Jesus was fed on butter and honey

JESUS WAS FED ON BUTTER AND HONEY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Isaiah7:15 15
He will be eating curds and honey when
he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the
right,
Parallel Verses
New American Standard Bible
"He will eat curds and honey at the time He knows enough to refuse evil and choose good.
King James Version
Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
Holman Bible
By the time he learns to reject what is bad and choose what is good,<crossreference=hcsb-
17798a he will be eating butter<footnote=hcsb-17798a and honey.<crossreference=hcsb-
17798b</crossreference=hcsb-17798b</footnote=hcsb-17798a</crossreference=hcsb-17798a
International Standard Version
He'll eat cheese and honey, when he knows enough to reject what's wrong and choose what's
right.
A Conservative Version
Butter and honey shall he eat, when he knows to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
American Standard Version
Butter and honey shall he eat, when he knoweth to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
Amplified
Butter and curds and wild honey shall he eat when he knows [enough] to refuse the evil and
choose the good.
Bible in Basic English
Butter and honey will be his food, when he is old enough to make a decision between evil and
good.
Darby Translation
Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and to choose the good.

Jubilee 2000 Bible
He shall eat butter and honey that he may know to refuse the evil and choose the good.
Julia Smith Translation
Curdled milk and honey he shall eat, for his knowing to reject in evil, and to choose in good.
King James 2000
Curds and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
Lexham Expanded Bible
He shall eat curds and honey until he knows to reject the evil and to choose the good.
Modern King James verseion
Butter and honey he shall eat until he knows to refuse the evil and choose the good.
Modern Spelling Tyndale-Coverdale
He shall eat butter and honey, that he may have understanding to refuse the evil and to choose
the good.
NET Bible
He will eat sour milk and honey, which will help him know how to reject evil and choose what is
right.
New Heart English Bible
He shall eat butter and honey when he knows to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
The Emphasized Bible
Curds and honey, shall he eat, by the time that he knoweth to refuse the bad and choose the
good;
Webster
Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
World EnglishBible
He shall eat butter and honey when he knows to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
Youngs Literal Translation
Butter and honey he doth eat, When he knoweth to refuse evil, and to fix on good.
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES

Pulpit Commentary Homiletics
The Presence Of God
Isaiah 7:14
W. Clarkson We naturally ask the question - In what ways is God ours? "Immanuel;" in what
respect is he one of whom we can say that he is "God with us;" how and where is his presence to
be found and to be felt? There are many answers to this question; there is -
I. THE ANSWER OF SACRED POETRY. That the presence of God is seen in the results of his
Divine handiwork, in the foundations and pillars of the earth, in the "meanest flower that blows,"
in the varied forms of life; that it only needs a true imagination to see him in all the objects and
scenes of his creative power; that "every bush's afire with God, but only he who sees takes off his
shoes."
II. THE ANSWER OF PHILOSOPHY. That his presence is in all-surrounding nature, in which
he is immanent; that though all nature does not include Deity, the Divine power is present in all
things, sustaining, energizing, renewing; the "laws of nature" are the regular activities of God.
III. THE ANSWER OF NATURAL RELIGION. That he is with us in his omnipresent and
observant Spirit; that he fills immensity with his presence, being everywhere and observing
everything, and taking notice of every human soul; that the Infinite One is he who cannot be
absent from any sphere or be ignorant of any action.
IV. THE ANSWER, OF THE EARLIER REVELATION. That his presence is in his overruling
providence; that God is with us, not only "besetting us behind and before," not only
"understanding our thought afar off," but also "laying his hand upon us," directing our course,
ordering our steps (Psalm 37:23), making plain our path before our face, causing all things to
work together for our good, defending us in danger, delivering us from trouble, establishing us in
life and strength and joy (see Genesis 39:2; 1 Samuel 3:19; 1 Samuel 18:12; 2 Kings 18:7;
Matthew 28:20).
V. THE ANSWER OF THE LATER REVELATION. That his presence was in his Divine Son.
The time came when the words of the text proved to have indeed "a springing and germinant
fulfillment;" for a virgin did conceive, and bring forth a Son, and he was the "Immanuel" of the
human race, God with us - that One who dwelt amongst us, and could say, "He that hath seen me
hath seen the Father." They who walked with him and watched his life, and who understood and
appreciated him, recognized the spirit, the character, the life, of God himself. In his mind were
the thoughts, in his words the truth, in his deeds the principles, in his death the love, in his
mission the purpose, of God. When "Jesus was here among men," God was with us as never
before, as never since.
VI. THE ANSWER OF OUR OWN CONSCIOUSNESS. That his presence is in and through his
Holy Spirit. God is with us because in us; present, therefore, in the deepest, truest, most potent,
and influential of all ways and forms; in us, enlightening our minds, subduing our wills,
enlarging our hearts, uplifting our souls, strengthening and sanctifying our spiritual nature. Then,
indeed, is he nearest to us when he comes unto us and makes his abode with us, and thus "dwells
in us and we in him." Our duty, which is our privilege, is
(1) to realize, increasingly, the nearness of the living God;

(2) to rejoice, practically, in the coming of God to man in the presence of the virgin-born
Immanuel;
(3) to gain, by believing prayer, the presence of the Divine Spirit in the sanctuary of our own
soul. - C.
Biblical Illustrator
Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign.
Isaiah 7:14
God's sign to King Ahaz
D. M. Sweets.Perhaps more perplexity has been produced among commentators by this passage
than by any other in Old Testament prophecy. The chief difficulties of the passage may be stated
as follows: Does the prophecy refer to some event which was soon to occur, or does it refer
exclusively to some event in the distant future? If it refers to some event which was soon to
occur, what event was it? Who was the child intended, and who the virgin who should bring
forth the child?
1. The first step toward the unravelling of the prophet's meaning is to determine the exact
significance of the words. What, then, is the meaning of the word ‫,תוא‬ which is translated "sign"?
Delitzsch defines the word as "a thing, event, or act which may serve to guarantee the Divine
certainty of some other thing, event, or act." It does not of necessity denote a miracle. For
example, in Genesis 17:11, circumcision is said to be a "sign," or token. The context, together
with the nature of the thing, event, or act, must decide whether the ‫תוא‬ is a miracle or not. All
that is necessary to constitute a "sign" to Ahaz is that some assurance shall be given which
Jehovah alone can give. And the certain prediction of future events is the prerogative of Jehovah
alone.
2. We turn now to the word ‫ע‬ ַ‫ל‬ְ‫מ‬ָ‫,ה‬ translated "virgin" and shall try to find its exact meaning. The
derivation of it from ‫ָע‬‫מ‬ַ‫,ה‬ to hide, to conceal, is now generally abandoned. Its most probable
derivation is from ‫ָע‬‫מ‬ַ‫,ה‬ to grow, to be strong, and hence the word means one who has come to a
mature or marriageable age. Hengstenberg contends that it means one in an unmarried state;
Gesenius holds that it means simply being of marriageable age, the age of puberty. However this
may be, it seems most natural to take the word in this place as meaning one who was then
unmarried and who could be called a virgin. But we must guard against the exegetical error of
supposing that the word here used implies that the person spoken of must be a virgin at the time
when the child is born. All that is said is that she who is now a virgin shall bear a son.
3. Let us now proceed to consider the interpretation of the prophecy itself. The opinions which
have generally prevailed with regard to it are three —(1) That it has no reference to any

Messianic fulfilment, but refers exclusively to some event in the time of the prophet.(2) That it
has exclusive and immediate reference to the Messiah, thus excluding any reference to any event
which was then to occur. On this view, the future birth of the Messiah from a virgin is made the
sign to Ahaz that Jerusalem shall he safe from a threatened invasion(3) That the prophet is
speaking of the birth of a child which would soon take place of someone who was then a virgin;
but that the prophecy has also a higher fulfilment in Christ. This last view we regards the only
tenable one, and the proof of it will be the refutation of the other two. The following reasons are
presented to show that the prophecy refers to some event which was soon to occur.
1. The context demands it. If there was no allusion in the New Testament to the prophecy, and
we should contemplate the narrative here in its surrounding circumstances, we should naturally
feel that the prophet must mean this. If the seventh and eighth chapters, connected as they are,
were all that we had, we should be compelled to admit a reference to something in the prophet's
time. The record in Isaiah 8:1-4, following in such close connection, seems to be intended as a
public assurance of the fulfilment of what is here predicted respecting the deliverance of the land
from the threatened invasion. The prediction was that she who is a virgin shall bear a son. Now
Jehovah alone can foreknow this, and He pronounces the birth of this child as the sign which
shall be given.
2. The thing to be given to Ahaz was a sign or token that a present danger would be averted.
How could the fact that the Messiah would come seven hundred years later prove this?Let us
now look at the reasons for believing that it contains also a reference to the Messiah.
1. The first argument we present is derived from the passage in Isaiah 9:7. There is an undoubted
connection between that passage and the one under consideration, as almost all critical scholars
admit. And it seems that nothing short of a Messianic reference will explain the words. Some
have asserted that the undoubted and exclusive reference to Messiah in this verse (Isaiah 9:7)
excludes any local reference in the prophecy in Isaiah 7:14. But so far from this being the ease,
we believe it is an instance of what Bacon calls the "springing, germinant fulfilment of
prophecy." And we believe that it can be proved that all prophecies take their start from
historical facts. Isaiah here (Isaiah 9:7) drops the historical drapery and rises to a mightier and
more majestic strain.
2. The second and crowning argument is taken from the language of the inspired writer Matthew
(Matthew 1:22, 23).
(D. M. Sweets.)
Who was the "virgin" and who the son
D. M. Sweets.? —
1. Some have supposed that the wife of Ahaz was meant by the "virgin," and that his son
Hezekiah was the child meant. There is an insuperable difficulty against this view. Ahaz's reign
extended over sixteen years (2 Kings 16:2), and Hezekiah was twenty-five years old when he
succeeded Ahaz (2 Kings 18:2). Consequently, at this time Hezekiah could not have been less
than nine years old. It has been supposed that Ahaz had a second wife, and that the son was hers.
This is a mere supposition, supported by nothing in the narrative, while it makes Isaiah 8:1-4
have no connection with what precedes or follows.
2. Others have supposed that some virgin who was then present before Ahaz was designated, and
they make the meaning this: "As surely as this virgin shall conceive and bear a son, so surely

