ch. 22

 

 

vs. 1-14 - A PROPHECY AGAINST JERUSALEM. The prophet,

present in Jerusalem, either actually, or at any rate in spirit, sees the

inhabitants crowded together upon the housetops, in a state of boisterous

merriment (vs. 1, 2). Outside the walls is a foreign army threatening the

town (vs. 5-7). Preparations have been made for resistance, which are

described (vs. 8-11); but there has been no turning to God. On the

contrary, the danger has but made the bulk of the people reckless. Instead

of humbling themselves and putting on sackcloth, and weeping, and

appealing to God’s mercy, they have determined to drown care in drink

and sensual enjoyment (vs. 12, 13). Therefore the prophet is bidden to

denounce woe upon them, and threaten that Jehovah will not forgive their

recklessness until their death (v. 14). There is nothing to mark very

distinctly the nationality of the foreign army.  It is almost impossible to

imagine any other army than the Assyrian besieging Jerusalem in Isaiah’s

time. Moreover, the particulars concerning the preparations made against

the enemy (vs. 9-11) agree with those mentioned in 2 Chronicles 32:3-5

and 30 as made by Hezekiah against Sennacherib. And the second

section of the chapter has certainly reference to this period. It seems,

therefore, reasonable to regard the siege intended as that conducted by

Sennacherib in his fourth year (B.C. 701), of which we have a brief

account in his annals (G. Smith, ‘Eponym Canon,’ p. 135, 11. 15-18).

 

Excerpted text Copyright AGES Library, LLC. All rights reserved.

Materials are reproduced by permission."

 

vs. 4-5 – "I will weep bitterly" because of the spoiling of God's

            people.

 

Patriotism moved the spirit of the mourner!

 

 a day of trouble, and of treading down, and of perplexity

            by the Lord God of hosts” – see also Luke 21:25

 

v. 9 - "Ye have seen also the breaches of the city of

            David, that they are many"

 

In 2 Chronicles 32:5 we read that Hezekiah at this time “built up

all the wall that was broken, and raised it up to the towers, and another

wall without, and repaired Mille in the city of David,” where a particular

part of Jerusalem seems certainly to be meant

 

 

 

 

 

 

vs. 11b-14 - there has been no turning to God - instead

            the danger had made the bulk of the people (polls)

            reckless - instead of humbling themselves and

            putting on sackcloth and weeping and appealing

            to God's mercy - they have determined to drown

            care in drink and sensual enjoyment.

 

v. 12 - Baldness (Isaiah15:2; Micah 1:16; Amos 8:10). It has been said that

baldness” was forbidden by the Law; but this is not so, absolutely. Baldness

was wholly forbidden to the priests (Leviticus 21:5; Ezekiel 44:20); and certain

peculiar modes of shaving the hair, the beard, and the eyebrows, practiced by

idolatrous nations, were prohibited to all the people (Leviticus 19:27;

Deuteronomy 14:2). But such shaving of the head as was practiced by Job

(Job 1:20) and other pious men, was not forbidden to laymen, any more than

the wearing of sackcloth. It was regarded as a natural mode of exhibiting grief.

 

v. 14 - therefore God will not forgive their recklessness until their death –

            the sin of turning a call to repentance into an excuse for rioting

            and drunkenness is one which God will not pardon.  It implies

            a hardness of heart which issues in final impenitence.

 

vs. 15-24 -  PROPHECY ON THE DEPOSITION OF SHEBNA

AND THE ELEVATION OF ELIAKIM. In its first and simplest

application, this section predicts the fall of one state official and the

advancement of another — matters, no doubt, of some importance in the

court history of the time, but scarcely (with reverence be it said) of such

moment as to be worthy either of prophetic announcement or of divinely

inspired record. It has, therefore, been generally felt that there must be a

secondary application of the passage. According to some, the two officials

represent respectively the two covenants, the old and the new; according

to others, they stand for the two great parties in the Jewish slate of the time

that which put its trust in Jehovah, and that which leant upon heathen

alliances.

