TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers 2 Kings 18:17–37. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
Here is, I. Jerusalem besieged by Sennacherib's army, Kg2 18:17. He sent three of his great generals with a great host against Jerusalem. Is this the great king, the king of Assyria? No, never call him so; he is a base, false, perfidious man, and worthy to be made infamous to all ages; let him never be named with honour that could do such a dishonourable thing as this, to take Hezekiah's money, which he gave him upon condition he should withdraw his army, and then, instead of quitting his country according to the agreement, to advance against his capital city, and not send him his money again either. Those are wicked men indeed, and, let them be ever so great, we will call them so, whose principle it is not to make their promises binding any further than is for their interest. Now Hezekiah had too much reason to repent his treaty with Sennacherib, which made him much the poorer and never the safer.
II.Hezekiah, and his princes and people, railed upon by Rabshakeh, the chief speaker of the three generals, and one that had the most satirical genius. He was no doubt instructed what to say by Sennacherib, who intended hereby to pick a new quarrel with Hezekiah. He had promised, upon the receipt of Hezekiah's money, to withdraw his army, and therefore could not for shame make a forcible attack upon Jerusalem immediately; but he sent Rabshakeh to persuade Hezekiah to surrender it, and, if he should refuse, the refusal would serve him for a pretence (and a very poor one) to besiege it, and, if it hold out, to take it by storm. Rabshakeh had the impudence to desire audience of the king himself at the conduit of the upper pool, without the walls; but Hezekiah had the prudence to decline a personal treaty, and sent three commissioners (the prime ministers of state) to hear what he had to say, but with a charge to them not to answer that fool according to his folly (Kg2 18:36), for they could not convince him, but would certainly provoke him, and Hezekiah had learned of his father David to believe that God would hear when he, as a deaf man, heard not, Psa 38:13-15. One interruption they gave him in his discourse, which was only to desire that he would speak to them now in the Syrian language, and they would consider what he said and report it to the king, and, if they did not give him a satisfactory answer, then he might appeal to the people, by speaking in the Jews' language, Kg2 18:26. This was a reasonable request, and agreeable to the custom of treaties, which is that the plenipotentiaries should settle matters between themselves before any thing be made public; but Hilkiah did not consider what an unreasonable man he had to deal with, else he would not have made this request, for it did but exasperate Rabshakeh, and make him the more rude and boisterous, Kg2 18:27. Against all the rules of decency and honour, instead of treating with the commissioners, he menaces the soldiery, persuades them to desert or mutiny, threatens if they hold out to reduce the to the last extremities of famine, and then goes on with his discourse, the scope of which is to persuade Hezekiah, and his princes and people, to surrender the city. Observe how, in order to do this,
1.He magnifies his master the king of Assyria. Once and again he calls him That great king, the king of Assyria, Kg2 18:19, Kg2 18:28. What an idol did he make of that prince whose creature he was! God is the great King, but Sennacherib was in his eye a little god, and he would possess them with the same veneration for him that he had, and thereby frighten them into a submission to him. But to those who by faith see the King of kings in his power and glory even the king of Assyria looks mean and little. What are the greatest of men when either they come to compare with God or God comes to contend with them? Psa 82:6, Psa 82:7.
2.He endeavours to make them believe that it will be much for their advantage to surrender. If they held out, they must expect no other than to eat their own dung, by reason of the want of provisions, which would be entirely cut off from them by the besiegers; but if they would capitulate, seek his favour with a present and cast themselves upon his mercy, he would give them very good treatment, Kg2 18:31. I wonder with what face Rabshakeh could speak of making an agreement with a present when his master had so lately broken the agreement Hezekiah made with him with that great present, Kg2 18:14. Can those expect to be trusted that have been so grossly perfidious? But, Ad populum phaleras - Gild the chain and the vulgar will let you bind them. He thought to soothe up all with a promise that if they would surrender upon discretion, though they must expect to be prisoners and captives, yet it would really be happy for them to be so. One would wonder he should ever think to prevail by such gross suggestions as these, but that the devil does thus impose upon sinners every day by his temptations. He will needs persuade them,
(1.)That their imprisonment would be to their advantage, for they should eat every man of his own vine (Kg2 18:31); though the property of their estates would be vested in the conquerors, yet they should have the free use of them. But he does not explain it now to them as he would afterwards, that it must be understood just as much, and just as long, as the conqueror pleases.