shall the land be forsaken of its kings." This is too vague for the definite language used, and
gives no explanation of the incident in chap. 8. about Maher-shalal-hash-baz.
3. Another opinion is that the virgin was not an actual but an ideal virgin." "Michaelis thus
presents this view: "By the time when one who is yet a virgin can bring forth (i.e., in nine
months), all will be happily changed and the present impending danger so completely passed
away that if you were to name the child you would call him Immanuel." Surely this would not be
a sign or pledge of anything to Ahaz. Besides, it was not a birth possible, but an actual birth,
which was spoken of.
4. But the view which is most in keeping with the entire context, and which presents the fewest
difficulties, is that the prophet's own son is intended. This view does require the supposition that
Isaiah married a second wife, who at the time of this prophecy was still a virgin and whom he
subsequently married. "But there is no improbability in the supposition that the mother of his
son, Shear-jashub, was deceased, and that Isaiah was about again to be married. This is the only
supposition which this view demands. Such an occurrence was surely not uncommon. All other
explanations require more suppositions, and suppositions more unnatural than this. Our
supposition does no violence to the narrative, and certainly falls in best with all the facts. We
would then identify Immanuel (as Ahaz and his contemporaries would understand the name to be
applied) with Maher-shalal-hash-baz. With this view harmonises what the prophet says in Isaiah
8:18: "Behold, I and the children whom Jehovah hath given me are for signs and for wonders in
Israel from Jehovah of hosts, which dwelleth in Mount Zion." It is no objection to this view that
another name than "Immanuel" was given to the child. It was a common thing to give two names
to children, especially when one name was symbolic, as Immanuel was. Jesus Christ was never
called Immanuel as a proper name, though almost all scholars agree that the prophecy referred to
Him in some sense.
(D. M. Sweets.)
A double tolerance in Isaiah's prophecies
D. M. Sweets.The careful, critical student of Isaiah will find this thing common in his writings,
namely, that he commences with a prophecy having reference to some remarkable delivery
which was soon to occur, and terminates it by a statement of events connected with a higher
deliverance under the Messiah. His mind becomes absorbed; the primary object is forgotten in
the contemplation of the more remote and glorious event.
(D. M. Sweets.)
The virgin
Prof. A. F. Kirkpatrick., Speaker's Commentary., Prof. W. J. Beecher, D. D.The Hebrew word
rendered "virgin" in the A.V. would be more accurately rendered "damsel." It means a young
woman of marriageable age, and is not the word which would be naturally used for virgin, if that
was the point which it was desired to emphasise.
(Prof. A. F. Kirkpatrick.)Our English word "maiden" comes as near, probably, as any to the
Hebrew word.
(Speaker's Commentary.)The Hebrew lexicons tell us that the word almah, here translated virgin,
may denote any mature young woman, whether a virgin or not. So far as its derivation is
concerned, this is undoubtedly the case; but in Biblical usage, the word denotes a virgin in every
case where its meaning can be determined. The instances are, besides the text, that in the account

of Rebekah (Genesis 24:43), that of the sister of Moses (Exodus 2:8), the word used in the plural
(Psalm 68:25, 26; Song of Solomon 1:3; Song of Solomon 6:8), its use in the titles of Psalms
(Psalm 46; 1 Chronicles 15:20), and its use in Proverbs 30:19. The last passage is the one chiefly
relied on to prove that the word may denote a woman not a virgin; but, "the way of a man with a
maid" there spoken of is something wonderful, incapable of being traced or understood, like the
way of an eagle in the air, a serpent on a rock, a ship in the sea, and it is only in its application to
that wonderful human experience, first love between a man and a virgin, that this description can
find a full and complete significance. The use of the word in the Bible may not be full enough in
itself to prove that almah necessarily means virgin, but it is sufficient to show that Septuagint
translators probably chose deliberately and correctly, when they chose to translate the word, in
this passage, by the Greek word that distinctively denotes a virgin, and that Matthew made no
mistake in so understanding their translation.
(Prof. W. J. Beecher, D. D.)
Deliverance by a lowly agent
Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.Not Ahaz, not some high-born son of Ahaz's house, is to have the
honour of rescuing his country from its peril: a "nameless maiden of lowly rank" (Delitzsch) is to
be the mother of the future deliverer. Ahaz and the royal house are thus put aside; it is not till
Isaiah 9:7 — spoken at least a year subsequently — that we are able to gather that the Deliverer
is to be a descendant of David's line.
(Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.)
God's sign to Ahaz
J. A. Alexander.The king having refused to ask a sign, the prophet gives him one, by renewing
the promise of deliverance (vers. 8, 9), and connecting it with the birth of a child, whose
significant name is made a symbol of the Divine interposition, and his progress a measure of the
subsequent events. Instead of saying that God would be present with them to deliver them, he
says the child shall be called Immanuel (God with us); instead of mentioning a term of years, he
says, before the child is able to distinguish good from evil; instead of saying that until that time
the land shall lie waste, he represents the child as eating curds and honey, spontaneous products,
here put in opposition to the fruits of cultivation. At the same time, the form of expression is
descriptive. Instead of saying that the child shall experience all this, he represents its birth and
infancy as actually passing in his sight; he sees the child brought forth and named Immanuel; he
sees the child eating curds and honey till a certain age. But very different opinions are held as to
the child here alluded to. Some think it must be a child about to be born, in the course of nature,
to the prophet himself. Others think that two distinct births are referred to, one that of Shear-
jashub, the prophet's son, and the other Christ, the Virgin's Son. Yet others see only a prophetic
reference to the birth of Messiah.
(J. A. Alexander.)
A prediction of the miraculous conception of Jesus Christ
J. A. Alexander.While some diversity of judgment ought to be expected and allowed, in relation
to the secondary question (of the child of the period that is referred to), there is no ground,
grammatical, historical, or logical, for doubt as to the main point, that the Church in all ages has
been right in regarding this passage as a signal and explicit prediction of the miraculous
conception and nativity of Jesus Christ.

(J. A. Alexander.)
The figure of Immanuel an ideal one
Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.The language of Isaiah forces upon us the conviction that the figure of
Immanuel is an ideal one, projected by him upon the shifting future — upon the nearer future in
chap. 7, upon the remoter future in chap. 9, but grasped by the prophet as a living and real
personality, the guardian of his country now, its deliverer and governor hereafter. The
circumstances under which the announcement is made to Ahaz are such as apparently exclude
deliberation in the formation of the idea; it is the unpremeditated creation of his inspired
imagination. This view satisfies all the requirements of the narrative. The birth of the child being
conceived as immediate affords a substantial ground for the assurance conveyed to Ahaz; and the
royal attributes with which the child speedily appears to be endued, and which forbid hit
identification with any actual contemporary of the prophet's, become at once intelligible. It is the
Messianic King, whose portrait is here for the first time in the Old Testament sketched directly.
(Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.)
Immanuel, the Messiah
F. Delitzsch.It is the Messiah whom the prophet here beholds as about to be born, then in chap. 9
as born, and in chap. 11 as reigning.
(F. Delitzsch.)
What sign could the distant birth of Christ be to Ahaz
F. T. Bassett, M. A.? — The answer is plain, as evidenced by the prophet turning away from the
king who repudiated, his privileges to the "house of David," to which in all its generations the
promise was given. The king was endeavouring to bring about the destruction of "the land," but
his efforts in that direction would be useless until the destiny of the house of David was fulfilled.
The virgin must bear the promised Son; Judah is immortal till that event is accomplished. It
matters not whether it is near or far, the family and lineage of David must survive till then.
Hence the sign was plain enough, or ought to have been, to Ahaz and the people in general. The
closing portion of this section of Scripture fully discloses the destruction that should befall Judah
as well as Israel, but the final fall of Judah is after the birth of Immanuel.
(F. T. Bassett, M. A.)
The virgin mother
F. H. Woods, B. D.To maintain that Isaiah did not mean to say that a certain Person in the future
was to be born of a virgin, is not the same thing as to hold that Christ was not so born as a fact.
(F. H. Woods, B. D.)
The mystery of the sign
F. Delitzsch.The "sign" is on the one side a mystery staring threateningly at the house of David,
and on the other side it is a mystery rich in comfort to the prophet and all believers; and it is
couched in such enigmatic terms in order that they who harden themselves may not understand
it, and in order that believers may so much the more long to understand it.
(F. Delitzsch.)
A new thing in the earth

Anon.(vers. 10-16): —
I. THE PLEDGE PROPOSED.
1. The condescension which God displayed on this occasion was very remarkable.
2. There may be a semblance of regard for the honour of God, while the heart is in a state of
hostility against Him.
3. God may sustain a certain relationship to those who are not His in reality.
II. THE INDIGNANT REBUKE ADMINISTERED. (Ver. 13.)
1. The persons to whom it was addressed. Not the king only, but the whole nation; which shows
that they, or a large portion of them, were like-minded with their ungodly ruler. They are called
"the house of David," a designation which was doubtless intended to remind them of his
character, and the great things which God had done for him. Well would it have been if he by
whom David's throne was now occupied had been imbued with David's spirit, and walked in
David's ways; and that his influence had been exerted in inducing his subjects to do so likewise.
2. The feeling by which it was prompted. It was evidently that of holy indignation.
3. The grounds on which it rested. There were two things especially by which God was
dishonoured on this occasion.(1) Unbelief. Nothing casts a greater indignity upon the Divine
character than for His word to be distrusted.(2) Hypocrisy. Far better to bid open defiance to the
Most High, and say with Pharaoh, "Who is the Lord, that I should obey His voice?" than pretend
to serve Him while we are resolved to act in opposition to His will.
III. THE GLORIOUS EVENT PREDICTED. As to this striking prediction, in itself considered,
there are several particulars which it sets before us —
1. The miraculous conception of Christ.
2. The essential Deity of Christ.
3. The design of the coming of Christ. For Him to be called "Immanuel, God with us," shows
that He appeared to espouse our cause.
4. The lowly condition of Christ. "Butter and honey shall He eat," etc.
5. The moral purity of Christ. Although the expression, "before the child shall know to refuse the
evil, and choose the good," has literal reference to His attaining the age of discernment, yet it
may be applied with special propriety to the spotless sanctity of His character. He knew, in a
sense in which no one else ever knew, how to refuse the evil and choose the good.
(Anon.)
The birth of ChristI. THE BIRTH OF CHRIST.
1. We see here a miraculous conception.
2. Notice next, the humble parentage. Though she was not a princess, yet her name, Mary, by
interpretation, signifies a princess; and though she is not the queen of heaven, yet she has a right
to be reckoned amongst the queens of earth; and though she is not the lady of our Lord, she does
walk amongst the renowned and mighty women of Scripture. Yet Jesus Christ's birth was a
humble one. Strange that the Lord of glory was not born in a palace! Let us take courage here. If
Jesus Christ was born in a manger in a rock, why should He not come and live in our rocky
hearts? If He was born in a stable, why should not the stable of our souls be made into a

