or earthly conceptions of him; for the mere sight of heaven ought to
carry us higher, and transport us into admiration. And yet, in innumerable passages, he protests that he is
with us, that his power is everywhere diffused, in order that we may not imagine that he is shut up in
heaven.
It may be thought that this is beyond all controversy, and was at that time acknowledged by all; for who
did not know that heaven and earth are filled by the majesty of God? They might therefore object that
there is no man who wishes to thrust God out of heaven, and that the Prophet has no good reason for
waxing wroth and breaking out into such violent invective. And undoubtedly they rejected with great
haughtiness this doctrine of the Prophet, and were highly irritated and enraged, as if great injury had been
done to them. But it is easy to reply that, when men endeavor to appease God according to their own
fancy, they frame an idol that is altogether contrary to his majesty, Relying on their useless ceremonies,
they thought that they had performed their duty well when they went frequently to the temple, and offered
in it prayers and sacrifices. The Prophet shews that the majesty of God must not be measured by this
standard, and that all that they bring forward, unaccompanied by purity of heart, are absolute trifles; for

17. since it is evident from his dwelling-place being in heaven that the nature of God is spiritual, if the worship
do not correspond to that nature, it is undoubtedly wicked and corrupted.
Where is that house which ye will build for me? Under the word house or temple he includes all the
ceremonies in which they thought that the worship of God consisted; and because they measured God
and his worship by the temple as a standard, the Prophet shews that it is unworthy of God’ majesty to
view his presence as confined to a visible and frail building. He does not argue merely about God’
essence, but at the same time discourses concerning his true worship, which he shews to be spiritual, in
order that it may correspond to the nature of God, who “ a Spirit.” (Joh_4:24.) And if men diligently
considered what is the nature of God, they would not contrive foreign and new modes of worship for him,
or measure him by themselves. (217) This common and often expressed sentiment is more weighty and
energetic than if the Prophet had brought forward something new; for he shews that they are so stupid
and dull as to be ignorant of that which was well known to the merest idiot, and that they resemble dumb
beasts in imagining that God dwells and reposes in the temple. He therefore asks contemptuously, “ is
that house?” For it was absurd to think either that God dwells on the earth, or that he is concealed and
shut up in a prison. Besides, the temple was built on a small mountain, and could not contain the glory of
God within its limited dimensions.
And where is this place of my rest? And yet the Lord had said of the temple, “ is my rest for ever; here will
I dwell, for I have chosen it,.” (Psa_132:14.) In another passage it was said, “ O Lord, into thy rest.”
(2Ch_6:41.) Besides, we have seen, in a former part of this book, that “ Lord’ rest shall be glorious in it.”
(Isa_11:10.) Finally, this was the ordinary designation of the temple, and yet the Prophet now finds fault
with it. I reply, the temple is called God’ rest, because he gave the token of his presence in the temple; for
he had chosen it as the place where men should call upon him, and from which he would give a display of
his strength and power. But he did not command it to be built in order that men might conceive of his
majesty according to their own fancy, (218) but rather that, reminded by the outward signs of God’
presence, they might raise their minds higher and rise to heaven, and acknowledge that God is greater
and more excellent than the whole world. Yet, as the minds of men are prone to superstition, the Jews
converted into obstacles to themselves those things which were intended to be aids; and when they ought
to have risen by faith to heaven, they believed that God was bound to them, and worshipped him only in a
careless, manner, or rather made sport of worshipping him at their own pleasure.
This passage is very appropriately quoted by Stephen, (Act_7:49,) and is indirectly accommodated by
Paul to the sense which we have now stated; for they shew that those persons are grievously deceived
and far astray who bring to God carnal ceremonies, as if pure worship and religion consisted of them, or
who wickedly and profanely disfigure his worship by statues and images. Stephen addresses the Jews,

18. who, being attached to the figures of the Law, disregarded true godliness; while Paul, speaking to the
Gentiles, affirms that “ dwelleth not in temples made with hands.” (Act_17:24.)
(217) “Et ne mesureroyent sa grandeur infinie a leur petitesse.” “ would not measure his infinite greatness
by their littleness.”
(218) “Afin que les hommes creussent de sa majeste tout ce que bon leur sembleroit.” “ order that men
might believe concerning his majesty whatever they thought fit.”
2
Has not my hand made all these things,
and so they came into being?”
declares the LORD.
“These are the ones I look on with favor:
those who are humble and contrite in spirit,
and who tremble at my word.
1.BARNES, “For all those things hath mine hand made - That is the heaven and the
earth, and all that is in them. The sense is, ‘I have founded for myself a far more magnificent and
appropriate temple than you can make; I have formed the heavens as my dwelling-place, and I
need not a dwelling reared by the hand of man.’