(2.)That their captivity would be much more to their advantage: I will take you away to a land like your own land; and what the better would they be for that, when they must have nothing in it to call their own?
3.That which he aims at especially is to convince them that it is to no purpose for them to stand it out: What confidence is this wherein thou trustest? So he insults over Hezekiah, Kg2 18:19. To the people he says (Kg2 18:29), "Let not Hezekiah deceive you into your own ruin, for he shall not be able to deliver you; you must either bend or break." It were well if sinners would submit to the force of this argument, in making their peace with God - That it is therefore our wisdom to yield to him, because it is in vain to contend with him: what confidence is that which those trust in who stand it out against him? Are we stronger than he? Or what shall we get by setting briars and thorns before a consuming fire? But Hezekiah was not so helpless and defenceless as Rabshakeh would here represent him. Three things he supposes Hezekiah might trust to, and he endeavours to make out the insufficiency of these: - (1.) His own military preparations: Thou sayest, I have counsel and strength for the war; and we find that so he had, Ch2 32:3. But this Rabshakeh turns off with a slight: "They are but vain words; thou art an unequal match for us," Kg2 18:20. With the greatest haughtiness and disdain imaginable, he challenges him to produce 2000 men of all his people that know how to manage a horse, and will venture to give him 2000 horses if he can. He falsely insinuates that Hezekiah has no men, or none fit to be soldiers, Kg2 18:23. Thus he thinks to run him down with confidence and banter, and will lay him any wager that one captain of the least of his master's servants is able to baffle him and all his forces. (2.) His alliance with Egypt. He supposes that Hezekiah trusts to Egypt for chariots and horsemen (Kg2 18:24), because the king of Israel had done so, and of this confidence he truly says, It is a broken reed (Kg2 18:21), it will not only fail a man when he leans on it and expects it to bear his weight, but it will run into his hand and pierce it, and rend his shoulder, as the prophet further illustrates this similitude, with application to Egypt, Eze 29:6, Eze 29:7. So is the king of Egypt, says he; and truly so had the king of Assyria been to Ahaz, who trusted in him, but he distressed him, and strengthened him not, Ch2 28:20. Those that trust to any arm of flesh will find it no better than a broken reed; but God is the rock of ages. (3.) His interest in God and relation to him. This was indeed the confidence in which Hezekiah trusts, Kg2 18:22. He supported himself by depending on the power and promise of God; with this he encouraged himself and his people (Kg2 18:30): The Lord will surely deliver us, and again Kg2 18:32. This Rabshakeh was sensible was their great stay, and therefore he was most large in his endeavours to shake this, as David's enemies, who used all the arts they had to drive him from his confidence in God (Psa 3:2; Psa 11:1), and thus did Christ's enemies, Mat 27:43. Three things Rabshakeh suggested to discourage their confidence in God, and they were all false: - [1.] That Hezekiah had forfeited God's protection, and thrown himself out of it, by destroying the high places and the altars, Kg2 18:22. Here he measures the God of Israel by the gods of the heathen, who delighted in the multitude of altars and temples, and concludes that Hezekiah has given a great offence to the God of Israel, in confining his people to one altar: thus is one of the best deeds he ever did in his life misconstrued as impious and profane, by one that did not, or would not, know the law of the God of Israel. If that be represented by ignorant and malicious men as evil and a provocation to God which is really good and pleasing to him, we must not think it strange. If this was to be sacrilegious, Hezekiah would ever be so. [2.] That God had given orders for the destruction of Jerusalem at this time (Kg2 18:25): Have I now come up without the Lord? This is all banter and rhodomontade. He did not himself think he had any commission from God to do what he did (by whom should he have it?) but he made this pretence to amuse and terrify the people that were on the wall. If he had any colour at all for what he said, it might be taken from the notice which perhaps he had had, by the writings of the prophets, of the hand of God in the destruction of the ten tribes, and he thought he had as good a warrant for the seizing of Jerusalem as of Samaria. Many that have fought against God have pretended commissions from him. [3.] That if Jehovah, the God of Israel, should undertake to protect them