habitation for Him? If He was born in poverty, may not the poor in spirit expect that He will be
their Friend?
3. We must make one more remark upon this birth of Christ, and that remark shall be concerning
a glorious birthday. With all the humility that surrounded the birth of Christ, there was yet very
much that was glorious, very much that was honourable. No other man ever had such a birthday
as Jesus Christ had. Of whom had prophets and seers ever written as they wrote of Him? Whose
name is graven on so many tablets as His? Who had such a scroll of prophecy, all pointing to
Him as Jesus Christ, the God-man? Then recollect, concerning His birth, when did God ever
hang a fresh lamp in the sky to announce the birth of a Caesar? Caesars may come, and they may
die, but stars shall never prophesy their birth. When did angels ever stoop from heaven, and sing
choral symphonies on the birth of a mighty man? Christ's birth is not despicable, even if we
consider the visitors who came around His cradle.
II. THE FOOD OF CHRIST. "Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may know to refuse the
evil, and choose the good." Our translators were certainly very good Scholars, and God gave
them much wisdom, so that they craned up our language to the majesty of the original, but here
they were guilty of very great inconsistency. I do not see how butter and honey can make a child
choose good, and refuse evil. If it is so, I am sure butter and honey ought to go up greatly in
price, for good men are ver much required. But it does not say, in the original, "Butter and honey
shall He eat, that He may know to refuse the owl, and choose the good," but, "Butter and honey
shall He eat, till He shall know how to refuse the evil, and choose the good," or, better still,
"Butter and honey shall He eat, when He shall know how to refuse the evil, and choose the
good." We shall take that translation, and just try to elucidate the meaning couched in the words.
They should teach us —
1. Christ's proper humanity. When He would convince His disciples that He was flesh, and not
spirit, He took a piece of a broiled fish and of a honeycomb, and ate as others did.
2. The butter and honey teach us, again, that Christ was to be born in times of peace. Such
products are not found in Judea in times of strife; the ravages of war sweep away all the fair
fruits of industry.
3. There is another thought here. "Butter and honey shall He eat when He shall know how to
refuse the evil, and choose the good." This is to teach us the precocity of Christ, by which I mean
that, even when He was a child, even when He lived upon butter and honey, which is the food of
children, He Knew me evil from the good.
4. Perhaps it may seem somewhat playful, but I must say how sweet it is to my soul to believe
that, as Christ lived upon butter and honey, surety butter and honey drop from His lips. Sweet are
His words unto our souls, more to be desired than honey or the honeycomb.
5. And perhaps I ought not to have forgotten to say, that the effect of Christ's eating butter and
honey was to show us that He would not in His lifetime differ from other men in His outward
guise. Butter and honey Christ ate, and butter and honey may His people eat; nay, whatsoever
God in His providence gives unto them, that is to be the food of the child Christ.
III. THE NAME OF CHRIST. "And shall call His name Immanuel."
1. The Virgin Mary called her son Immanuel that there might be a meaning in His name
2. Would you know this name most sweetly you must know it by the teaching of the Holy Spirit.

( C. H. Spurgeon.)
The responsibility of revelation
E. T. Marshall, M. A.1. This Annunciation to Ahaz was a great opportunity for him — a crisis in
his spiritual life. He was getting entangled in idolatrous ways, involved in disloyal relations with
the Assyrian monarchy, and had already seriously compromised himself in sacrilegious
appropriation of temple treasure. And here was a golden opportunity to break through his bends,
and cast himself loose, once for all from his unworthy associations. He was only asked to trust
on for a little while longer, to watch events, and, as they fell out in a certain direction, to
recognise that they were of God's special ordering, and that they constituted a claim on his
obedience and trust in God. But he was incapable of profiting by God's goodwill towards him.
He rejected the Divine overtures of prosperity and peace; and, while God still carried out the
dictates of His purpose, they came to Ahaz without blessing and without relief. His enemies were
removed, but a direr foe stood in their place; he could not but learn that God was faithful, but the
word that he compelled God to keep was a word of retribution.
2. And if we were capable of the combined mental and spiritual effort that such a course would
require, and were to sit down calmly and without prejudice to dissect our past lives, and with
unerring judgment were to separate cause from effect in every case, and to trace each important
issue of life to its true turning point, how often, probably, should we find that the unsatisfactory
features of the past were largely due to our neglect of some revelation — some annunciation —
of God! By experience, by example, by warning, by discipline; by difficulties significantly
placed in our path, or by clearances unexpectedly but unmistakably made; by words in season,
out of season; by a thousand things, and in countless ways, we have had annunciations from God
— plain indications of His will and pleasure concerning us, and no indistinct prophecies of
things that shall be hereafter. And our judgment upon a review of the whole is this — that our
true happiness and our genuine success have been in very exact proportion to our faithfulness or
our unfaithfulness in reading the signs of God.
(E. T. Marshall, M. A.)
The mercy of God
J. Donne.The first word of this text joins the anger of God and His mercy together. God chides
and rebukes the king Ahaz by the prophet; He is angry with him, and therefore" He will give him
a sign — a seal of mercy.
I. GOD TAKES ANY OCCASION TO SHOW MERCY.
II. THE PARTICULAR WAY OF HIS MERCY DECLARED HERE. "The Lord shall give you
a sign."
III. WHAT THIS SIGN WAS. "Behold a virgin," etc.
(J. Donne.)
Miracle of miraclesKing Ahaz saith, I will not tempt God, and, making religion his pretence
against religion, being a most wilful and wicked man, would not. We may learn by this wretched
king that those that are least fearful before danger are most basely fearful in danger (ver. 2). We
may see the conflict between the infinite goodness of God and the inflexible stubbornness of
man; God's goodness striving with man's badness. When they would have no sign, yet God will
give them a sign. Behold.

(1)As a thing presented to the eye of faith.
(2)As a matter of great concernment.
(3)As a strange and admirable thing.It is atheistical profaneness to despise any help that God in
His wisdom thinketh necessary to support our weak faith withal. The house of David was afraid
they should be extinct by these two great enemies of the Church; but, saith Isaiah, "A virgin of
the house of David shall conceive a son," and how then can the house of David be extinct?
Heaven hath said it; earth cannot disannul it. God hath said it, and all the creatures in the world
cannot annihilate it. How doth friendship between God and us arise from hence, that Christ is
God in our nature?
1. Sin, the cause of division, is taken away.
2. Our nature is pure in Christ, and therefore in Christ God loveth us.
3. Christ being our head of influence conveyeth the same Spirit that is in Him to all His
members, and, little by little, by that Spirit, purgeth His Church and maketh her fit for
communion with Himself.
4. The second person is God in our nature for this end, to make God and us friends.
( Sibbes, Richard.)
Christ in prophecy
H. L. Hastings.You will find that the presence of one Person pervades the whole book If you go
into a British navy yard, or on board a British vessel, and pick up a piece of rope, you will find
that there is one little red thread which runs through the whole of it — through every foot of
cordage which belongs to the British government; so, if a piece of rope is stolen, it may be cut
rote inch pieces, but every piece has the mark which tells where it belongs. It is so with the
Bible. You may separate it into a thousand parts, and yet you will find one thought — one great
fact running through the whole of it. You will find it constantly pointing and referring to one
great Personage. Around this one mighty Personage this whole book revolves. "To Him give all
the prophets witness."
(H. L. Hastings.)
Immanuel
Shear-jashub; Maher-shalal-hash-baz; Immanuel
F. H. Woods, B. D.The three names taken together would mean this — the Assyrians would
spoil the countries of Syria and Ephraim, and though they would threaten Judah, God would be
with His people, and save them, and so a remnant would For left which would return at once to
religious faith and to national prosperity. For these two last are almost always associated in the
prophet's view.
(F. H. Woods, B. D.)
A prophecy of the Messiah
Canon Ainger.When Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, the Jews saw quite clearly that this was
indeed nothing less than the claim to be Divine, and they cried out that this was blasphemy. And
what was His reply? Jesus reminded His hearers that the earliest judges and leaders of the people
of Israel, as testified by the language of their Scriptures, had been called gods. "Jesus answered
them, Is it not written in your law, I said, ye are gods? If He called them gods, unto whom the

Word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken; say ye of Him, whom the Father hath
sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?" The
judges and rulers of the early days of Israel had been called gods because their office and
function was just this — to represent God on earth to men, to reflect His character, and do His
will, and lead His people. They often failed to do this because they were merely human. In some
cases they were false to their trust, and then God's vengeance overtook them. Yet they pointed to
that one far-off Divine event when One who should perfectly fulfil that name was to interpose
for the world's deliverance. And thus, just as the implied prophecy in calling men gods was to be
one day fulfilled, so the prophecy of Isaiah before us was also a prophecy of that same later far-
off event, when one who was in every sense "God with us" should come to satisfy the needs and
the longings of the human heart.
(Canon Ainger.)
Immanuel, the Sympathiser
Canon Ainger."God with us." This means omnipotence with us, omniscience with us, perfection
with us, and the love that never fails. Some of us, perhaps, have tried, in conformity with the
passion for getting rid of the supernatural that marks the latest struggle of the scientific world, to
construct a new religion out of the old, in which the same pathetic and lovely figure as before
shall be placed beside us for our example, but from whom the aureole of Deity has been taken
away; they have been trying to find all that life needs in the presence only of a fellow man,
however superior to ourselves in holiness and purity. There are moments in our lives when we
feel ourselves face to face with sin, in the presence of sorrow or of death from which no man can
deliver us. In the sad hours of your life, it has been said, the recollection of that Man you read of
in your childhood, the Man of sorrows, the great Sympathiser with human woes and sufferings,
rises up before you. I know it is a reality for you then, for you feel it to be not only beautiful but
true. In such moments does it seem to you as if Christ were merely a person who eighteen
hundred years ago made certain journeying between Judea and Galilee? Can such a recollection
fill up the blank which some present grief, the loss of some friend, has made in your heart? It
does not. It never did this for you or for anyone. But the comfort that came to you from the
thought of Him may be safely trusted not to betray you, for that voice that came to you in your
anguish says, "You may trust Me, you may lean upon Me, for I know all things in heaven and
earth. I and My Father are one."
(Canon Ainger.)
Immanuel
Evan Lewis, B. A.Nature, God, and Jesus are words often used to designate the same power or
being, but are suggestive of very different associations. The word "nature" veils from our view
the glory of the Godhead, and removes His personality from our consciousness. It removes the
Deity to a distance from us, but Jesus, the newer and better name, the latest revelation, brings
Him nearer to us. The associations of the name Jesus, as a name of God, are most tender and
endearing. Jesus does not remind us of blind power or unfeeling skill, as the word nature does;
nor yet of overwhelming greatness, distant force and vast intelligence, the conception of which
strains our faculties, and the realisation of which crushes our power, as the word God does. The
name of Jesus reminds us chiefly of sympathy, kindheartedness, brotherly tenderness, and one-
ness with ourselves. The word God presents a picture of the Deity to the mind, in which those
attributes of the Divine character which are in themselves most removed from us, occupy the