And all those things have been - That is, have been made by me, or for me. The
Septuagint renders it, ‘All those things are mine?’ Jerome renders it, ‘All those things were
made;’ implying that God claimed to be the Creator of them all, and that, therefore, they all
belonged to him.
But to this man will I look - That is, ‘I prefer a humble heart and a contrite spirit to the
most magnificent earthly temple’ (see the notes at Isa_57:15).
That is poor - Or rather ‘humble.’ The word rendered ‘poor’ (‫עני‬ ‛anı y), denotes not one who
has no property, but one who is down-trodden, crushed, afflicted, oppressed; often, as here, with
the accessory idea of pious feeling Exo_24:12; Psa_10:2, Psa_10:9. The Septuagint renders it, Τ

19. απεινᆵν Tapeinon - ‘Humble;’ not πτωχόν ptochon (poor). The idea is, not that God looks with
favor on a poor man merely because he is poor - which is not true, for his favors are not
bestowed in view of external conditions in life - but that he regards with favor the man that is
humble and subdued in spirit.
And of a contrite spirit - A spirit that is broken, crushed, or deeply affected by sin. It
stands opposed to a spirit that is proud, haughty, self-confident, and self-righteous.
And that trembleth at my word - That fears me, or that reveres my commands.
2. CLARKE, “And all those things have been “And all these things are mine” - A
word absolutely necessary to the sense is here lost out of the text: ‫לי‬ li, mine. It is preserved by
the Septuagint and Syriac.
3. GILL, “For all those things hath mine hand made,.... The heavens and the earth,
which are his throne and footstool; and therefore, since he is the Creator of all things, he must
be immense, omnipresent, and cannot be included in any space or place:
and all those things have been, saith the Lord; or "are" (l); they are in being, and
continue, and will, being supported by the hand that made them; and what then can be made by
a creature? or what house be built for God? or what need of any?
but to this man will I look. The Septuagint and Arabic versions read, by way of interrogation,
"and to whom shall I look?" and so the Syriac version, which adds, "in whom shall I dwell?" not
in temples made with hands; not in the temple of Jerusalem; but in the true tabernacle which
God pitched, and not man; in Christ the antitypical temple, in whom the fulness of the Godhead
dwells bodily, and in whom Jehovah the Father dwells personally; see Heb_8:2 as also in every
true believer, who is the temple of the living God, later described, for these words may both
respect Christ and his members; the characters well agree with him:
even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word; Christ
was poor literally, and his estate and condition in this world was very low and mean, 2Co_8:9,
or "afflicted" (m), as some render it, as he was by God, and by men, and by devils; or "humble"
(n), meek and lowly, as the Septuagint and Targum; it was foretold of him that he should be
lowly; and this character abundantly appeared in him, Zec_9:9 and he was of a "contrite" or
broken spirit, not only was his body broken, but his spirit also; not through a sense of sin, and
consciousness of it, but through his sorrows and sufferings:
he also trembled at the word of God; that is, had a suitable and becoming reverence of it; it
was at the word of the Lord he assumed human nature; and according as his Father taught, and
gave him commandment, so he spake; and, agreeably to it, laid down his life, and became
obedient to death: and now the Lord looks, to him; he looks to him as his own Son, with a look
of love, and even as in human nature, and is well pleased with all he did and suffered in it; he
looked to him as the surety of his people, for the payment of their debts, and the security and
salvation of their persons; and he now looks to his obedience and righteousness, with which he
is well pleased, and imputes it to his people, and to his blood, sacrifice, and satisfaction, on
account of which he forgives their sins, and to his person for the acceptance of theirs; and he

20. looks to them in him, and has a gracious regard for them: they also may be described as "poor";
poor in spirit, spiritually poor, as they see and own themselves to be, and seek to Christ for the
riches of grace and glory, which they behold in him, and expect from him; and are both "afflicted
and humble", and become the one by being the other;
and of a contrite spirit, their hard hearts being broken by the Spirit and word of God, and
melted by the love and grace of God; and so contrite, not in a mere legal, but evangelical
manner:
and such tremble at the Word of God; not at the threatenings of wrath in it, or in a servile
slavish manner; but have a holy reverence for it (o), and receive it, not as the word of man, but
as the word of God: and to such the Lord looks; he looks on these poor ones, and feeds them; on
these afflicted ones, and sympathizes with them; on these contrite ones, and delights in their
sacrifices, and dwells with them, and among them; see Psa_51:17.
4. CHARELES SIMEON, “THE POOR AND CONTRITE THE OBJECTS OF GOD’S FAVOUR
Isa_66:2. To this man will I look, even to him that it poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.