from the king of Assyria, yet he was notable to do it. With this blasphemy he concluded his speech (Kg2 18:33-35), comparing the God of Israel with the gods of the nations whom he had conquered and putting him upon the level with them, and concluding that because they could not defend and deliver their worshippers the God of Israel could not defend and deliver his. See here, First, His pride. When he conquered a city he reckoned himself to have conquered its gods, and valued himself mightily upon it. His high opinion of the idols made him have a high opinion of himself as too hard for them. Secondly, His profaneness. The God of Israel was not a local deity, but the God of the whole earth, the only living and true God, the ancient of days, and had often proved himself to be above all gods; yet he makes no more of him than of the upstart fictitious gods of Hamath and Arpad, unfairly arguing that the gods (as some now say the priests) of all religions are the same, and himself above them all. The tradition of the Jews is that Rabshakeh was an apostate Jew, which made him so ready in the Jews' language; if so, his ignorance of the God of Israel was the less excusable and his enmity the less strange, for apostates are commonly the most bitter and spiteful enemies, witness Julian. A great deal of art and management, it must be owned, there were in this speech of Rabshakeh, but, withal, a great deal of pride, malice, falsehood, and blasphemy. One grain of sincerity would have been worth all this wit and rhetoric.
Lastly, We are told what the commissioners on Hezekiah's part did. 1. They held their peace, not for want of something to say both on God's behalf and Hezekiah's: they might easily and justly have upbraided him with his master's treachery and breach of faith, and have asked him, What religion encourages you to hope that such conduct will prosper? At least they might have given that grave hint which Ahab gave to Benhadad's like insolent demands - Let not him that girdeth on the harness boast as though he had put it off. But the king had commanded them not to answer him, and they observed their instructions. There is a time to keep silence, as well as a time to speak, and there are those to whom to offer any thing religious or rational is to cast pearls before swine. What can be said to a madman? It is probable that their silence made Rabshakeh yet more proud and secure, and so his heart was lifted up and hardened to his destruction. 2. They rent their clothes in detestation of his blasphemy and in grief for the despised afflicted condition of Jerusalem, the reproach of which was a burden to them. 3. They faithfully reported the matter to the king, their master, and told him the words of Rabshakeh, that he might consider what was to be done, what course they should take and what answer they should return to Rabshakeh's summons.
Continue studying 2 Kings 18:17 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Second Kings 18:17 details a pivotal moment in the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem, describing the dispatch of a powerful delegation and military contingent from King Sennacherib's headquarters in Lachish to King Hezekiah. This strategic move, involving high-ranking officials and a formidable army, was designed to intimidate Jerusalem into surrender, marking a dramatic escalation of the conflict and initiating a period of intense psychological warfare against the people of Judah. The delegation's deliberate positioning at a vital water source outside the city walls underscores the existential threat facing the capital.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is deeply embedded within the narrative of King Hezekiah's reign in 2 Kings 18, a period marked by his significant religious reforms and unwavering trust in the Lord amidst the formidable threat posed by the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Immediately preceding this account, 2 Kings 18:13-16 describes Sennacherib's initial invasion of Judah, his successful capture of numerous fortified cities, and Hezekiah's desperate, yet ultimately futile, attempt to appease the Assyrian king with a massive tribute of silver and gold, even resorting to stripping the Temple of its precious metals. The dispatch of this high-level Assyrian delegation in 2 Kings 18:17 signals that the tribute was either insufficient or merely a precursor to Sennacherib's true objective: the complete subjugation of Jerusalem. This verse thus shifts the narrative from a failed financial appeasement to a direct military and diplomatic confrontation, setting the stage for the infamous taunts delivered by the Rabshakeh and the subsequent miraculous divine deliverance of Jerusalem detailed in 2 Kings 19.