most prominent position, and are bathed with a flood of light, while those features of character,
by which the Divine Spirit touches the delicate chords of human affections, are dimly seen amid
the darkening shadows of the background. The picture is reversed in Jesus. The great attributes
are buried in the light of love, as the stars are covered by the light of day.
(Evan Lewis, B. A.)
"Immanuel," a stimulus to the prophet himself
"Niger" in Expositor.Isaiah may have meant the Name to speak to him as well as to the nation.
He may have desired to bring the message of the Name into his personal and family life. For,
after all, a prophet is but a man of like passions with" ourselves, subject to the same infirmities
and fluctuations of spirit, "warmed and cooled, by the same winter and summer." There were
times, no doubt, when even Isaiah lost faith in his own function, in his own message, when the
very man who had assured a sinful nation that God was with them could hardly believe that God
was with him or could even cry out, "Depart from me, O Lord, for I am a sinful man!" And in
such moments as these, when, weary of the world and weary of himself, he lost courage and
hope, he may have felt that it would be well for him to have that in his very household which
would help to recall the truths he had recognised and taught in hours of clearer insight, help to
restore the faith with which he had first sprung up to greet the Divine message. We may believe
that there were many darkened hours in his experience, hours of broken faith and defeated hope,
when he would fall back on his earlier faith and brighter hopes; when he would call his little son
to him, and, as he fondled him, would repeat his name, Immanuel, Immanuel — God-with-us,
God-with-us, — and find in that Name a charm potent to restore his waning trust in the gracious
presence and gracious will of Jehovah.
("Niger" in Expositor.)
The child Immanuel
"Niger" in Expositor.Isaiah may have felt, as we feel, that God is with a little child in quite
another sense, in a more pathetic sense, than He is with grown men. To him, as to us, their
innocence, their loveliness, and, above all, their love, may have been the most exquisite
revelation of the purity and love of God. "Heaven lies about their infancy"; and in this heaven the
prophet may often have taken refuge from his cares, despondencies, and fears. Every child born
into the world brings this message to us, reminds us that God is with us indeed and of a truth; for
whence did this new, pure, tender life come if not from the central Fountain of life and purity and
love? And from this point of view Isaiah's "Immanuel" is but the ancient analogue of our Lord's
tender words: Of such is the kingdom of heaven."
Immanuel
T. H. Barnett.The text is prophecy of the Messiah (Matthew 1:23).
I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH IT WAS SPOKEN.
II. ITS FULFILMENT. For more than seven hundred years devout Jews waited for the Divinely
predicted sign. Then came the day which Christmas commemorates,
III. ITS PRACTICAL IMPORT. To Christians this prophecy is significant of those blessings
which are pledged to us in Christ. In Him we have the assurance of God being —

1. With us in the sense of on our side. Nature shows us God as above us; law shows us God as
against us, because we have made ourselves His enemies; but the Gospel shows us God with us
to defend us from the. power of sin and to deliver us from the penalty of sin.
2. With us in the sense of in our nature. "The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us";
became one of ourselves, shared with us —(1) The trials of a human life;(2) The temptations
which assail us;(3) The penalty of sin — death of the body, the hiding of God's countenance.
And so in Christ Jesus we the pledge of the three cardinal blessings of all Divine revelation —(a)
The Divine sympathy, because He is "touched with the feeling of our infirmities."(b) The Divine
salvation, because He has "put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."(c) The Divine succour,
because He "ever liveth to make intercession" for us; and His parting word to His Church is, "Lo,
I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world."
(T. H. Barnett.)
God with us, though His presence is not always realised
"Niger" in Expositor.Professor Tyndall has told us how, as he wandered through the higher
Alpine pastures in the earlier months of the present summer (1879), he was often surprised to
find at evening lovely flowers in full bloom where in the morning he had seen only a wide thin
sheet of snow. Struck with the strange phenomenon, unable to believe that a few hours of even
the most fervent sunshine had drawn these exquisite flowers to their full maturity, he carefully
scraped away the snow from a few inches of pasture and examined the plants that were growing
beneath it. And, to his surprise and delight, he found that the powers of life had been with them
even while they seemed wrapped in death; that the sun had reached them through the snow; that
the snow itself had both held down the rising warmth of the earth upon them, and sheltered them
from the cold biting winds which might else have destroyed them. There they stood, each full
grown, every flower maturely developed, though the green calyx was carefully folded over the
delicately coloured petals; and no sooner was the snow removed, no sooner did the rays of the
sun touch the green enfolding calyx, than it opened and revealed the perfect beauty it had
shrouded and preserved. And so, doubtless, we shall one day find that God, our Sun, has been
with us even during the winter of our self-discontent, all through the hours of apparent failure
and inertness, quickening in us a life of which we gave but little sign, maturing and making us
perfect by the things we suffered; so that when the hindering veils are withdrawn, and the full
light of His love shines upon us, at that gracious touch we too may disclose a beauty of which we
had not dreamed, and of Which for long we gave no promise.
Life's best amulet
Christian Endeavor.A Mohammedan in Africa was once taken prisoner in war. He wore
suspended around his neck an amulet or charm. When this was taken from him he became almost
frenzied with grief, and begged that it be returned to him He was willing to sacrifice his right
hand for it. It was his peculiar treasure, which he valued as life itself. It was a very simple affair
— A little leather case enclosing a slip of paper on which was inscribed in Arabic characters one
word — "God." He believed that the wearing of this charm secured for him a blessed immunity
from ill. When it was returned to him he was so overjoyed that the tears streamed from his eyes,
and falling to the ground he kissed the feet of the man who restored to him his treasure. That
poor man had but the bare name — we have God! Not a distant monarch seated lonesomely

away from any human voice or footstep. There is one name that ought to be dearest of all to
every Christian — "Immanuel." It means not a Deity remote or hidden, but "God with us."
(Christian Endeavor.)
God with us
Gates of Imagery.An old poet has represented the Son of God as having the stars for His crown,
the sky for His azure mantle, the clouds for His bow, and the fire for His spear. He rode forth in
His majestic robes of glory, but one day resolved to alight on the earth, and
descended, undressing Himself on the way. When asked what He would wear, He
replied, with a smile, "that He had new clothes making down below."
(Gates of Imagery.)
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers(15) Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know .
. .—Better, till he know, or, when he shall know. . . .—By a strange inversion of the familiar
associations of the phrase (Exodus 3:17; Deuteronomy 31:20), probably, as the prophet spoke
them, not without a certain touch of the irony of paradox, the words describe a time, not of
plenty, but of scarcity. (Comp. Isaiah 7:22.) Fields and vineyards should be left uncultivated
(Isaiah 5:9), and instead of bread and meat, and wine and oil, the people, flying from their cities
and taking refuge in caves and mountains, should be left to the food of a nomadic tribe, such,
e.g., as the Kenites (Judges 5:25; 1Samuel 14:26; Matthew 3:4). The “butter” of the Bible here,
as in Judges 5:25, is the clotted milk which has always been a delicacy with Arabs.
Benson CommentaryHYPERLINK "/isaiah/7-15.htm"Isaiah 7:15. Butter and honey shall he eat
— The common food of children in that country, where these articles were in great abundance,
and of the best sort. The principal meaning of the verse seems to be, that this child, called
Immanuel, should be brought up in the usual manner, “the same republic still continuing, and the
cultivated fields, unoccupied by the enemy, abundantly supplying all necessary food; and that
thus he should grow up to maturity.” The words, however, also signify, that though he should be
miraculously conceived, and should be possessed of a nature truly divine, yet he should be also
human, subject to all the infirmities of our nature, standing in need of food for his support as
other children do, and by the help thereof growing up from childhood to manhood. That he may
know — Or rather, till he know, as ‫ותעדמ‬may be properly rendered; to refuse the evil and choose
the good — That is, till his faculties be fully unfolded, or, as Bishop Lowth renders it, when he
knows, &c.; when they are unfolded, and he is arrived at mature age. Both in childhood and in
manhood, he shall be sustained by the usual diet of the country, which, being neither invaded nor
distressed by any foreign enemy, shall yield food sufficient for all its inhabitants.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary7:10-16 Secret disaffection to God is often disguised with
the colour of respect to him; and those who are resolved that they will not trust God, yet pretend
they will not tempt him. The prophet reproved Ahaz and his court, for the little value they had
for Divine revelation. Nothing is more grievous to God than distrust, but the unbelief of man
shall not make the promise of God of no effect; the Lord himself shall give a sign. How great