IT often happens that accidental distinctions serve men as grounds of confidence towards God. Many
found their hopes on no better basis than Micah did [Note: Jdg_17:13.]: the Jews in particular thought
themselves assured of the Divine favour because of God’s residence in their temple [Note: Hence that
common boast among them, Jer_7:4.]. But God shews them the folly of their notions [Note: ver. 1, 2. The
import of which is, How can you think that I, an infinite Being, who myself created those things of which
you boast, can be allured by an earthly structure to continue my presence among you, if you persist in
your evil ways?], and declares the character of those who alone shall be considered by him with any
favourable regard:
I. Who are the objects of the Divine favour—
Men choose for their companions the rich and gay; but those whom God regards are of a very different
character—
1. They feel themselves destitute of all good—
[It is not temporal, but spiritual poverty, that distinguishes God’s people. They have discovered their total
want of spiritual wisdom [Note: Pro_30:2-3.]. They are constrained to acknowledge that they have
norighteousness of their own [Note: Isa_64:6.], and that they an “without strength” for obedience
[Note: Rom_5:6. 2Co_3:5.]. They unfeignedly adopt the language of St. Paul [Note: Rom_7:18.]— Nor do

21. they hope for mercy but as the free gift of God [Note: They say not, like the servant, Mat_18:26. but
desire to experience the clemency shewn to insolvent debtors, Luk_7:42.].]
2. They bewail the many evils they have committed—
[They hare been made to see that sin is hateful to God; and they have felt the bitterness of it in their own
consciences. They know experimentally the sensations of David [Note: Psa_38:4; Psa_38:6;Psa_38:8.].
They lothe themselves for all their abominations [Note: Eze_36:31.]. Nor are their convictions merely
occasional or transient; they are habitually of a tender and “contrite spirit.”]
3. They pay a reverential regard to every word of God—
[They dare not say like the idolatrous Jews [Note: Jer_44:16.]— They rather resemble the man after
God’s own heart [Note: Psa_119:161.]. If the word be preached, they “receive it as the word, not of man,
but of God.” They hear the threatenings like the meek Josiah [Note: 2Ch_34:19; 2Ch_34:27.]. They
attend to the promises with an eager desire to embrace them. To every precept they listen with an
obedient ear [Note: Like Cornelius, Act_10:33 and Paul, Act_22:10. yes, the angels in
heaven, Psa_103:20.].]
These, though generally considered by the world as weak and superstitious, are not overlooked by the
Supreme Being.
II. The peculiar regard which God shews them—
The “eyes of God are in every place beholding the evil and the good;” but he “looks to” these, in a far
different manner from others. This distinguishing favour implies,
1. Approbation of them—
[From the proud and self-sufficient God turns his face [Note: Jam_4:6.]; but he “despises not the broken
and contrite in heart [Note: Psa_51:17.].” Though so exalted in himself, he will not disdain to notice them.
His approbation of such characters stands recorded for ever [Note: Luk_18:13-14.]. His reception of the
prodigal is an eternal monument of the regard he will shew to entry repenting sinner.]
2. Care over them—

22. [Wherever they go, his eye is upon them for good [Note: 2Ch_16:9.]. He watches them in order to deliver
them from danger [Note: Psa_12:5.]. He watches them in order to comfort them in trouble
[Note:Psa_147:3.]. He watches them in order to relieve them in want [Note: Isa_41:17-18.]. He watches
them in order to exalt them to happiness and honour [Note: 1Sa_2:8.].]
3. Delight in them—
[There are none on earth so pleasing to God as broken-hearted sinners. Their sighs and groans are as
music in his ears [Note: Psa_102:19-20.]. Their tears he treasures up in his vial [Note: Psa_56:8.]. He
dwells with them as his dearest friends [Note: Isa_57:15.]. He rejoices over them as a people in whom he
greatly delights [Note: Zep_3:12; Zep_3:17.]. He saves them here by the unceasing exercise of his power
[Note: Psa_34:15; Psa_34:18.]; and reserves for them hereafter an inheritance in heaven
[Note: Mat_5:3.].]
Nor shall the fewness of such characters render them at all less the objects of God’s regard—
[It must be acknowledged that they are but few. But if there were only one in the whole world, God would
find him out [Note: “To this man, &c. even to him,” &c.]. Not all the splendour of heaven, nor all the
acclamations of angels, should for a moment divert God’s attention from him. Though he were despised
by all the human race, yet should he be amiable in the eyes of his Maker. Nor should he want any thing in
time or eternity. Never shall that declaration in any instance be falsified [Note: Psa_138:6.]—]
Infer—
1. How should we admire the condescension of God!—
[If we view only the material world we may well stand astonished that God should regard such an
insignificant creature as man [Note: Psa_8:3-4.]. But, if we contemplate the majesty of God, we cannot
but exclaim with Solomon [Note: 1Ki_8:27.]— Let then the declaration in the text lead our thoughts up to
God. Let us adore him for so clearly describing the objects of his favour. And let us express our
admiration in the words of David [Note: Psa_113:5-8.]—]
2. How should we desire to attain the character that is pleasing to God!—
[The pool and contrite are exclusively beloved of God. If he look on others, it is only as he did on the
Egyptians [Note: Exo_14:24-25.]. And how dreadful must it be to have such an enemy! But how delightful

23. to have an almighty, omnipresent guardian! Above all, how awful must it be to have him turn his face from
us in the day of judgment! Let us then endeavour to humble ourselves before God [Note: Isa_2:11.]. And
rest assured that the promised mercy shall in due time be fulfilled to us [Note: Jam_4:10.].]
