King James Version

Isaiah 36

22 verses with commentary

Sennacherib Threatens Jerusalem

Now it came to pass in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah, that Sennacherib king of Assyria came up against all the defenced cities of Judah, and took them.

View commentary

This historical crisis introduces the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem under Hezekiah, testing faith in God's promises to protect Zion. The synchronization with Hezekiah's fourteenth year (701 BC) confirms biblical chronology and demonstrates God's sovereignty over pagan empires. The Rabshakeh's propaganda campaign foreshadows Satan's tactics of undermining trust in God's Word through logical-sounding arguments.

And the king of Assyria sent Rabshakeh from Lachish to Jerusalem unto king Hezekiah with a great army. And he stood by the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller's field.

View commentary

Rabshakeh was the Assyrian field commander sent with a large army to Jerusalem. His position at the "conduit of the upper pool" was strategic—threatening Jerusalem's water supply demonstrated Assyria's power to besiege the city. This geographical detail emphasizes the real historical threat. The large army's presence was psychological warfare, meant to intimidate. This sets the stage for God's dramatic deliverance, showing that human military might means nothing when God defends His people.

Then came forth unto him Eliakim, Hilkiah's son, which was over the house, and Shebna the scribe, and Joah, Asaph's son, the recorder. scribe: or, secretary

View commentary

Eliakim, Shebna, and Joah were Hezekiah's senior officials who went to negotiate with Rabshakeh. Their titles indicate governmental organization: Eliakim "over the household" (palace administrator), Shebna "the scribe" (secretary of state), and Joah "the recorder" (official historian). This diplomatic delegation shows proper protocol but also Hezekiah's wise refusal to personally engage with blasphemous threats. The confrontation between God's servants and pagan representatives sets up a spiritual conflict beyond mere politics.

And Rabshakeh said unto them, Say ye now to Hezekiah, Thus saith the great king, the king of Assyria, What confidence is this wherein thou trustest?

View commentary

The Rabshakeh's taunt reveals the spiritual warfare dimension behind political crises. His rhetorical question 'What confidence is this?' attacks the very foundation of faith - trusting God despite circumstances. This mirrors Satan's temptation strategy, questioning God's Word and provision. Hezekiah's silence models godly wisdom in not defending oneself before mockers.

I say, sayest thou, (but they are but vain words) I have counsel and strength for war: now on whom dost thou trust, that thou rebellest against me? vain: Heb. a word of lips I have: or, but counsel and strength are for the war

View commentary

Rabshakeh's taunt "I say, thy counsel and strength for war are but vain words" attacks the foundation of Hezekiah's trust. The Assyrian accurately identifies that military preparedness requires both strategy ("counsel") and power ("strength"). His claim that Judah possesses neither is designed to demoralize. However, he fundamentally misunderstands the source of Judah's confidence—not military might but divine protection. This reveals the world's inability to comprehend faith-based confidence.

Lo, thou trustest in the staff of this broken reed, on Egypt; whereon if a man lean, it will go into his hand, and pierce it: so is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all that trust in him.

View commentary

The metaphor of Egypt as a "broken reed" that pierces the hand of anyone leaning on it is vivid and accurate. Egypt had encouraged Judah's rebellion against Assyria but provided no meaningful military support. The imagery teaches that alliances with worldly powers not only fail to help but actively harm. This principle extends to spiritual life—trusting created things rather than the Creator brings injury. God alone is the trustworthy support that never breaks.

But if thou say to me, We trust in the LORD our God: is it not he, whose high places and whose altars Hezekiah hath taken away, and said to Judah and to Jerusalem, Ye shall worship before this altar?

View commentary

The accusation that Hezekiah removed the high places (actually an act of faithfulness) is twisted into evidence of God's displeasure. This demonstrates how reforming obedience can be misrepresented as rebellion. The enemy always attempts to redefine righteousness as sin and faithfulness as folly. Hezekiah's reforms (2 Kings 18:4) were covenant faithfulness, not presumption.