soever your distress and danger, of you the Messiah is to be born, and you cannot be destroyed
while that blessing is in you. It shall be brought to pass in a glorious manner; and the strongest
consolations in time of trouble are derived from Christ, our relation to him, our interest in him,
our expectations of him and from him. He would grow up like other children, by the use of the
diet of those countries; but he would, unlike other children, uniformly refuse the evil and choose
the good. And although his birth would be by the power of the Holy Ghost, yet he should not be
fed with angels' food. Then follows a sign of the speedy destruction of the princes, now a terror
to Judah. Before this child, so it may be read; this child which I have now in my arms, (Shear-
jashub, the prophet's own son, ver. 3,) shall be three or four years older, these enemies' forces
shall be forsaken of both their kings. The prophecy is so solemn, the sign is so marked, as given
by God himself after Ahaz rejected the offer, that it must have raised hopes far beyond what the
present occasion suggested. And, if the prospect of the coming of the Divine Saviour was a
never-failing support to the hopes of ancient believers, what cause have we to be thankful that
the Word was made flesh! May we trust in and love Him, and copy his example.
Barnes' Notes on the BibleButter and honey - The word rendered "butter" (‫הלאע‬ chem'âh),
denotes not butter, but thick and curdled milk. This was the common mode of using milk as an
article of food in the East, and is still. In no passage in the Old Testament does butter seem to be
meant by the word. Jarchi says, that this circumstance denotes a state of plenty, meaning that the
land should yield its usual increase notwithstanding the threatened invasion. Eustatius on this
place says, that it denotes delicate food. The more probable interpretation is, that it was the usual
food of children, and that it means that the child should be nourished in the customary manner.
That this was the common nourishment of children, is abundantly proved by Bochart; "Hieroz."
P. i. lib. xi. ch. li. p. 630. Barnabas, in his epistle says, 'The infant is first nourished with honey,
and then with milk.' This was done usually by the prescription of physicians.
Paulus says, 'It is fit that the first food given to a child be honey, and then milk.' So Aetius, 'Give
to a child, as its first food, honey;' see "Bochart." Some have, indeed, supposed that this refers to
the fact that the Messiah should be "man" as well as God, and that his eating honey and butter
was expressive of the fact that he had a "human nature!" But against this mode of interpretation,
it is hoped, it is scarcely needful now to protest. It is suited to bring the Bible into contempt, and
the whole science of exegesis into scorn. The Bible is a book of sense, and it should be
interpreted on principles that commend themselves to the sober judgment of mankind. The word
rendered "honey" - ‫דבד‬ debash - is the same word - "dibs" - which is now used by the Arabs to
denote the syrup or jelly which is made by boiling down wine. This is about the consistence of
molasses, and is used as an article of food. Whether it was so employed in the time of Isaiah,
cannot now be determined, but the word here may be used to denote honey; compare the note at
Isaiah 7:22.
That he may know - As this translation now stands, it is unintelligible. It would "seem" from this,
that his eating butter and honey would "contribute" to his knowing good and evil. But this cannot
be the meaning. It evidently denotes 'until he shall know,' or, 'at his knowing;' Nord. "Heb.
Gram.," Section 1026. 3. He shall be no urished in the usual way, "until" he shall arrive at such a
period of life as to know good from evil. The Septuagint renders it, Πρινη γνῶναι αὐτὸν Prinē
gnōnai auton - 'before he knows.' The Chaldee, 'Until he shall know.'
To refuse the evil ... - Ignorance of good and evil denotes infancy. Thus, in Nineveh, it is said
there were 'more than sixscore thousand perons that cannot discern between their right hand and
left hand;' commonly supposed to denote infants; Jonah 4:11; compare Deuteronomy 1:39. The

meaning is, that he should be nourished in the usual mode in infancy, and before he should be
able to discern right from wrong, the land should be forsaken of its kings. At what particular
period of life this occurs, it may not be easy to determine. A capability to determine, in some
degree, between good and evil, or between right and wrong, is usually manifest when the child is
two or three years of age. It is evinced when there is a capability of understanding "law," and
feeling that it is wrong to disobey it. This is certainly shown at a very early period of life; and it
is not improper, therefore, to suppose that here a time was designated which was not more than
two or three years.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary15. Butter—rather, curdled milk, the acid of which
is grateful in the heat of the East (Job 20:17).
honey—abundant in Palestine (Jud 14:8; 1Sa 14:25; Mt 3:4). Physicians directed that the first
food given to a child should be honey, the next milk [Barnabas, Epistle]. Horsley takes this as
implying the real humanity of the Immanuel Jesus Christ, about to be fed as other infants (Lu
2:52). Isa 7:22 shows that besides the fitness of milk and honey for children, a state of distress of
the inhabitants is also implied, when, by reason of the invaders, milk and honey, things produced
spontaneously, shall be the only abundant articles of food [Maurer].
that he may know—rather, until He shall know.
evil … choose … good—At about three years of age moral consciousness begins (compare Isa
8:4; De 1:39; Jon 4:11).
Matthew Poole's CommentaryButter and honey; the common food of children in that Country,
where they were in great abundance, and of the best sort.
He; the virgin’s Son last mentioned, who, though he be God blessed for ever, yet shall become
man, and, to show the truth of his humanity, shall not only be conceived and brought forth, but
also shall be nourished and brought up, by the same means and steps as other children; which is
justly mentioned here as a stupendous and miraculous work of God.
That he may know; that by this food he may grow up, and so may know, &c. Or, until he know,
as it is rendered by divers learned men, and, among others, by the Chaldee interpreter, who best
knew the use of this particle among the Hebrews.
To refuse the evil, and choose the good; to discern between things morally good and evil; which
children are capable of doing, in some measure, when they are five or six years old. Compare
Deu 1:39, where young children are described by this character, that they had no knowledge
between good and evil.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire BibleButter and honey shall he eat..... As the Messiah Jesus no
doubt did; since he was born in a land flowing with milk and honey, and in a time of plenty,
being a time of general peace; so that this phrase points at the place where, and the time when,
the Messiah should be born, as well as expresses the truth of his human nature, and the manner
of his bringing up, which was in common with that of other children. signifies the "cream of
milk", as well as "butter", as Jarchi, in Genesis 18:8, observes; and milk and honey were
common food for infants:
that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good; meaning not knowledge of good and
bad food, so as to choose the one, and refuse the other; but knowledge of moral good and evil;

and this does not design the end of his eating butter and honey, as if that was in order to gain
such knowledge, which have no such use and tendency; but the time until which he should live
on such food; namely, until he was grown up, or come to years of discretion, when he could
distinguish between good and evil; so that as the former phrase shows that he assumed a true
body like ours, which was nourished with proper food; this that he assumed a reasonable soul,
which, by degrees, grew and increased in wisdom and knowledge; see Luke 2:52. should be
rendered, "until he knows"; as in Leviticus 24:12 which the Chaldee paraphrase of Onkelos
renders, "until it was declared to them"; and so the Targum here,
"butter and honey shall he eat, while or before the child knows not, or until he knows to refuse
the evil, and choose the good.''
Geneva Study Bible{n} Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and
choose the good.
(n) Meaning that Christ is not only God, but man also, because he will be nourished as other men
until the age of discretion.
EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges15. Butter and honey shall he eat] This has to be
explained by Isaiah 7:22, where the eating of butter (lit. “thick milk”) and (wild) honey is a
symptom of the primitive simplicity to which human life is reduced by the cessation of
agriculture. The meaning is that the youth of Immanuel will be spent amidst the privations of a
land laid waste by foreign invaders.
that he may know] This is the rendering of the Vulgate and other ancient versions, and is
maintained still by a few scholars. But the idea that eating butter and honey promotes the
formation of ethical character is somewhat bizarre. Translate with R.V. when he knoweth (more
precisely “towards the time when, &c.”). It must be admitted, however, that exact parallels to
this use of the preposition cannot be produced (though cf. Genesis 24:63; Exodus 14:27). But
what lapse of time is here indicated? The expression “refuse the evil and choose the good” must
bear the same sense as in Isaiah 7:16, and from ch. Isaiah 8:4 we see that the event predicted in
Isaiah 7:16 was expected to happen in a very short time,—within two or three years from the
date of the interview with Ahaz. It would seem, therefore, that the phrase denotes the age at
which a child begins to exercise intelligent choice between the pleasant and the painful (cf. 2
Samuel 19:35). Most commentators, it is true, explain it of the development of moral
consciousness, and think of a period of 10 or 12 years or even longer. But this introduces a
needless discrepancy between this sign and that of Isaiah 8:4. There is nothing improbable in the
supposition that Isaiah expected the Assyrian invasion of Judah (which of course is presupposed
by Isaiah 7:15) to happen simultaneously with the destruction of Samaria and Damascus.
Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament"For head of Aram is Damascus,
and head of Damascus Rezin, and in five-and-sixty years will Ephraim as a people be broken in
pieces. And head of Ephraim is Samaria, and head of Samaria the son of Remalyahu; if ye
believe not, surely ye will not remain." The attempt to remove Isaiah 7:8, as a gloss at variance
with the context, which is supported by Eichhorn, Gesenius, Hitzig, Knobel, and others, is a very
natural one; and in that case the train of thought would simply be, that the two hostile kingdoms
would continue in their former relation without the annexation of Judah. But when we look more
closely, it is evident that the removal of Isaiah 7:8 destroys both the internal connection and the

external harmony of the clauses. For just as Isaiah 7:8 and Isaiah 7:8 correspond, so do Isaiah 7:9
and Isaiah 7:9. Ephraim, i.e., the kingdom of the ten tribes, which has entered into so unnatural
and ungodly a covenant with idolatrous Syria, will cease to exist as a nation in the course of
sixty-five years; "and ye, if ye do not believe, but make flesh your arm, will also cease to exist."
Thus the two clauses answer to one another: Isaiah 7:8 is a prophecy announcing Ephraim's
destruction, and Isaiah 7:9 a warning, threatening Judah with destruction, if it rejects the promise
with unbelief. Moreover, the style of Isaiah 7:8 is quite in accordance with that of Isaiah (on ‫,דעוד‬
see Isaiah 21:16 and Isaiah 16:14; and on ‫,עעל‬ "away from being a people," in the sense of "so
that it shall be no longer a nation," Isaiah 17:1; Isaiah 25:2, and Jeremiah 48:2, Jeremiah 48:42).
And the doctrinal objection, that the prophecy is too minute, and therefore taken ex eventu, has
no force whatever, since the Old Testament prophecy furnishes an abundance of examples of the
same kind (vid., Isaiah 20:3-4; Isaiah 38:5; Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 21:16; Ezekiel 4:5., Isaiah 24:1.,
etc.). The only objection that can well be raised is, that the time given in Isaiah 7:8 is wrong, and
is not in harmony with Isaiah 7:16. Now, undoubtedly the sixty-five years do not come out if we
suppose the prophecy to refer to what was done by Tiglath-pileser after the Syro-Ephraimitish
war, and to what was also done to Ephraim by Shalmanassar in the sixth year of Hezekiah's
reign, to which Isaiah 7:16 unquestionably refers, and more especially to the former. But there is
another event still, through which the existence of Ephraim, not only as a kingdom, but also as a
people, was broken up - namely, the carrying away of the last remnant of the Ephraimitish
population, and the planting of colonies from Eastern Asia by Esarhaddon.
(Note: The meaning of this king's name is Assur fratrem dedit (Asuṙacḣyiddin): vid., Oppert,
Expedition, t. ii. p. 354.)
on Ephraimitish soil (2 Kings 17:24; Ezra 4:2). Whereas the land of Judah was left desolate after
the Chaldean deportation, and a new generation grew up there, and those who were in captivity
were once more enabled to return; the land of Ephraim was occupied by heathen settlers, and the
few who were left behind were melted up with these into the mixed people of the Samaritans,
and those in captivity were lost among the heathen. We have only to assume that what was done
to Ephraim by Esarhaddon, as related in the historical books, took place in the twenty-second
and twenty-third years of Manasseh (the sixth year of Esarhaddon), which is very probable, since
it must have been under Esarhaddon that Manasseh was carried away to Babylon about the
middle of his reign (2 Chronicles 33:11); and we get exactly sixty-five years from the second
year of the reign of Ahaz to the termination of Ephraim's existence as a nation (viz., Ahaz, 14;
Hezekiah, 29; Manasseh, 22; in all, 65). It was then that the unconditional prediction, "Ephraim
as a people will be broken in pieces," was fulfilled (yēchath mē‛âm; it is certainly not the 3rd
pers. fut. kal, but the niphal, Malachi 2:5), just as the conditional threat "ye shall not remain" was
fulfilled upon Judah in the Babylonian captivity. ‫ןלאנ‬ signifies to have a fast hold, and ‫ןילאע‬ to
prove fast-holding. If Judah did not hold fast to its God, it would lose its fast hold by losing its
country, the ground beneath its feet. We have the same play upon words in 2 Chronicles 20:20.
The suggestion of Geiger is a very improbable one, viz., that the original reading was ‫יב‬ ‫ונילאת‬ ‫אמ‬
saw dna ,elbanoitcejbo deraeppa ‫בי‬ taht tub ,‫אע‬altered into ‫.יי‬ Why should it be
objectionable, when the words form the conclusion to a direct address of Jehovah
Himself, which is introduced with all solemnity? For this ‫,יי‬ passing over from a confirmative
into an affirmative sense, and employed, as it is here, to introduce the apodosis of the
hypothetical clause, see 1 Samuel 14:39, and (in the formula ‫יי‬ ‫)עּכע‬ Genesis 31:42; Genesis