5. JAMISON, “have been — namely, made by Me. Or, absolutely, were things made; and
therefore belong to Me, the Creator [Jerome].
look — have regard.
poor — humble (Isa_57:15).
trembleth at ... word — (2Ki_22:11, 2Ki_22:19; Ezr_9:4). The spiritual temple of the heart,
though not superseding the outward place of worship, is God’s favorite dwelling (Joh_14:23). In
the final state in heaven there shall be “no temple,” but “the Lord God” Himself (Rev_21:22).
6. KELLY, “"But to this [man] will I look, to the afflicted and contrite in spirit, and trembling at my
word" (v. 2). Thus the line is drawn here as before between a godly remnant, and the people apostate
as a whole. Hence their oblations are vain. "He that killeth an ox slayeth a man; he that sacrificeth a
lamb breaketh a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation [is as] swine's blood; he that burneth incense
[is as] he that blesseth an idol. As they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their
abominations, I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I
called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did the evil in mine eyes, and chose
[that] wherein I delight not" (vv. 3, 4).
7. CALVIN, “2.Yet my hand hath made all these things. The Prophet refutes the false opinion which
men form about the worship of God, by thinking that sacrifices and outward ceremonies are of great value
in themselves; for the state of the question is this. God cares nothing about ceremonies, but they are
empty and useless masks, when men think that they satisfy God by means of them. When he says that
he made all these things, this must not be understood as referring solely to the temple, but to all that was
there offered to God. Now he says that he “ all these things,” in order that men may know that God has no
need of this external worship, as he declares (Psa_50:10) that all the animals were created by him, and
are his own, though by sacrifices of them the Jews hoped to obtain his favor. But foolish mortals have this
disease deeply seated in them, that they transform God according to their inclination, though he
appointed external worship not for his sake, but for our advantage; that is, that we may be trained by it
according to the capacity of our flesh.
And all these things began to be. It is the same as if he had said that he must not be compared to these
things, which at one time began to be; for he is eternal and had no beginning. “ could dispense with your

24. sacrifices,” saith the Lord, “ before they began to be, I was, and therefore they can be of no service to
me.” In short, he maintains that ceremonies are of no avail in themselves, but aim at a different object.
Isaiah takes for granted that it is impossible that God could receive any addition; and hence it follows that
he is satisfied with himself alone; for he could do without the world from all eternity.
And I look to him who is humble and contrite in spirit. Next, a definition of lawful worship is added; for,
when he says that God “ to the humble,” I have no doubt that he who is “ and contrite in spirit” is indirectly
contrasted by him with the array, and splendor, and elegance of ceremonies, by which the eyes of men
are commonly dazzled, so as to be carried away in admiration. On the other hand, the Lord testifies that
he demands humble and downcast minds, and that tremble at his commandments. By these words he
describes inward purity of heart and sincere desire of godliness, and at the same time shews in what way
we ought to be prepared to please God.
And trembleth at my word. So far as relates to “” it might be thought strange at first sight that he demands
it in believers, since nothing is more sweet or gentle than the word of the Lord, and nothing is more
opposite to it than to excite terror. I reply, there are two kinds of trembling; one by which they are terrified
who hate and flee from God, and another which affects the heart, and promotes the obedience, of those
who reverence and fear God. This clause, I am aware, is viewed by others as relating to the Law, which
threatens and terrifies, and proclaims the dreadful judgment of God. But I take it in a more general
acceptation; for even believers tremble at the promises when they embrace them with reverence. Hence
infer that true godliness consists in having our senses brought into a state of obedience to God, and in
making no boastful or wicked claims for ourselves. The nature of faith is to yield obedience to God, and to
listen to him attentively and patiently when he speaks. But when we are puffed up and carried away by a
vain confidence in ourselves, we have no piety or fear of God; for we cannot make even the smallest
claim for ourselves without despising God.