Now therefore give pledges, I pray thee, to my master the king of Assyria, and I will give thee two thousand horses, if thou be able on thy part to set riders upon them. pledges: or, hostages

View commentary

Rabshakeh's mocking offer—"I will give thee two thousand horses, if thou be able to set riders upon them"—ridicules Judah's military weakness. This insult implies Judah lacks even basic cavalry forces. The offer is disingenuous psychological warfare meant to humiliate and demoralize. However, it inadvertently highlights a spiritual truth: God's strength is made perfect in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9). When His people are obviously inadequate, His power becomes undeniable.

How then wilt thou turn away the face of one captain of the least of my master's servants, and put thy trust on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen?

View commentary

The rhetorical question "How then wilt thou turn away the face of one captain of the least of my master's servants?" emphasizes hopelessness from a human perspective. Even the lowest Assyrian officer supposedly outmatches all Judah. The continued mention of trusting Egypt for chariots and horsemen shows the Assyrians understood Judah's diplomatic maneuvering. This sustained mockery aims to break morale by presenting the situation as utterly hopeless apart from surrender.

And am I now come up without the LORD against this land to destroy it? the LORD said unto me, Go up against this land, and destroy it.

View commentary

Rabshakeh's claim "Am I now come up without the LORD against this land to destroy it?" is particularly insidious—asserting that YHWH Himself authorized Assyria's invasion. The phrase "the LORD said unto me, Go up against this land" mimics prophetic language. This psychological warfare technique attempts to create religious doubt, suggesting that resisting Assyria means resisting God. While God does use pagan nations as instruments of judgment, Rabshakeh's blasphemous claim that God directly commissioned him is false.

Then said Eliakim and Shebna and Joah unto Rabshakeh, Speak, I pray thee, unto thy servants in the Syrian language; for we understand it: and speak not to us in the Jews' language, in the ears of the people that are on the wall.

View commentary

The officials' request to speak in "Syrian" (Aramaic) rather than "Jews' language" (Hebrew) shows concern for public morale. They recognize Rabshakeh's speech is aimed at the people on the wall, not just the negotiating team. Aramaic was the diplomatic lingua franca, understood by educated officials but not common people. The request reveals wisdom in protecting the vulnerable from demoralizing propaganda. However, Rabshakeh will deliberately reject this request to maximize psychological impact.

But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung , and drink their own piss with you?

View commentary

Rabshakeh's graphic response about people eating their own dung and drinking their own urine depicts siege horror. He explicitly states his message targets the common people on the wall who will suffer siege deprivation. This crude psychological warfare aims to create panic and civilian pressure on Hezekiah to surrender. The tactic reveals Satan's methodology—targeting the vulnerable with worst-case scenarios to induce fear. Rabshakeh shows contempt for diplomatic protocol, exposing Assyria's brutal arrogance.

Then Rabshakeh stood, and cried with a loud voice in the Jews' language, and said, Hear ye the words of the great king, the king of Assyria.

View commentary

Rabshakeh standing and crying "with a loud voice in the Jews' language" deliberately violates the officials' request, showing contempt for Judah's leaders. Speaking loudly in Hebrew ensures maximum dissemination of his message. His opening "Hear ye the words of the great king, the king of Assyria" parodies prophetic announcements ("Hear the word of the LORD"). This blasphemous appropriation of divine authority reveals satanic pride—the creature demanding worship due only the Creator.

Thus saith the king, Let not Hezekiah deceive you: for he shall not be able to deliver you.

View commentary

The command "Let not Hezekiah deceive you" attempts to reframe the king's faith as deception. The claim "he shall not be able to deliver you" directly challenges God's power, though Rabshakeh addresses it to Hezekiah's competence. This is spiritual warfare disguised as political negotiation. The tactic is to separate the people from their godly leader by portraying his faith as foolish fantasy. Satan uses similar tactics to isolate believers from faithful shepherds.

Neither let Hezekiah make you trust in the LORD, saying, The LORD will surely deliver us: this city shall not be delivered into the hand of the king of Assyria.

View commentary

The Rabshakeh's command not to let Hezekiah 'make you trust in the LORD' reveals the ultimate goal of all worldly philosophy - preventing faith in God. This verbal form emphasizes the ongoing nature of trust that must be actively maintained. The promise that Jerusalem would not be delivered into Assyria's hand becomes a test case for divine faithfulness versus human calculation.