Historical & Cultural Context
The events of 2 Kings 18:17 are firmly situated in the historical reality of the late 8th century BC, specifically around 701 BC. At this time, the Neo-Assyrian Empire, under the formidable King Sennacherib, stood as the preeminent superpower of the ancient Near East, renowned for its brutal military efficiency, sophisticated siege tactics, and highly effective psychological warfare. Lachish, from which this delegation was sent, was a strategically vital and heavily fortified city in Judah that Sennacherib had already conquered and established as his temporary operational base, a conquest vividly depicted in the famous Lachish reliefs discovered in Nineveh. The deployment of high-ranking officials—Tartan, Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh—was a standard Assyrian diplomatic and military strategy. These were not personal names but rather titles denoting significant roles: Tartan (commander-in-chief), Rabsaris (chief eunuch or court official), and Rabshakeh (chief cupbearer or spokesman). The Rabshakeh, in particular, was chosen for his linguistic prowess (speaking Hebrew, as demonstrated in 2 Kings 18:26) and his skill in delivering intimidating messages designed to break the morale of a besieged city without the necessity of a prolonged and costly siege. Their deliberate positioning at "the conduit of the upper pool, which is in the highway of the fuller's field," was also a calculated move. This location, outside the city walls but crucial for Jerusalem's water supply, was a highly visible and vulnerable point, a site with historical significance as a place of public encounter, as seen in Isaiah 7:3.
Key Themes
2 Kings 18:17 significantly contributes to several overarching themes within the book of Kings and the broader biblical narrative. Firstly, it powerfully illustrates the Imminent Threat and Overwhelming Force faced by the kingdom of Judah. The presence of a "great host" and the dispatch of high-ranking officials underscore the formidable military and diplomatic might of Assyria, presenting an existential crisis for Jerusalem. Secondly, the verse introduces the theme of Psychological Warfare. By sending these specific officials to a public and vital location, Sennacherib aimed to demoralize King Hezekiah and the people, hoping to secure surrender through intimidation rather than a costly and uncertain siege. This tactic is fully unleashed in the Rabshakeh's subsequent speech (e.g., 2 Kings 18:28-35). Thirdly, while not explicitly stated in this verse, it subtly yet powerfully sets the stage for the overarching theme of Divine Sovereignty and Deliverance. The seemingly insurmountable human threat presented here serves as a dramatic backdrop against which God's miraculous intervention in 2 Kings 19:35-36 will be powerfully demonstrated, ultimately affirming that the Lord alone controls the destiny of nations and faithfully delivers His covenant people.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This is not a personal name but an Assyrian title, literally meaning "chief butler" (H7262). In the context of the Assyrian court, such a high-ranking official would have been a significant figure, often entrusted with diplomatic missions, public pronouncements, and the direct representation of the king's authority. The Rabshakeh's role here is primarily that of Sennacherib's chief spokesman, chosen for his ability to speak Hebrew fluently, enabling him to directly address and psychologically undermine the morale of Jerusalem's inhabitants without the need for an interpreter. His words carry the full weight of the Assyrian king's authority and intent.
A place in Palestine (H3923), Lachish was a heavily fortified city in the Shephelah region of Judah, strategically important due to its location controlling access to the Judean hills. By 701 BC, Lachish had already fallen to Sennacherib and served as his operational base for the campaign against Judah. Sending the delegation from Lachish emphasizes the Assyrian king's close proximity and the immediate, overwhelming nature of the threat, as well as the complete devastation that had already befallen other Judean cities.