We ought carefully to mark the expression which he employs, “ at the word of God.” Many boast that they
reverence and fear God; but, by disregarding his word, they at the same time shew that they are
despisers of God. All the reverence that we owe to God must be paid to his word, in which he wishes to
be fully recognised as in a lively image. The amount of what is said is, that God prefers this sacrifice to all
others, when believers, by true self-denial, lie low in such abasement as to have no lofty opinion about
themselves, but to permit themselves to be reduced to nothing. Thus also the Psalmist says, “ sacrifice
acceptable to God is a contrite spirit; an afflicted heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.” (Psa_51:17.)
Because this modesty of faith produces obedience, this pious feeling is likewise added, that, laying aside
all obstinacy, they tremble at the word of God.

25. From these words we ought to draw a remarkable consolation, “ we appear to be wretched in our
abasement and humility, and though we appear to be unworthy of being beheld by men, yet we are truly
happy; because the Lord looks upon us, and bestows on us his favor.” When we are tempted to despair,
let us think that in this way the Lord exalts his servants to heaven, though they have been cast down to
hell, and almost sink under the burden.
3
But whoever sacrifices a bull
is like one who kills a person,
and whoever offers a lamb
is like one who breaks a dog’s neck;
whoever makes a grain offering
is like one who presents pig’s blood,
and whoever burns memorial incense
is like one who worships an idol.
They have chosen their own ways,
and they delight in their abominations;
1.BARNES, “He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man - Lowth and Noyes render
this, ‘He that slayeth an ox, killeth a man.’ This is a literal translation of the Hebrew. Jerome
renders it, ‘He who sacrifices an ox is as if (quasi) he slew a man.’ The Septuagint, in a very free
translation - such as is common in their version of Isaiah - render it, ‘The wicked man who
sacrifices a calf, is as he who kills a dog; and he who offers to me fine flour, it is as the blood of
swine.’ Lowth supposes the sense to be, that the most flagitious crimes were united with
hypocrisy, and that they who were guilty of the most extreme acts of wickedness at the same
time affected great strictness in the performance of all the external duties of religion. An
instance of this, he says, is referred to by Ezekiel, where he says, ‘When they had slain their
children to their idols, then they came the same day into my sanctuary to profane it’ Eze_23:39.
There can be no doubt that such offences were often committed by those who were very strict
and zealous in their religious services (compare Isa_1:11-14, with Isa_66:21-23. But the
generality of interpreters have supposed that a different sense was to be affixed to this passage.
According to their views, the particles as if are to be supplied; and the sense is, not that the mere
killing of an ox is as sinful in the sight of God as deliberate murder, but that he who did it in the

26. circumstances, and with the spirit referred to, evinced a spirit as odious in his sight as though he
had slain a man. So the Septuagint, Vulgate, Chaldee, Symmachus, and Theodotion, Junius, and
Tremellius, Grotius, and Rosenmuller, understand it. There is probably an allusion to the fact
that human victims were offered by the pagan; and the sense is, that the sacrifices here referred
to were no more acceptable in the sight of God than they were.
The prophet here refers, probably, first, to the spirit with which this was done. Their sacrifices
were offered with a temper of mind as offensive to God as if a man had been slain, and they had
been guilty of murder. They were proud, vain, and hypocritical. ‘They had forgotten the true
nature and design of sacrifice, and such worship could not but be an abhorrence in the sight of
God. Secondly, It may also be implied here, that the period was coming when all sacrifices would
be unacceptable to God. When the Messiah should have come; when he should have made by
one offering a sufficent atonement for the sins of the whole world; then all bloody sacrifices
would be needless, and would be offensive in the sight of God. The sacrifice of an ox would be no
more acceptable than the sacrifice of a man; and all offerings with a view to propitiate the divine
favor, or that implied that there was a deficiency in the merit of the one great atoning sacrifice,
would be odious to God.
He that sacrificeth a lamb - Margin, ‘Kid’ The Hebrew word (‫שׂה‬ s'eh) may refer to one of a
flock, either of sheep or goats Gen_22:7-8; Gen_30:32. Where the species is to be distinguished,
it is usually specified, as, e. g., Deu_14:4, ‫כשׂבים‬ ‫שׂה‬ ‫עזים‬ ‫ושׂה‬ ve
s'eh ‛ı zzym s'eh kı s'abı ym (one of
the sheep and one of the goats). Both were used in sacrifice.
As if he cut off a dog’s neck - That is, as if he had cut off a dog’s neck for sacrifice. To offer
a dog in sacrifice would have been abominable in the view of a Jew. Even the price for which he
was sold was not permitted to be brought into the house of God for a vow (Deu_23:18; compare
1Sa_17:43; 1Sa_24:14). The dog was held in veneration by many of the pagan, and was even
offered in sacrifice; and it was, doubtless, partly in view of this fact, and especially of the fact
that such veneration was shown for it in Egypt, that it was an object of such detestation among
the Jews. Thus Juvenal, Sat. xiv. says:
Oppida tota canem venerantur, nemo Dianam.