Hearken not to Hezekiah: for thus saith the king of Assyria, Make an agreement with me by a present, and come out to me: and eat ye every one of his vine, and every one of his fig tree, and drink ye every one the waters of his own cistern; Make: or, Seek my favour by a present: Heb. Make with me a blessing

View commentary

The offer of 'a land like your own land' is a satanic counterfeit of God's promises - a substitute blessing that requires surrender and compromise. This echoes the serpent's offer in Eden and foreshadows the Antichrist's false peace. The enemy always offers immediate comfort at the cost of ultimate blessing. True faith endures present difficulty for future glory (Romans 8:18).

Until I come and take you away to a land like your own land, a land of corn and wine, a land of bread and vineyards.

View commentary

Rabshakeh's offer of relocation to "a land like your own land" is dressed-up slavery. The litany of promised abundance—grain, wine, bread, vineyards—sounds appealing but ignores that these blessings are tied to the Promised Land covenant. Exchanging the land God gave for foreign territory means abandoning covenant promises. This temptation parallels Satan offering Jesus all kingdoms (Matthew 4:8-9)—trading God's promises for immediate comfort. The offer reveals that sometimes our greatest temptation is not obvious evil but comfortable compromise.

Beware lest Hezekiah persuade you, saying, The LORD will deliver us. Hath any of the gods of the nations delivered his land out of the hand of the king of Assyria?

View commentary

The warning "Beware lest Hezekiah persuade you" repeats the deception charge, while adding "The LORD will deliver us" as the supposedly false promise. Rabshakeh now explicitly attacks trust in YHWH, escalating from political to theological assault. The rhetorical question "Hath any of the gods of the nations delivered his land?" equates YHWH with impotent pagan deities. This blasphemy reveals the fundamental error—Rabshakeh cannot distinguish between the true God and false gods, judging YHWH by pagan standards.

Where are the gods of Hamath and Arphad? where are the gods of Sepharvaim? and have they delivered Samaria out of my hand?

View commentary

The taunt "Where are the gods of Hamath and Arphad...Sepharvaim?" lists conquered cities whose deities failed to save them. The climactic question "have they delivered Samaria?" is particularly cutting—Samaria was Israel's capital, fallen to Assyria in 722 BC. Rabshakeh implies that if YHWH couldn't save the northern kingdom, He certainly can't save Judah. This argument has superficial logic but misses that Samaria fell precisely because of covenant unfaithfulness, while Hezekiah has instituted reforms and sought God.

Who are they among all the gods of these lands, that have delivered their land out of my hand, that the LORD should deliver Jerusalem out of my hand?

View commentary

The ultimate blasphemy: "Who are they among all the gods of these lands, that have delivered their land out of my hand, that the LORD should deliver Jerusalem?" This rhetorical question places YHWH in the same category as demonstrably powerless false gods. Rabshakeh's arrogance assumes Assyrian power supersedes all divine authority. This echoes Satan's primal rebellion—the creature exalting himself above the Creator. The question sets up God's dramatic intervention to demonstrate His incomparable power.

But they held their peace, and answered him not a word: for the king's commandment was, saying, Answer him not.

View commentary

The people's silence in response to blasphemy shows remarkable discipline—"they answered him not a word; for the king's commandment was, saying, Answer him not." Hezekiah had wisely instructed them not to engage in verbal sparring with the enemy. This restraint demonstrates mature faith that doesn't need to defend God with arguments but trusts Him to vindicate Himself. The silence also prevents giving Rabshakeh additional material for mockery. Sometimes the most powerful response to blasphemy is faithful silence.

Then came Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah, that was over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and Joah, the son of Asaph, the recorder, to Hezekiah with their clothes rent, and told him the words of Rabshakeh.

View commentary

The officials returning with "their clothes rent" signifies deep distress—tearing garments was the customary expression of grief or horror at blasphemy. Despite their diplomatic composure during the meeting, they appropriately grieve at the assault on God's honor. Their report to Hezekiah sets up the king's faithful response in chapter 37. The officials' grief demonstrates that spiritual leaders should feel the weight of attacks on God's name, not becoming calloused to blasphemy.

About Isaiah

Places in This Chapter

Isaiah 36

Sennacherib Threatens Jerusalem

Test Your Knowledge

Continue Your Study