43:10; Numbers 22:29, Numbers 22:33; 1 Samuel 14:30 : their continued existence would
depend upon their faith, as this chi emphatically declares.
PRECEPT AUSTIN RESOURCES
THE BIRTH OF CHRIST NO.2392
A SERMON INTENDED FORREADING ON LORD’S DAY, DECEMBER 23, 1894.
DELIVERED BYC. H. SPURGEON, AT THE NEWPARK STREET CHAPEL, SOUTHWARK,
ON LORD’S-DAYMORNING, DECEMBER 24, 1854.
“Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel. Butter and
honey shall He eat, that He may knowto refuse the evil, and choose the good.” Isaiah 7:14, 15.
THE kingdom ofJudah was in a condition of imminent peril. Two monarchs had leagued
themselves against her; two nations had risen up for her destruction. Syria and Israel had come up
against the walls ofJerusalem, with full intent to raze them to the ground, and utterly to destroy
the monarchy of Judah. Ahaz the king, in great trouble, exerted all his ingenuity to defend the city;
and among the other contrivances which his wisdom taught him, he thought it fit to cut off the
waters ofthe upper pool, so that the besiegers might be in distressfor lack ofwater. He goes out in
the morning, no doubt attended by his courtiers, makeshis way to the conduit ofthe upper pool,
intending to see after the stopping ofthe stream ofwater; but lo! He meets with something which
sets aside his plans, and renders them needless. Isaiah steps forward, and tells him not to be afraid
for the smoke ofthose two firebrands, for God should utterly destroy both the nations that had
risen up against Judah. Ahaz need not fear the present invasion, for both him and his kingdom
would be saved. The king looked at Isaiah with an eye ofincredulity, as much as to say, “Ifthe Lord
were to send chariots from heaven,could such a thing as this be? Should He animate the dust, and
quicken every stone in Jerusalem to resist my foes, could this be done?” The Lord, seeing the
littleness ofthe king’s faith, tells him to ask for a sign. “Ask it,” He says,“either in the depth,or in
the height above.Let the sun go backward ten degrees, or letthe moon stop in her midnight
marches. Letthe stars move acrossthe sky in grand procession; ask any sign you please in the
heaven above, or, ifyou wish, choose the earth beneath, let the depths give forth the sign, let some
mighty waterspout lose its way across the pathless ocean, and travel through the air to Jerusalem’s
very gates; let the heavens shower a golden rain, instead ofthe watery fluid which usually they

distill; ask that the fleece may be wet upon the dry floor, or dry in the midst ofdew; whatever you
please to request, the Lord will grant it to you for the confirmation ofyour faith.” Instead of
accepting this offer with all gratitude, as Ahaz should have done,he,with a pretended humility,
declares that he will not ask, neither will he tempt the Lord his God; whereupon Isaiah, waxing
indignant, tells him that, since he will not in obedience to God’s command ask a sign, behold, the
Lord Himselfwill give him one—not simply a sign, but the sign, the sign and wonder ofthe world,
the mark of God’s mightiest mystery and of His most consummate wisdom, for, “a virgin shall
conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel.” It has been said that the passage I
have taken for my text is one ofthe most difficult in all the Word of God. It may be so; I certainly
did not think it was until I sawwhat the commentators had to say about it, and I rose up from
reading them perfectly confused.One said one thing and another denied what the other had said;
and if there was anything that I liked, it was so self-evident that it had been copied from one to the
other, and handed through the whole ofthem. One set ofcommentators tells us that this passage
refers entirely to some person who was to be born within a few months after this prophecy, “for,”
they say, “it says here,‘Before the child shall knowto refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land
that you abhor shall be forsaken ofboth her kings.’ Now,” say they, “this was an immediate
delivery which Ahaz required, and there was a promise ofa speedy rescue that, before a fewyears
had elapsed,before the child should be able to knowright from wrong, Syria and Israel should both
lose their kings.” Well, that seems a strange frittering away of a wonderful passage, full ofmeaning,
and I cannot see howthey can substantiate their view, when we find the Evan
2 The Birth ofChrist Sermon #2392
2 Tell someone today howmuch you love Jesus Christ. Volume 40
gelist Matthewquoting this very passage in reference to the birth ofChrist, and saying, “Nowall
this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken ofthe Lord by the prophet, saying,
Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name
Immanuel.” It strikes me that this Immanuel, who was to be born, could not be a mere simple man,
and nothing else, for ifyou turn to the next chapter, at the eighth verse,you will find it said, “He
shall pass through Judah; he shall overflowand go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the
stretching out ofhis wings shall fill the breadth of Your land, O Immanuel.” Here is a government
ascribed to Immanuel which could not be His ifwe were to suppose that the Immanuel here spoken
of was either Shear-Jashub, or Maher-shalal-hashbaz, or any other ofthe sons ofIsaiah. I therefore
reject that viewofthe matter; it is, to my mind, far belowthe height ofthis great argument; it does
not speak or allowus to speak one halfof the wondrous depth which couches beneath this mighty
passage. I find, moreover, that many of the commentators divide the sixteenth verse from the
fourteenth and fifteenth verses, and they read the fourteenth and fifteenth verses exclusively of
Christ, and the sixteenth verse ofShear-Jashub, the son ofIsaiah. They say that there were two
signs, one was the conception by the virgin ofa son, who was to be called Immanuel, who is none
other than Christ; but the second sign was Shear-Jashub, the prophet’s son, ofwhom Isaiah said,
“Before this child, whom I now lead before you—before this son ofmine shall be able to knowgood
and evil, so soon shall both nations that have nowrisen against you lose their kings.” But I do not
like that explanation because it does seem to me to be pretty plain that the same child is spoken of
in the one verse as in the others. “Before the child”—the same child, it does not say that child in one

verse and then this child in another verse, but before the child, this one ofwhom I have spoken, the
Immanuel, before He “shall knowto refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that you abhor
shall be forsaken ofboth her kings.” Then another view, which is the most popular ofall, is to
refer the passage first ofall to some child that was then to be born, and afterwards, in the highest
sense,to our blessed Lord Jesus Christ.Perhaps that is the true sense ofit, perhaps that is the best
way of smoothing difficulties; but I do think that if I had never read those books at all, but had
simply come to the Bible, without knowing what any man had written upon it, I would have said,
“There is Christ here as plainly as possible; never could His name have been written more legibly
than I see it here. ‘Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son.’ It is an unheard of thing, it is a
miraculous thing, and therefore it must be a God-like thing. She ‘shall call His name Immanuel.
Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may knowto refuse the evil,and choose the good;’ and
before that child, the Prince Immanuel, shall knowto refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land
that you abhor shall be forsaken ofboth her kings,and Judah shall smile upon their ruined
palaces.” This morning, then, I shall take my text as relating to our Lord Jesus Christ, and we
have three things here about Him; first, the birth, secondly, the food, and, thirdly, the name of
Christ. I. Let us commence with THE BIRTH OF CHRIST: “Behold a virgin shall conceive,and
bear a son.” “Let us nowgo even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass,” said
the shepherds. “Let us followthe star in the sky,” said the Eastern Magi,and so say we this
morning. Hard by the day when we, as a nation, celebrate the birthday of Christ, let us go and
stand by the manger to behold the commencement ofthe incarnation ofJesus. Let us recall the time
when God first enveloped Himselfin mortal form, and tabernacled among the sons ofmen. Let us
not blush to go to so humble a spot, let us stand by that village inn, and let us see Jesus Christ,the
God-man, become an infant of a span long. And, first, we see here, in speaking ofthis birth of
Christ, a miraculous conception.The text says expressly, “Behold,a virgin shall conceive, and bear
a son.” This expression is unparalleled even in Sacred Writ; of no other woman could it be said
beside the Virgin Mary, and of no other man could it be written that his mother was a virgin. The
Greek word and the Hebreware both very expressive ofthe true and real virginity ofthe mother,
to showus that Jesus Christ was born ofwoman, and not of man. We shall not enlarge upon the
thought, but still it is an important one, and ought not to be passed over without mentioning. Justas
the woman, by her venturous spirit, stepped first into transgression—lest she should be despised
and trampled on, God in His wisdom devised that the woman, and the woman alone, should be the
author of the body of the God-man who should redeem mankind. Albeit that she herselffirst tasted
the accursed fruit, and tempted her husband (it may be that Adam out of love to her tasted that
fruit), lest she should be degraded, lestshe should not stand on an equality with him, God has or
Sermon #2392 The Birth ofChrist 3
Volume 40 Tell someone today howmuch you love Jesus Christ. 3
dained that so it should be, that His Son should be sent forth “born ofa woman,” and the first
promise was that the seed ofthe woman, not the seed ofthe man, should bruise the serpent’s head.
Moreover, there was a peculiar wisdom ordaining that Jesus Christshould be the son ofthe
woman, and not of the man, because, had He been born ofthe flesh, “that which is born ofthe flesh
is flesh,” and merely flesh, and He would naturally, by carnal generation, have inherited all the
frailties and the sins and the infirmities which man has from his birth; He would have been