 

vs. 15 - 18 - Shebna - worldly, leaned on heathen alliances,                                

            secular?  Disposed - made obscure as he sought to                                

            attract attention to himself and sought to become                    

             famous

 

v. 19 - Vices have natural punishments

 

 

 

vs. 20-21 - Eliakim - trusted in Jehovah - established - firm with

                   tenure - given honor - prosperity - so shall all members

                   of the family of God participate in the final glory of

                   Christ in His eternal kingdom - Rev. 7:9

 

            Virtues have natural rewards

 

(See Isaiah 13-23 Pulpit appendage)

 

vs. 22-24a - The reference to this passage in Revelation 3:7 is sufficient

            to show that Eliakim, the “servant of Jehovah” (v. 20), is, to a

            certain extent, a type of Christ; perhaps also of his faithful

            ministers (Matthew 16:19; John 20:23).

 

and they shall hang upon Him all the glory”

 

According to scriptural notions, the “glory” of a family consists very much

in its size (Genesis 15:5; Psalm 127:5). And Christ’s glory in His final

kingdom will consist greatly in the number of the saved (Revelation 7:4-9).

 

v. 25  In that day”

 

"the burden that was upon it shall be cut off" - the load of

sin which Christ bore

 

"For the Lord hath spoken it" - the double attestation, at the

beginning and the end of the verse marks the vast importance

of the announcement contained in it - THE GERM OF THE

GREAT DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT

 

Christ is the Propitiation for our sins - we do not understand

it but it seems to be IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE SINS OF MAN

TO BE FORGIVEN UNLESS GOD DIED FOR THEM.

 

When I think of my sin, it seems impossible that any atonement

should ever be adequate; but when I think of Christ’s death it

seems impossible that any sin should ever be great enough

to need such an atonement as that - Charles Haddon Spurgeon

 

Then, think of all the sins of every person from the beginning

of time - The Lamb of God atoned for them - no wonder He

sweat great drops of blood in Gethsemane!

 

How hateful for sin to cause the death of the CREATOR!

 

We should love God "with all our heart, mind, soul and

strength" for dying for us!

 

John 3:16 – “For God so loved the world that He gave His

            only Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should

            not perish, but have everlasting life”!

 

If we do not accept this great salvation - we are no

doubt "past feeling"  - Eph. 4:19 - and are no better than

"brute beasts" - Jude 10

 

                                    ADDITIONAL NOTES

 

vs. 15-24 – Shebna and Eliakim

 

I. A MORAL CONTRAST.

 

A.  Shebna, selfish, isolated, vain-glorious; noted for his display of chariots,

like Absalom (2 Samuel 15:1); no “father” to the people under his

charge; no good adviser of the king his master; chiefly desirous of handing

his name down to posterity by a magnificent tomb; perhaps not even a

worshipper of Jehovah.

 

B. Eliakim, God’s “servant;” kind and thoughtful for others; regarded as “a

father,” not only by the people of Jerusalem, but by the entire “house” or

tribe of Judah; looked up to by a large body of relations, of whom many

were poor and of low rank, and willingly sharing his prosperity with them;

an honest and prudent counselor to his king; a faithful worshipper of the

One God, whose unity his name proclaimed. No two dwellers at the same

court, no two servants of the same king, could well be more different in

character, in circumstances, in moral desert.

 

II. A CONTRAST OF RESULT.

 

A.  Shebna, degraded from his office, is forced for a time to serve in one of

very inferior dignity. Then he is either further degraded or so dissatisfied

with his position that he cannot bear to retain it. He becomes a refugee in a

distant land, an exile, an outcast.

 

B.  Eliakim, advanced into Shebna’s place, has the key of the house of

David placed upon his shoulder, becomes his king’s most trusty counselor

and representative, is a glory and a support to his father’s house, and

retains his position, if not till his death, at any rate for a long period. In

estimating the extent to which God’s moral government is carried on in this

world, such instances as those of Haman and Mordecai, Shebna and

Eliakim, should by no means be omitted from our calculation. History

contains very many such cases.

 

                        Shebna and Eliakim: an Allegory.

 

Shebna, set over the house of the Hezekiah by the king himself, but unfaithful

in his office, worldly, carnal, fond of grandeur and display, typifies the old

covenant, and the priesthood to which it was committed — a priesthood

which looked more to the enrichment of the treasury than to the pure

service of God (Mark 7:11), and which was not above the weakness of

raising up grand sepulchers for its members in a conspicuous place

(1 Macc. 13:27-30). This priesthood, found wanting, had to be cast away, and

a better priesthood, after a different order, to be instituted. Eliakim typifies

this new priesthood — a priesthood “made, not after the law of a carnal

commandment, but after the power of an endless life” (Hebrews 7:16).