‘Every city worships the dog; none worship Diana.’ Diodorus (B. i.) says, ‘Certain animals the
Egyptians greatly venerate (σέβονται sebontai), not only when alive, but when they are dead, as
cats, ichneumons, mice, and dogs.’ Herodotus says also of the Egyptians, ‘In some cities, when a
cat dies all the inhabitants cut off their eyebrows; when a dog dies, they shave the whole body
and the head.’ In Samothracia there was a cave in which dogs were sacrificed to Hecate. Plutarch
says, that all the Greeks sacrificed the dog. The fact that dogs were offered in sacrifice by the
pagan is abundantly proved by Bochart (Hieroz. i. 2. 56). No kind of sacrifice could have been
regarded with higher detestation by a pious Jew. But God here says, that the spirit with which
they sacrificed a goat or a lamb was as hateful in his sight as would be the sacrifice of a dog: or
that the time would come when, the great sacrifice for sin having been made, and the necessity
for all other sacrifice having ceased, the offering of a lamb or a goat for the expiation of sin
would be as offensive to him as would be the sacrifice of a dog.
He that offereth an oblation - On the word rendered here ‘oblation’ (‫מנחה‬ minchah). See
the notes at Isa_1:13.
As if he offered swine’s blood - The sacrifice of a hog was an abomination in the sight of
the Hebrews (see the notes at Isa_65:4). Yet here it is said that the offering of the ‫מנחה‬ minchah,
in the spirit in which they would do it, was as offensive to God as would be the pouring out of the
blood of the swine on the altar, Nothing could more emphatically express the detestation of God

27. for the spirit with which they would make their offerings, or the fact that the time would come
when all such modes of worship would be offensive in his sight.
He that burneth incense - See the word ‘incense’ explained in the notes at Isa_1:13. The
margin here is, ‘Maketh a memorial of.’ Such is the usual meaning of the word used here (‫זכר‬ za
kar), meaning to remember, and in Hiphil to cause to remember, or to make a memorial. Such is
its meaning here. incense was burned as a memorial or a remembrance-offering; that is, to keep
up the remembrance of God on the earth by public worship (see the notes at Isa_62:6).
As if he blessed an idol - The spirit with which incense would be offered would be as
offensive as idolatry. The sentiment in all this is, that the most regular and formal acts of
worship where the heart is lacking, may be as offensive to God as the worst forms of crime, or
the most gross and debasing idolatry. Such a spirit often characterized the Jewish people, and
eminently prevailed at the time when the temple of Herod was nearly completed, and when the
Saviour was about to appear.
2. CLARKE, “He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man “He that slayeth an ox
killeth a man” - These are instances of wickedness joined with hypocrisy; of the most
flagitious crimes committed by those who at the same time affected great strictness in the
performance of all the external services of religion. God, by the Prophet Ezekiel, upbraids the
Jews with the same practices: “When they had slain their children to their idols, then they came
the same day into my sanctuary to profane it,” Eze_23:39. Of the same kind was the hypocrisy of
the Pharisees in our Savior’s time:” who devoured widows’ houses, and for a pretense made long
prayers,” Mat_23:14.
The generality of interpreters, by departing from the literal rendering of the text, have totally
lost the true sense of it, and have substituted in its place what makes no good sense at all; for it
is not easy to show how, in any circumstances, sacrifice and murder, the presenting of legal
offerings and idolatrous worship, can possibly be of the same account in the sight of God.
He that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine’s blood “That maketh an
oblation offereth swine’s blood” - A word here likewise, necessary to complete the sense, is
perhaps irrecoverably lost out of the text. The Vulgate and Chaldee add the word offereth, to
make out the sense; not, as I imagine, from any different reading, (for the word wanted seems to
have been lost before the time of the oldest of them as the Septuagint had it not in their copy,;
but from mere necessity.
Le Clerc thinks that ‫מעלה‬ maaleh is to be repeated from the beginning of this member; but that
is not the case in the parallel members, which have another and a different verb in the second
place, “‫דם‬ dam, sic Versiones; putarem tamen legendum participium aliquod, et quidem ‫זבח‬
zabach, cum sequatur ‫ח‬ cheth, nisi jam praecesserat.” - Secker. Houbigant supplies ‫אכל‬ achal,
eateth. After all, I think the most probable word is that which the Chaldee and Vulgate seem to
have designed to represent; that is, ‫מקריב‬ makrib, offereth.
In their abominations - ‫ובשקוציהם‬ ubeshikkutseyhem, “and in their abominations;” two
copies of the Machazor, and one of Kennicott’s MSS. have ‫ובגלוליהם‬ ubegilluleyhem, “and in their
idols.” So the Vulgate and Syriac.

