This prophecy, and the circumstances surrounding and giving rise to it, have been a source of much misunderstanding and conflict of views through the years, and it is with a wish to bring some clarity to our thinking that these notes are set out, traversing much of the material available to us without claiming to be completely exhaustive.
On the subject of Immanuel, there seem to be two schools of thought: the first, those who regard the sign given to Ahaz1 as being fulfilled only in the birth of Jesus — the second, those who, whilst not denying that the birth of Jesus is foreshadowed in the 8th Century sign, still look for a fulfilment in the birth of a specific child at that time, to give local point to the prophet’s words, and to make plain that God was dealing directly with His people, in spite of the woes that were to come upon them.
The history of those years is a fascinating series of currents and cross-currents which we would do well to examine, as a background to the brief encounter between the prophet and the king at the end of the conduit on the way to the fullers’ field. We will essay a partial reconstruction, following the lines set out in the books of the Kings and the Chronicles, which will reveal how real, how natural, how normal, are the individuals and the circumstances with which the sacred record deals; our grasp and understanding of God’s purpose will be made the clearer with increased awareness of the inter-relationships evident in the record.2
This is the period when the end of the kingdom of Israel is fast approaching, when the internecine strife in the northern kingdom is added to by the proximity of the Assyrian invaders, and when the threat of Assyrian attack is a strong motive in the internal politics of Judah.
For the sleeping giant of Assyria is waking, and in retrospect, we see that World Empires are now in embryo — rather than having power over small neighbours, the powerful are to seek to exert their influence in increasingly widening circles — in short, the time of the Gentiles is beginning!
We see that Israel and Judah cannot escape involvement in the effects of this Assyrian influence, and we will be made aware of the inevitable and purposeful drawing together of the burgeoning giant and the declining kingdoms, now ripe for judgment.
The Historical Setting
Let us begin our review with Azariah (Uzziah), at the point where he was smitten with leprosy, at which time, because he was confined to his house, it was natural that Jotham, his son, would act as regent in the place of his father,3 — this he seems to have done for 12 years, after which, upon the death of his father, he reigned for four years as sole ruler.4 However, it appears that a pro-Assyrian movement, focussed upon Jotham’s son, Ahaz, deposed Jotham in his 16th year of rule, though he lived a further four years.5
Ahaz ruled in all for 20 years, the first four of which were in the place of his deposed father. Clearly, he was a ready vassal of Tiglath-Pileser, calling upon him for aid, being willing to meet him face to face — from this journey to Damascus he brought back a pagan altar, and introduced heathen practices into the temple, himself offering upon the altar.6
At the end of his 16 years’ official reign, Ahaz was followed upon the throne by Hezekiah. We are here provided with a positive dating — as Sennacherib’s investment of Jerusalem, identified as in year 701, was in Hezekiah’s 14th year, we are able to date his succession from year 715 B.C.
It is now possible to date the succession of Judah’s kings — refer Table.
Analysis of the succession of Israel’s kings for the parallel period will reveal that, although there has always been difficulty in reconciling the records, our recently-developed insights into the history of this period enable us to state that the Biblical record is an exact one, and inter-relationships between the two kingdoms and between those and the surrounding nations being accurately available to us in the Scriptures as well as in the secular records.
In our review of the last six or so of Israel’s kings, let us commence with the third generation of the dynasty of Jehu,7 Jeroboam II, whose 41-year reign ended in the year 753, when he was succeeded by his son Zechariah. Zechariah’s reign was restricted to six months only, a conspiracy originating in Gilead and headed up in the person of Shallum (a son of Jabesh a man of Jabesh-Gilead?) taking the kingship by the murder of Zechariah.8 Shallum, however, only lasted one month, for Menahem-ben-Gadi apparently thought that this Gileadite interloper should not be permitted to rule, and took the initiative of disposing of him.9
Not without reason, if we note his cruelty set out in the book of Kings,10 Menahem seems to have been not entirely acceptable to his subjects and had, in fact, to ask TiglathPileser to support him (the Chronicler uses the word “confirm”) in his ill-gotten kingship, even to the point where he raised special taxes to buy this Assyrian help.” To help us to understand why Menahem should need this support, we should recognise that the conspiracy would not end with the death of Shallum, but would in fact be carried on by some one of his co-conspirators.