conceived in sin, and shaped in iniquity, even as the rest ofus. Therefore He was not born ofman,
but the Holy Spirit overshadowed the Virgin Mary, and Christ stands as the one man, save one
other, who came forth pure from his Maker’s hands, who could ever say, “I am pure.” Yes,and He
could say far more than that other Adam could say concerning his purity, for He maintained His
integrity, and never let it go,and from His birth down to His death He knewno sin, neither was
guile found in His mouth. Oh, marvelous sight! Let us stand and look at it. A child of a virgin, what
a mixture! There is the finite and the infinite, there is the mortal and the immortal, corruption and
incorruption, the manhood and the Godhead, time married to eternity, God linked with a creature,
the infinity ofthe august Maker come to tabernacle on this speck ofearth, the vast unbounded One,
whom earth could not hold, and the heavens cannot contain, lying in His mother’s arms, He who
fastened the pillars ofthe universe,and riveted the nails ofcreation, hanging on a mortal breast,
depending on a creature for nourishment. Oh, marvelous birth! Oh, miraculous conception! We
stand and gaze and admire. Verily, angels may wish to look into a subject too dark for us to speak
of; there we leave it, a virgin has conceived,and borne a son. In this birth, moreover, having
noticed the miraculous conception, we must notice, next, the humble parentage.It does not say, “A
princess shall conceive, and bear a son,” but a virgin. Her virginity was her highest honor, she had
no other. True, she was ofroyal lineage,she could reckon David among her forefathers, and
Solomon among those who stood in the tree ofher genealogy. She was a woman not to be despised,
albeit that I speak ofhumble parentage, for she was ofthe blood-royal ofJudah. O babe, in Your
veins there runs the blood ofkings; the blood ofan ancient monarchy found its way from Your
heart, all through the courses ofYour body! You were born, not ofmean parents, ifwe look at their
ancient ancestry, for You are the son ofhim who ruled the mightiest monarchy in his day, even
Solomon, and You are the descendant ofone who devised in his heart to build a temple for the
mighty God of Jacob. Nor was Christ’s mother, in point ofintellect, an inferior woman. I take it
that she had great strength ofmind; otherwise she could not have composed so sweet a piece of
poetry as that which is called the Virgin’s Song, beginning,“My soul does magnify the Lord.” She
is not a person to be despised.I would this morning especially utter my thoughts on one thing which
I consider to be a fault among us Protestants.Because Roman Catholics pay too much respect to
the Virgin Mary, and offer prayer to her, we are too apt to speak ofher in a slighting manner. She
ought not to be placed under the ban ofcontempt, for she could truly sing, “From henceforth all
generations shall call me blessed.” I suppose Protestant generations are among the “all
generations” who ought to call her blessed. Her name is Mary, and quaint George Herbert wrote an
anagram upon it— “Howwell her name an ARMYdoes present, In whom the Lord ofHosts did
pitch His tent.” Though she was not a princess,yet her name, Mary, by interpretation, signifies a
princess, and though she is not the queen ofheaven, yet she has a right to be reckoned among the
queens ofearth; and though she is not the lady ofour Lord, she does walk among the renowned and
mighty women ofScripture. Yet Jesus Christ’s birth was a humble one. Strange that the Lord of
glory was not born in a palace! Princes, Christ owesyou nothing! Princes,Christ is not your
debtor; you did not swaddle Him, He was not wrapped in purple, you had not prepared a golden
cradle for Him to be rocked in! Queens, you did not dandle Him on your knees,He hung not at
your breasts! And you mighty cities, which then were great and famous; your marble halls were not
blessed with His little footsteps! He came out ofa village, poor and despised, even Bethlehem; when
there, He was not born in the governor’s house, or in the mansion ofthe chiefman, but in a
manger. Tradition tells us that His manger was cut in the solid rock; there was He laid, and the

oxen likely enough came to feed from the self-same manger, the hay and the fodder ofwhich was
His only bed. Oh! Wondrous stoop ofcondescension, that our blessed Jesus should be girded with
humility, and stoop so low! Ah! IfHe stooped, why should He bend to such a lowly
birth? And if He bowed, why should He submit not simply to become the son ofpoor parents,but to
be born in so miserable a place? Let us take courage here.IfJesus Christ was born in a manger in
a rock, why should He not come and live in our rocky hearts? IfHe was born in a stable, why
should not the stable ofour souls be made into a house for Him? IfHe was born in poverty, may
not the poor in spirit expect that He will be their Friend? IfHe thus endured degradation at the
first, will He count it any dishonor to come to the very poorest and humblestofHis creatures,and
tabernacle in the souls ofHis children? Oh, no! We can gather a lesson ofcomfort from His humble
parentage, and we can rejoice that not a queen, or an empress,but that a humble woman became
the mother ofthe Lord ofglory. We must make one more remark upon this birth ofChrist before
we pass away from it, and that remark shall be concerning a glorious birthday. With all the
humility that surrounded the birth ofChrist, there was yet very much that was glorious, very much
that was honorable. No other man ever had such a birthday as Jesus Christhad. Ofwhom had
prophets and seers ever written as they wrote ofHim? Whose name is engraved on so many tablets
as His? Who had such a scroll ofprophecy, all pointing to Him as Jesus Christ, the God-man? Then
recollect, concerning His birth, when did God ever hang a fresh lamp in the sky to announce the
birth of a Caesar? Caesars may come, and they may die, but stars shall never prophesy their birth.
When did angels ever stoop from heaven, and sing choral symphonies on the birth ofa mighty
man? No, all others are passed by; but see, in heaven there is a great light shining,and a song is
heard, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” Christ’s birth is
not despicable, even ifwe consider the visitors who came around His cradle.Shepherds came first,
and, as it has been quaintly remarked by an old divine, the shepherds did not lose their way, and
the wise men did. Shepherds came first, unguided and unled, to Bethlehem; the wise men, directed
by the star, came next. The representative men ofthe two bodies ofmankind, the rich and the poor,
knelt around the manger; and gold, and frankincense, and myrrh, and all manner of precious gifts,
were offered to the child, who was the Prince ofthe kings ofthe earth, who, in ancient times was
ordained to sit upon the throne ofHis father David, and in the wondrous future to rule all nations
with His rod of iron. “Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son.” Thus have we spoken ofthe
birth of Christ. II. The second thing that we have to speak ofis, THEFOODOF CHRIST: “Butter
and honey shall He eat, that He may knowto refuse the evil, and choose the good.” Our
translators were certainly very good scholars,and God gave them much wisdom, so that they
craned up our language to the majesty ofthe original, but here they were guilty ofvery great
inconsistency. I do not see howbutter and honey can make a child choose good, and refuse evil. Ifit
is so, I am sure butter and honey ought to go up greatly in price, for good men are very much
required. But it does not say, in the original, “Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may knowto
refuse the evil, and choose the good,” but, “Butter and honey shall He eat, till He shall knowhowto
refuse the evil, and choose the good,” or, better still, “Butter and honey shall He eat, when He shall
knowhow to refuse the evil,and choose the good.” We shall take that translation, and just try to

make clear the meaning couched in the words. They should teach us,first ofall, Christ’s proper
humanity. When He would convince His disciples that He was flesh, and not spirit, He took a piece
of a broiled fish and of a honeycomb, and ate as others did. “Handle Me,” He said, “and see,for a
spirit has not flesh and bones, as you see I have.” Some heretics taught, even a little after the death
of Christ, that His body was a mere shadow, that He was not an actual, real man; but here we are
told He ate butter and honey just as other men did. While other men were nourished with food, so
was Jesus; He was very man as certainly as He was verily and eternally God. “In all things it
behooved Him to be made like unto His brethren,that He might be a merciful and faithful high
priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins ofthe people.” Therefore we
are told that He ate butter and honey, to teach us that it was actually a real man, who afterwards
on Calvary died. The butter and honey teach us, again, that Christ was to be born in times of
peace. Such products are not to be found in Judea in times ofstrife; the ravagesofwar sweep away
all the fair fruits of industry, the unwatered pastures yield no grass, and therefore there could be no
butter. The beesmay make their hive in the lion’s carcass, and there may be honey there, but when
the land is disturbed, who shall go to gather the sweetness? Howshall the babe eat butter when its
mother flees away, even in the winter time,
with the child clinging to her breast? In times ofwar, we have no choice offood; then men eat
whatever they can procure, and the supply is often very scanty. Letus thank God that we live in the
land of peace, and let us see a mystery in this text, that Christ was born in times ofpeace. The
temple ofJanus was shut before the temple ofheaven was opened.Before the king ofpeace came to
the temple ofJerusalem, the horrid mouth of war was stopped. Mars had sheathed his sword, and
all was still. Augustus Caesar was emperor ofthe world, none other ruled it, and therefore wars
had ceased, the earth was still, the leaves quivered not upon the trees ofthe field, the ocean ofstrife
was undisturbed by a ripple, the hot winds ofwar blewnot upon man to trouble him, all was
peaceful and quiet, and then came the Prince ofpeace,who in later days shall break the bowand
cut the spear in sunder, and burn the chariot in the fire. There is another thought here.“Butter
and honey shall He eat when He shall knowhowto refuse the evil, and choose the good.” This is to
teach us the precocity ofChrist, by which I mean that, even when He was a child, even when He
lived upon butter and honey, which is the food ofchildren, He knewthe evil from the good. It is,
usually, not until children leave offthe food oftheir infancy that they can discern good from evil in
the fullest sense.It requires years to ripen the faculties,to develop the judgment, to give full play to
the man, in fact, to make him a man; but Christ, even while He was a baby, even while He lived
upon butter and honey, knewthe evil from the good, refused the one, and chose the other. Oh!
What a mighty intellect there was in that brain! While He was an infant, surely there must have
been sparklings ofgenius from His eyes; the fire ofintellect must have often lit up that brow. He
was not an ordinary child; how would His mother talk about the wonderful things the little prattler
said! He played not as others did; He cared not to spend His time in idle amusements; His thoughts
were lofty and wondrous; He understood mysteries;and when He went up to the temple, in early
days, He was not found, like the other children, playing about the courts or the markets, but sitting
among the doctors,both hearing and asking them questions. His was a master-mind: “Never man