28. 3. GILL, “He that killeth an ox, is as if he slew a man,.... Not that killed the ox of his
neighbour, which, according to law, he was to pay for; or that killed one for food, which was
lawful to be done; but that slew one, and offered it as a sacrifice; not blamed because blind or
lame, or had any blemish in it, and so unfit for sacrifice; or because not rightly offered, under a
due sense of sin, and with repentance for it, and faith in Christ; but because all sacrifices of this
kind are now abolished in Gospel times, to which this prophecy belongs; Christ the great
sacrifice being offered up; and therefore to offer sacrifice, which, notwithstanding the
unbelieving Jews continued daily, till it was made to cease by the destruction of their temple,
was a great offence to God; it was as grievous to him as offering their children to Moloch; or as
the murder of a man; and was indeed a trampling under foot the Son of God, and accounting his
blood and sacrifice as nothing, which was highly displeasing to God:
he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; the lamb for the daily sacrifice,
morning and evening, or the passover lamb, or any other: this now is no more acceptable to
God, than if a dog, a very impure creature, was slain, his head cut off, and offered on the altar;
which was so abominable to the Lord, that the price of one might not be brought into his house,
Deu_23:18,
he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; the meat offering, made of
fine flour, on which oil was poured, and frankincense put, Lev_2:1, however rightly composed it
might be, and offered according to law, yet now of no more esteem with God than blood, which
was forbidden by the same law; nay, than the blood of swine, which creature itself, according to
the ceremonial law, was unclean, and might not be eaten, and much less be offered up, and still
less its blood, Lev_11:7,
and he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol; or that "remembers incense" (p);
that offers it as a memorial of mercies, and by way of thankfulness for them, as if he gave thanks
to an idol, which is nothing, and vanity and vexation in the world; sacrifices of such kind, be they
what they will, are reckoned no other than as idolatry and will worship:
yea, they have chosen their own ways: which were evil, and opposite to the ways of God,
especially to the way of salvation by Christ; they gave heed to the traditions of the elders;
continued the service of the ceremonial law; and set up their own righteousness, in opposition to
the doctrines, ordinances, sacrifice, and righteousness of Christ:
and their soul delighteth in their abominations: things which were abominable unto
God; as were their traditions, which were preferred to the word of God, and by which they made
it void; and their sacrifices being offered up contrary to his will, and with a wicked mind; and
their righteousness being imperfect, and trusted in, to the neglect and contempt of the
righteousness of his Son.
4. HENRY, “Sacrifices are slighted when they come from ungracious hands. The sacrifice of
the wicked is not only unacceptable, but it is an abomination to the Lord (Pro_15:8); this is
largely shown here, v. 3, 4. Observe, 1. How detestable their sacrifices were to God. The carnal
Jews, after their return out of captivity, though they relapsed not to idolatry, grew very careless
and loose in the service of God; they brought the torn, and the lame, and the sick for sacrifice
(Mal_1:8, Mal_1:13), and this made their services abominable to God; they had no regard to

29. their sacrifices, and therefore how could they think God would have any regard to them? The
unbelieving Jews, after the gospel was preached and in it notice given of the offering up of the
great sacrifice, which put an end to all the ceremonial services, continued to offer sacrifices, as if
the law of Moses had been still in force and could make the comers thereunto perfect: this was
an abomination. He that kills an ox for his own table is welcome to do it; but he that now kills it,
that thus kills it, for God's altar, is as if he slew a man; it is as great an offence to God as murder
itself; he that does it does in effect set aside Christ's sacrifice, treads under foot the blood of the
covenant, and makes himself accessory to the guilt of the body and blood of the Lord, setting up
what Christ died to abolish. He that sacrifices a lamb, if it be a corrupt thing, and not the male
in his flock, the best he has, if he think to put God off with any thing, he affronts him, instead of
pleasing him; it is as if he cut off a dog's neck, a creature in the eye of the law so vile that,
whereas an ass might be redeemed, the price of a dog was never to be brought into the treasury,
Deu_23:18. He that offers an oblation, a meat offering or drink-offering, is as if he thought to
make atonement with swine's blood, a creature that must not be eaten nor touched, the broth of
it was abominable (Isa_65:4), much more the blood of it. He that burns incense to God, and so
puts contempt upon the incense of Christ's intercession, is as if he blessed an idol; it was as
great an affront to God as if they had paid their devotions to a false god. Hypocrisy and
profaneness are as provoking as idolatry. 2. What their wickedness was which made their
sacrifices thus detestable. It was because they had chosen their own ways, the ways of their own
wicked hearts, and not only their hands did but their souls delighted in their abominations.