We are able to deduce that this one was Pekah, of whom it is recorded that, after the 10-year reign of Menahem and the two-year reign of Pekahiah, he murdered the latter. It assists us in this identification to note that when he killed Pekahiah he had with him a band of 50 Gileadites.12 Further, as it is recorded of Pekah that he reigned 20 years,13 we are led to conclude that the first 12 years of this reign was as “king in absentia, according to the conspiracy”, possibly in Gilead, with the last eight years an overt rule in Samaria. We may also note that, when Pekahiah came to power, Pekah seems to have ingratiated himself with him, even to the point of being appointed his lieutenant,14 possibly on the basis that he had experience that would be helpful against Assyria — but this was almost certainly a devious and dishonest relationship, and Pekah is seen in his true colors when he brings about Pekahiah’s death.
Hoshea, who followed Pekah, reigned for nine years, and his rule came to an end with the fall of Samaria to the Assyrians, an established date of 722. With this in mind, we are able to set out a table of Israel’s kings, which we may place in parallel with that of the kings of Judah:
Although our table is extremely condensed, it does provide us with indications as to ‘how’, `why’ and even an assumed ‘when’, as to the events recorded in the seventh chapter of Isa-iah’s prophecy.
Rezin of Damascus and Pekah of Samaria (previously of Gilead) would be anti-Assyrian, by reason of the situation in which they both were placed by the territorial ambitions of Tiglath-Pileser. Whilst Jotham was king of Judah, their southern neighbour presented no political problem to them, being himself anti-Assyrian. But after the pro-Assyrian faction had placed Ahaz on the throne, it was possible that the southern kingdom could be used by Tiglath-Pileser as a base, turning the defences available to them, and giving opportunity for attack from the south.
Hence the wish on the part of Rezin and Pekah to remove Ahaz, and to place upon the throne their own appointee.15 On the question of the several contacts between Ahaz and Rezin/Pekah, the Scriptural record does not allow us to determine positive sequential datings. But on examination of the available references, a preference can be stated which is in accord with the general trend of these notes.
Initially, we read that in the reign of Jotham “the Lord began to send against Judah Rezin … and Pekah”. This could not reasonably be expected until the accession of Pekah to the throne in Samaria in the same year of Jotham’s accession to Judah’s throne upon the death of Uzziah. As Jotham was to be removed after four years of sole reign, it is clear that only in those four years could that opposition be seen to begin. Additionally, we note that it was in Pekah’s 17th year that Ahaz came to the throne (supplanting his father over the last four years of the latter’s life). Thus, Pekah virtually had only three years (and a fraction) of his reign to carry out those oppositions to Ahaz which are recorded of him.
To make of this a harmonious whole, the following is proposed. First, it is a fair assumption that Rezin and Pekah would look southward to Judah in the hope that they might be able to bring on to their side against Assyria the not-inconsiderable Judean Army, which, under Uzziah and Jotham, had given demonstration of its capabilities. For this cause, they sought to overcome Jotham. It is possible that an expedition of Rezin, mounted against Jo-tham in the last months of that king’s reign, was successful,16 but by this time Ahaz had come to the throne. Also possible is it that Pekah had in preparation an excursion against Judah, which, in the early days of Ahaz’ rule, moved against him, and was also successful.17
In the light of these two successful incursions, Ahaz was understandably anxious when, in the second year of his reign, the two kings combined against him, this time determined to remove him as being more dangerous to their ambitions than Jotham had been.
The Immanuel sign gave a 12-year period for its working out in the fall of Samaria in 722, thus suggesting that it was given in the year 734.18
The Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz sign gave a two year period for its working out, by which time both kings were to have been removed.
Hoshea murdered Pekah in year 732: at Ahaz’ request Tiglath-Pileser moved against Damascus promptly, and Rezin was slain, the year, according to Assyrian records, being 733 or 732.
We thus seem to have established conclusively that the two successful attacks of 2 Chron. 28 took place before the joint siege of Jerusalem, and were a cause of the fear of Ahaz, as seen in the record of Isaiah 7.
1 Isa 7:13-16
2 Throughout these notes we will use the times and sequences proposed by Prof. E. R. Thiele, ref. “Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings”, which work provides us with insights into the accuracy and historical reliability of the scriptural record.
3 2 Chron 26:21
4 2 Kings 15:32-33; 2 Chron 27:8 — reigned 16 years.
5 2 Kings 15:20 — 20th year of Jotham
6 2 Kings 16:15; 2 Chron 28:23
7 2 Kings 10:30; 2 Kings 15:12
8 2 Kings 15:15
9 2 Kings 15:14
10 2 Kings 15:4
11 2 Kings 15:19-20
12 2 Kings 15:25
13 2 Kings 15:27
14 2 Kings 15:25
15 Isaiah 7:5-6
16 2 Chron 28:5
17 2 Chron 28:6-15
The Solution