This term (H2426) refers to an army or a formidable military force, often implying an intrenchment or bulwark. In this verse, it is modified by the adjective "great" (Hebrew, kâbêd, H3515), which means heavy, numerous, or severe. Together, "great host" signifies a massive and overwhelming military contingent accompanying the Assyrian officials. This was not merely a diplomatic envoy but a display of overwhelming force, designed to enforce demands and intimidate Jerusalem into submission through sheer numerical and strategic superiority.
Verse Breakdown
"¶ And the king of Assyria sent Tartan and Rabsaris and Rabshakeh from Lachish to king Hezekiah with a great host against Jerusalem."
This opening clause immediately identifies the aggressor, King Sennacherib of Assyria, and his target, King Hezekiah and the city of Jerusalem. The dispatch of three high-ranking officials—Tartan (commander-in-chief), Rabsaris (chief court official), and Rabshakeh (chief spokesman)—underscores the gravity and official nature of the Assyrian delegation. Their origin "from Lachish" emphasizes Sennacherib's victorious presence deep within Judean territory, having already conquered other cities, and highlights the immediate proximity of the threat. The phrase "with a great host" signifies not just a diplomatic envoy but a formidable military contingent, designed to enforce their demands and intimidate Jerusalem into submission.
"And they went up and came to Jerusalem."
This concise statement describes the physical movement of the Assyrian forces. "Went up" implies an ascent, characteristic of travel towards Jerusalem, which is famously situated on a hill. Their arrival at the city's gates marks the culmination of Sennacherib's campaign against Judah and the direct confrontation with its capital, signaling a point of no return for the city and its inhabitants.
"And when they were come up, they came and stood by the conduit of the upper pool, which [is] in the highway of the fuller's field."
This final clause precisely specifies the highly strategic location of the Assyrian delegation's stand. The "conduit of the upper pool" was a critical part of Jerusalem's water supply system, making it a vulnerable point for the city. The "highway of the fuller's field" was a well-known public thoroughfare outside the city walls, likely where clothes were washed and laid out to dry, and a place of public gathering. By choosing this prominent and vital location, the Assyrians maximized their visibility and psychological impact, aiming to demonstrate their control over a life-sustaining resource and to deliver their message to the widest possible audience, thereby intensifying the pressure on King Hezekiah and the besieged inhabitants.
Literary Devices
The verse employs several effective literary devices to heighten the drama and significance of the moment. Foreshadowing is prominently used, as the arrival of such a powerful delegation, particularly the Rabshakeh, ominously predicts the intense psychological warfare and blasphemous taunts that will follow in the subsequent verses. The specific mention of "a great host" also foreshadows the overwhelming military threat that God will miraculously overcome, building tension for the reader. Symbolism is deeply embedded in the choice of location: "the conduit of the upper pool" symbolizes Jerusalem's lifeblood and inherent vulnerability, while the "highway of the fuller's field" symbolizes a public arena where the fate of the city will be openly challenged and its morale attacked. The very act of the Assyrians "standing by" this vital water source is a powerful symbol of their intent to cut off Jerusalem's lifeline and force its surrender. Furthermore, there is an element of Dramatic Irony for the reader familiar with the broader narrative of 2 Kings. While the Assyrians arrive with overwhelming confidence and a display of might, the reader knows that their ultimate plans will be thwarted by divine intervention, making their initial display of power a prelude to their humiliating defeat.
Theological and Thematic Connections
This verse, while outwardly a description of military movement and political maneuvering, deeply resonates with profound theological themes of divine sovereignty, human vulnerability, and the nature of spiritual warfare. It presents a stark picture of human power and arrogance, embodied by Sennacherib's "great host" and high-ranking officials, arrayed against what appears to be a helpless people. The strategic choice of the "conduit of the upper pool" highlights the fragility of human self-sufficiency and the absolute dependence of life on essential resources, drawing a powerful parallel to humanity's spiritual dependence on God. The narrative that unfolds from this point underscores that true security is not found in military might, strategic locations, or political appeasement, but in humble, unwavering reliance upon the Lord. This confrontation serves as a theological crucible, testing Hezekiah's faith and ultimately demonstrating God's faithfulness to His covenant people, even when all human hope seems lost and the odds appear insurmountable.