They were vicious and immoral in their conversations, chose the way of sin rather than the way
of God's commandments, and took pleasure in that which was provoking to God; this made their
sacrifices so offensive to God, Isa_1:11-15. Those that pretend to honour God by a profession of
religion, and yet live wicked lives, put an affront upon him, as if he were the patron of sin. And
that which was an aggravation of their wickedness was that they persisted in it, notwithstanding
the frequent calls given them to repent and reform; they turned a deaf ear to all the warnings of
divine justice and all the offers of divine grace: When I called, none did answer, as before,
Isa_65:12. And the same follows here that did there: They did evil before my eyes. Being deaf to
what he said, they cared not what he saw, but chose that in which they knew he delighted not.
How could those expect to please him in their devotions who took no care to please him in their
conversations, but, on the contrary, designed to provoke him? 3. The doom passed upon them
for this. Theychose their own ways, therefore, says God, I also will choose their delusions. They
have made their choice (as Mr. Gataker paraphrases it), and now I will make mine; they have
taken what course they pleased with me, and I will take what course I please with them. I will
choose their illusions, or mockeries (so some); as they have mocked God and dishonoured him
by their wickedness, so God will give them up to their enemies, to be trampled upon and
insulted by them. Or they shall be deceived by those vain confidences with which they have
deceived themselves. God will make their sin their punishment; they shall be beaten with their
own rod and hurried into ruin by their own delusions. God will bring their fears upon them, that
is, will bring upon them that which shall be a great terror to them, or that which they themselves
have been afraid of and thought to escape by sinful shifts. Unbelieving hearts, and unpurified
unpacified consciences, need no more to make them miserable than to have their own fears
brought upon them.
5. JAMISON, “God loathes even the sacrifices of the wicked (Isa_1:11; Pro_15:8; Pro_28:9).
is as if — Lowth not so well omits these words: “He that killeth an ox (presently after)
murders a man” (as in Eze_23:39). But the omission in the Hebrew of “is as if” - increases the
force of the comparison. Human victims were often offered by the heathen.

30. dog’s neck — an abomination according to the Jewish law (Deu_23:18); perhaps made so,
because dogs were venerated in Egypt. He does not honor this abomination by using the word
“sacrifice,” but uses the degrading term, “cut off a dog’s neck” (Exo_13:13; Exo_34:20). Dogs as
unclean are associated with swine (Mat_7:6; 2Pe_2:22).
oblation — unbloody: in antithesis to “swine’s blood” (Isa_65:4).
burneth — Hebrew, “he who offereth as a memorial oblation” (Lev_2:2).
they have chosen — opposed to the two first clauses of Isa_66:4 : “as they have chosen their
own ways, etc., so I will choose their delusions.
6. BI, “Worship and wickedness
Our prophet affirms, that the sacrifices offered by the wicked and hypocritical among the Jews,
being attended with enormous crimes and profane rites, and not presented with pure hearts,
according to the Divine appointment, were an abomination to the Lord.
They intermixed impious ceremonies and odious superstitions with the sacrifices which they
offered to the Most High. (R. Macculloch.)
Hateful sacrifices
The first part of the verse runs literally thus: “The slaughterer of the ox, a slayer of a man; the
sacrificer of the sheep, a breaker of a dog’s neck; the offerer of an oblation, swine’s blood; the
maker of a memorial of incense, one that blesseth vanity (i.e an idol);” four legitimate sacrificial
acts being bracketed with four detestable idolatrous rites. The first member of each pair is
probably to be taken as subject, the second as predicate, of a sentence. But this leaves open a
choice between two interpretations.
1. That the legal sacrificial action is as hateful in the sight of God as the idolatrous rite, so
long as it is performed by unspiritual worshippers.
2. That he who does the first series of actions does also the second, i.e combines the service
of Jehovah with the most hateful idolatries. It is extremely difficult to decide which is the
true sense. The words “as if” in
E.V. are, of course, supplied by the translators, but the rendering is aperfectly fair one. The one
fact that favours the second explanation is that the latter part of the verse speaks of those who
“delight in their abominations. Unless there be a complete break in the middle of the verse,
which is unlikely, this would seem to imply that the abominations enumerated were actually
practised by certain persons, who at the same time claimed to be worshippers of Jehovah (cf
Isa_66:17, Isa_65:3-5; Isa_57:3-9). (Prof. J. Skinner, D. D.)
Unacceptable sacrifices
I regard Vitringa’s exposition as the most exact, profound and satisfactory. He agrees with
Gesenius in making the text the general doctrine that sacrifice is hateful in the sight of God if
offered in a wicked spirit, but with a special reference to those who still adhered to the old
sacrifices after the great Sacrifice for sin was come and had been offered once for all. Thus
understood, this verse extends to sacrifices that which the foregoing verse said of the temple,
after the change of dispensation. (J. A. Alexander.)