Primarily, he typifies Christ himself, the true “Servant of the Lord”

(Isaiah 42:1-4; 43:10; 49:3, 6; 52:13,), the perpetual High Priest of

His Church, the eternal Possessor of “the key of David, who openeth, and

no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth” (Revelation 3:7),

who “hath the keys of hell and of death” (Revelation 1:18). Eliakim

was “a father” to Judah and Jerusalem; among Christ’s names is that of

“Everlasting Father” (Isaiah 9:6). Eliakim was “as a nail fastened in a

sure place;” Christ is gone up where he “forever sitteth on the right hand of

God” (Hebrews 10:12). Eliakim had a “glorious throne;” Christ’s

throne is that “great white” one, which is set in heaven (Revelation 20:11),

out of which “come lightnings, and thunderings, and voices”

(Revelation 4:5). On Eliakim hung all the members of his father’s

house; on Christ depends, for pardon, for peace, for life, for glory, every

true Christian. Secondarily, Eliakim may be regarded as typifying the

faithful minister of Christ, to whom the power of the keys is communicated

in a certain modified sense (Matthew 16:19), who, binding and loosing

according to Christ’s ordinance, binds and looses effectively, so that none

can undo his work, and, as a faithful steward in the household of Christ,

dispenses the good things committed to his charge by his King and Master.

The faithful minister will not blench before the powers of evil, any more

than Eliakim did before Rabshakeh (Isaiah 36:11, 21); he will be “a

father” to the people of God, i.e. a protector, a guide, a friend; and with

those who “hang upon him” he will always be ready to share both his

material and his spiritual blessings.

 

v. 25 - Messiah’s burden and Messiah’s death.

 

How Christ’s death atones for sin we know not, and need not too curiously

inquire. But, if plain words have a plain meaning, it is impossible to doubt

that this is the teaching of Scripture. By his stripes we are healed

(Isaiah 53:5); “He is the Propitiation for our sins” (1 John 2:2);

One died for all” (2 Corinthians 5:14). It is quite possible that there is

something in the nature of things, which we cannot fathom, that made it

impossible for man’s sins to be forgiven unless God died for them. Our

wisdom is to avoid curious speculation, and to view the matter on its

practical side. Thus viewed, it manifestly calls on us for three things.

 

I. INTENSE HATRED OF SIN, ON ACCOUNT OF ITS HAVING

CAUSED MESSIAH’S DEATH. If an animate, or even an inanimate,

thing has caused the death of one we loved, how bitterly we detest it!

Often we cannot bear to look upon it, nay, even to see a thing of the same

kind. How, then, should we hate sin — hateful in itself, hateful in its

effects, hateful in its origin, most hateful in that it caused the death of the

one Man who alone of all that have ever lived did not deserve to die! And

He, moreover, One who dearly loved us, who came down from heaven for

us, lived a life of privation and suffering for us, at last died for our sakes.

 

II. INTENSE LOVE OF CHRIST, ON ACCOUNT OF HIS HAVING

DIED FOR US. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down

his life for his friends.” (John 15:13) But Christ died for his enemies. Sin is

an insuperable barrier between God and man, sets them at variance, makes

them adversaries. And till Christ died man could not be forgiven. So He

died for those with whom he was at enmity! And died by what a death!

 

  • More painful than any other.
  • Considered at the time more disgraceful.
  • Aggravated by the insults of lookers-on.
  • Regarded as bringing a man under a curse.

 

III. INTENSE LOVE OF GOD THE FATHER, ON ACCOUNT OF HIS

GIVING HIS SON TO DIE FOR US. We cannot realize the love of the

Father for the Son; but we cannot doubt that it transcends any love known

on earth. Yet He gave Him to suffer all that He suffered — and why? For us.

Because He loved us. As our Lord Himself says, “God so loved the world,

that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should

not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). If the knowledge of

this fact fails to stir up love towards the Father in our souls, we must be

past feeling” (Ephesians 4:19), utterly dead to any high motive,

scarcely better than “brute beasts” (Jude 1:10).

 

Excerpted text Copyright AGES Library, LLC. All rights reserved.

Materials are reproduced by permission."