Reflection and Application
The arrival of the Assyrian delegation in 2 Kings 18:17 serves as a powerful historical analogue for the "great hosts" we may face in our own lives—whether they are overwhelming challenges, seemingly insurmountable obstacles, or voices of doubt and intimidation that seek to undermine our faith. Just as the Assyrians targeted Jerusalem's vital water supply and sought to break its morale through psychological warfare, so too do the pressures of life, and indeed spiritual adversaries, often aim at our most vulnerable points, seeking to cut off our spiritual supply lines and erode our trust in God. This narrative calls us to recognize that while the threat may appear overwhelming and the enemy's tactics cunning, our ultimate security lies not in our own strength or strategic positioning, but in the unwavering sovereignty and delivering power of God. It encourages us to respond to such threats not with despair or frantic self-reliance, but with the humble and fervent prayer exemplified by Hezekiah in 2 Kings 19:15-19, trusting that God is able to deliver us from any "great host" that stands against us, demonstrating His faithfulness in our moments of greatest need.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What was the significance of the "conduit of the upper pool" and the "fuller's field"?
The "conduit of the upper pool" was a crucial part of Jerusalem's water supply system, bringing essential water into the city. By standing at this location, the Assyrians were asserting symbolic control over a vital resource, aiming to demoralize the inhabitants and demonstrate the city's vulnerability to siege. The "fuller's field" was a public area located outside the city walls, likely where clothes were washed and laid out to dry, and it served as a common meeting or confrontation point. This very location held historical significance as the place where the prophet Isaiah met King Ahaz during an earlier crisis (see Isaiah 7:3), highlighting its importance as a public stage for significant events and pronouncements. The choice of this prominent location by the Assyrians was a deliberate act of psychological warfare, maximizing their visibility and the impact of their demands on the morale of the besieged city.
Who were Tartan, Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh, and why were they sent?
Tartan, Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh were not personal names but high-ranking Assyrian military and court titles. The Tartan was typically the commander-in-chief or second-in-command of the army, indicating military authority. The Rabsaris likely held a position as chief eunuch or chief court official, suggesting an administrative or diplomatic role. The Rabshakeh, whose title means "chief butler" or "chief of staff," served as the primary spokesman for King Sennacherib. They were sent as a formidable delegation, accompanied by a "great host," to demand Jerusalem's surrender. Their high rank and the Rabshakeh's ability to speak Hebrew (as demonstrated in 2 Kings 18:26) were key elements of Sennacherib's psychological warfare, intended to break the morale of King Hezekiah and the people of Jerusalem without the need for a prolonged and costly siege.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
The dramatic confrontation in 2 Kings 18:17 finds its ultimate Christ-centered fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus, who is the true deliverer and the ultimate source of living water. Just as Jerusalem faced an overwhelming external threat from a seemingly invincible empire, humanity faces an even greater spiritual "great host"—the formidable forces of sin, death, and the devil. The Assyrian king's demand for surrender and the psychological warfare waged by the Rabshakeh foreshadow the spiritual battle for the human soul, where the enemy seeks to intimidate and accuse. However, unlike Hezekiah, who could only appeal to God for deliverance, Jesus Christ Himself is the divine King who directly confronts and decisively defeats these spiritual enemies. He is the true "conduit of the upper pool," the inexhaustible source of living water (as He declared in John 4:10-14 and John 7:37-38), offering eternal life and spiritual sustenance to all who believe. His victory on the cross (Colossians 2:15) and His glorious resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:54-57) represent the ultimate divine intervention, far surpassing the miraculous deliverance of Jerusalem. Through Christ, the "great host" of sin and death is utterly defeated, and His followers are offered not merely a temporary reprieve, but eternal salvation and an unshakeable kingdom (Hebrews 12:28), secured by His sovereign power and unfailing love.