spoke like this man.” So, never child thought like this child; He was an astonishing one, the wonder
and the marvel ofall children, the prince ofchildren; the God-man, even when He was a child. I
think this is taught us in the words, “Butter and honey shall He eat when He shall knowhowto
refuse the evil, and choose the good.” Perhaps it may seem somewhat playful; but, before I close
speaking upon this part of the subject,I must say howsweet it is to my soul to believe that, as
Christ lived upon butter and honey, surely butter and honey drop from His lips. Sweet are His
words unto our souls, more to be desired than honey or the honeycomb. Well might He eat butter
whose words are smooth to the tried, whose utterances are like oil upon the waters ofour sorrows.
Well might He eat butter, who came to bind up the broken-hearted; and well did He live upon the
fat of the land, who came to restore the earth to its old fertility, and make all flesh soft with milk
and honey, ah, honey in the heart— “Where can such sweetness be As I have tasted in Your love,
As I have found in Thee?” Your words, O Christ, are like honey! I, like a bee, have flown from
flower to flower to gather sweets, and concoct some precious essence that shall be fragrant to me;
but I have found honey drop from Your lips, I have touched Your mouth with my finger, and put
the honey to my lips, and my eyes have been enlightened,sweet Jesus; every word of Yours is
precious to my soul; no honey can with You compare, well did You eat butter and honey! And
perhaps I ought not to have forgotten to say, that the effect ofChrist’s eating butter and honey was
to showus that He would not in His lifetime differ from other men in His outward guise. Other
prophets, when they came, were dressed in rough garments, and were austere and solemn in
manner. Christ came not so; He came to be a man among men, a feaster with those that feast,an
eater ofhoney with eaters ofhoney. He differed from none, and therefore He was called a
gluttonous man and a winebibber. Why did Christ do so? Why did He so commit Himself, as men
said, though it was verily a slander? It was because He would have His disciples not regard meats
and drinks, but despise these things,and live as others do; because He would teach them that it is
not that which goes into a man, but that which comes out, that defiles him. It is not what a man eats
with temperance,that does him injury, it is what a man says and thinks; it is not abstaining from
meat, it is not the carnal ordinance of “Touch not, taste not,handle not,” that makes the
fundamentals of our religion, albeit it may be good addenda thereunto. Butter and honey Christ
ate, and butter and honey may His people eat; no, whatsoever God in His providence gives unto
them, that is to be the food ofthe child Christ.
III. Nowwe come to close with THE NAME OF CHRIST: “And shall call His name Immanuel.” I
did hope, dear friends, that I would have my voice this morning, that I might talk about my
Master’s name: I hoped to be allowed to drive along in my swift chariot; but, as the wheels are
taken off, I must be content to go as I can. We sometimescreep when we cannot go,and go when we
cannot run, but oh! Here is a sweetname to close up with: “She shall call His name Immanuel.”
Mothers in the olden time called their children by names which had meaning in them; they did not
give them the names ofeminent persons, whom they would very likely growup to hate, and wish
they had never heard of. They had names full of meaning, which recorded some circumstance of
their birth. There was Cain: “I have gotten a man from the Lord,” said his mother; and she called
him Cain, that is, “Gotten,” or “Acquired.” There was Seth—that is,“Appointed,” for his mother

said, “God has appointed me another seed instead ofAbel.” Noah means “Rest,” or “Comfort.”
Ishmael was so called by his mother because God had heard her. Isaac was called “Laughter”
because he brought laughter to Abraham’s home.Jacob was called the supplanter, or the crafty
one, because he would supplant his brother. We might point out many similar instances; perhaps
this custom was a good one among the Hebrews,though the peculiar formation of our language
might not allow us to do the same, except in a certain measure. We see, therefore, that the Virgin
Mary called her son Immanuel, that there might be a meaning in His name, “God with us.” My
soul, ring these words again “God with us.” Oh! It is one ofthe bells ofheaven; letus strike it yet
again: “God with us.” Oh! It is a stray note from the sonnets ofparadise: “God with us.” Oh! It is
the lisping ofa seraph: “God with us.” Oh! It is one ofthe notesofthe singing ofJehovah, when He
rejoices over His Church with singing: “God with us.” Tell it, tell it, tell it; this is the name of Him
who is born today— “Hark, the herald angels sing!” This is His name,“God with us”—God with
us, by His incarnation, for the august Creator ofthe world did walk upon this globe; He who made
ten thousand orbs, each ofthem more mighty and more vast than this earth, became the inhabitant
of this tiny atom. He, who was from everlasting to everlasting, came to this world oftime, and stood
upon the narrow neck ofland betwixt the two unbounded seas. “God with us:” He has not lost that
name, Jesus had that name on earth, and He has it nowin heaven. He is now“God with us.”
Believer, He is God with you, to protect you; you are not alone, because the Savior is with you. Put
me in the desert, where vegetation grows not; I can still say, “God with us.” Put me on the wild
ocean, and let my ship dance madly on the waves; I would still say, “Immanuel,God with us.”
Mount me on the sunbeam, and let me fly beyond the western sea; still I would say, “God with us.”
Let my body dive down into the depths ofthe ocean, and let me hide in its caverns; still I could, as a
child of God say, “God with us.” Yes,and in the grave, sleeping there in corruption, still I can see
the footmarks ofJesus;He trod the path ofall His people, and still His name is “God with us.” But
would you knowthis name most sweetly, you must knowit by the teaching ofthe Holy Spirit. Has
God been with us this morning? What is the use ofcoming to chapel, ifGod is not there? We might
as well be at home ifwe have no visits ofJesus Christ,and certainly we may come, and come,and
come, as regularly as that door turns on its hinges unlessit is “God with us” by the influence ofthe
Holy Spirit. Unless the Holy Spirit takes the things ofChrist, and applies them to our heart, it is not
“God with us.” Otherwise, God is a consuming fire. It is “God with us” that I love—“Till God in
human flesh I see, My thoughts no comfort find.” Nowask yourselves, do you knowwhat “God
with us” means? Has it been God with you in your tribulations, by the Holy Spirit’s comforting
influence? Has it been God with you in searching the Scriptures? Has the Holy Spirit shone upon
the Word? Has it been God with you in conviction, bringing you to Sinai? Has it been God with you
in comforting you, by bringing you again to Calvary? Do you knowthe full meaning ofthat name
Immanuel, “God with us”? No; he who knows it bestknows little ofit. Alas, he who knows it not at
all is ignorant indeed; so ignorant that his ignorance is not bliss, but will be his damnation. Oh!
May God teach you the meaning ofthat name Immanuel, “God with us”! Nowlet us close.
“Immanuel.” It is wisdom’s mystery, “God with us.” Sages look at it, and wonder; angels desire to
see it; the plumb-line ofreason cannot reach half-way into its depths;the eagle wing ofscience
cannot fly so high, and the piercing eye ofthe vulture ofresearch cannot see it. “God with us.” It is
hell’s terror. Satan trembles at the sound ofit; his legions fly apace, the black-winged dragon ofthe
pit quails before it. Let him come to you suddenly, and do you but whisper that word, “God with
us,”

back he falls, confounded and confused. Satan trembles when he hears that name, “God with us.” It
is the laborer’s strength; howcould he preach the gospel, howcould he bend his knees in prayer,
how could the missionary go into foreign lands, howcould the martyr stand at the stake, howcould
the confessor own his Master, howcould men labor if that one word were taken away? “God with
us.” ’Tis the sufferer’s comfort, ’tis the balm ofhis woe, ’tis the alleviation ofhis misery, ’tis the
sleep which God gives to His beloved, ’tis their rest after exertion and toil. Ah! And to finish, “God
with us”—’tis eternity’s sonnet, ’tis heaven’s hallelujah, ’tis the shout ofthe glorified, ’tis the song
of the redeemed, ’tis the chorus ofangels, ’tis the everlasting oratorio ofthe great orchestra ofthe
sky. “God with us”— “Hail You Immanuel, all divine, In You Your Father’s glories shine, You
brightest, sweetest, fairest One, That eyes have seen or angels known.” Now, a happy Christmas
to you all; and it will be a happy Christmas if you have God with you. I shall say nothing today
against festivities on this great birthday of Christ. I hold that, perhaps, it is not right to have the
birthday celebrated, but we will never be among those who think it as much a duty to celebrate it
the wrong way as others the right. But we will tomorrowthink of Christ’s birthday; we shall be
obliged to do it, I am sure, however sturdily we may hold to our rough Puritanism. And so, “letus
keep the feast,not with old leaven, neither with the leaven ofmalice and wickedness; but with the
unleavened bread ofsincerity and truth.” Do not feast as ifyou wished to keep the festival of
Bacchus; do not live tomorrowas ifyou adored some heathen divinity. Feast, Christians, feast;you
have a right to feast. Go to the house offeasting tomorrow, celebrate your Savior’s birth; do not be
ashamed to be glad, you have a right to be happy. Solomon says, “Go your way, eat your bread with
joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart; for God now accepts your works.Let your garments
be always white and let your head lack no ointment.”—“Religion never was designed To make our
pleasures less.” Recollect that your Master ate butter and honey. Go your way, rejoice tomorrow;
but, in your feasting, think ofthe Man in Bethlehem; let Him have a place in your hearts, give Him
the glory, think ofthe virgin who conceived Him, but think most ofall of the Man born, the Child
given. I finish by again saying— “A HAPPYCHRISTMAS TO YOU ALL!”
EXPOSITION BYC. H. SPURGEON: Matthew2:1-12.
Verse 1.Nowwhen Jesus was born in Bethlehem ofJudea in the days ofHerod the king,behold,
there came wise men from the East to Jerusalem, Our Lord was born in Bethlehem, an
inconsiderable village ofJudea. Its name, however, is significant; it means,“the house ofbread.”
Truly, Bethlehem has become, in a spiritual sense, the house ofbread to all who feed on Christ.
When Jesus was born in Bethlehem, there came wise men from the East to Jerusalem— 2. Saying,
Where is He that is born King ofthe Jews? There was another king, ofwhom we have just read:
“Herod the king,” but he was an Idumaean, an Edomite. He had no right to the throne; but here is
born the true heir to the throne ofDavid, and the Magi from the East have come to ask for Him. 2,
3. For we have seen His star in the east, and are come to worship Him. When Herod the king had

Jesus was fed on butter and honey

Jesus was fed on butter and honey

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Jesus was fed on butter and honey

Similar to Jesus was fed on butter and honey (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Jesus was fed on butter and honey