TEXT [Commentary]
4. Hezekiah seeks the Lord’s help (19:1-19)
1 When King Hezekiah heard their report, he tore his clothes and put on burlap and went into the Temple of the LORD. 2 And he sent Eliakim the palace administrator, Shebna the court secretary, and the leading priests, all dressed in burlap, to the prophet Isaiah son of Amoz. 3 They told him, “This is what King Hezekiah says: Today is a day of trouble, insults, and disgrace. It is like when a child is ready to be born, but the mother has no strength to deliver the baby. 4 But perhaps the LORD your God has heard the Assyrian chief of staff,[*] sent by the king to defy the living God, and will punish him for his words. Oh, pray for those of us who are left!”
5 After King Hezekiah’s officials delivered the king’s message to Isaiah, 6 the prophet replied, “Say to your master, ‘This is what the LORD says: Do not be disturbed by this blasphemous speech against me from the Assyrian king’s messengers. 7 Listen! I myself will move against him,[*] and the king will receive a message that he is needed at home. So he will return to his land, where I will have him killed with a sword.’”
8 Meanwhile, the Assyrian chief of staff left Jerusalem and went to consult the king of Assyria, who had left Lachish and was attacking Libnah.
9 Soon afterward King Sennacherib received word that King Tirhakah of Ethiopia[*] was leading an army to fight against him. Before leaving to meet the attack, he sent messengers back to Hezekiah in Jerusalem with this message:
10 “This message is for King Hezekiah of Judah. Don’t let your God, in whom you trust, deceive you with promises that Jerusalem will not be captured by the king of Assyria. 11 You know perfectly well what the kings of Assyria have done wherever they have gone. They have completely destroyed everyone who stood in their way! Why should you be any different? 12 Have the gods of other nations rescued them—such nations as Gozan, Haran, Rezeph, and the people of Eden who were in Tel-assar? My predecessors destroyed them all! 13 What happened to the king of Hamath and the king of Arpad? What happened to the kings of Sepharvaim, Hena, and Ivvah?”
14 After Hezekiah received the letter from the messengers and read it, he went up to the LORD’s Temple and spread it out before the LORD. 15 And Hezekiah prayed this prayer before the LORD: “O LORD, God of Israel, you are enthroned between the mighty cherubim! You alone are God of all the kingdoms of the earth. You alone created the heavens and the earth. 16 Bend down, O LORD, and listen! Open your eyes, O LORD, and see! Listen to Sennacherib’s words of defiance against the living God.
17 “It is true, LORD, that the kings of Assyria have destroyed all these nations. 18 And they have thrown the gods of these nations into the fire and burned them. But of course the Assyrians could destroy them! They were not gods at all—only idols of wood and stone shaped by human hands. 19 Now, O LORD our God, rescue us from his power; then all the kingdoms of the earth will know that you alone, O LORD, are God.”
NOTES
19:1 burlap. Traditionally, “sackcloth” (cf. note on 6:30).
19:2 Isaiah son of Amoz. Ironically not mentioned by name in 1–2 Kings up to this point, this very famous Judahite prophet has already played a large role in King Ahaz’s life and reign, and he will do that and more here and in the next chapter in connection with Ahaz’s son Hezekiah (cf. the commentary on 15:1-7 and on 19:20-37).
19:3 ready to be born. Lit., “children have come to the breaking forth, or breach [of the womb]” (‘ad-mashber [TH4866, ZH5402]); cf. Hos 13:13 for the same idiom.
19:4 chief of staff. Or, “the Rabshakeh” (see the second note on 18:17 for details).
19:7 I myself will move against him. As indicated in the NLT mg, the Hebrew reads “I will put a spirit in him” (hineni nothen [TH5414, ZH5989] bo ruakh); other usages of the term ruakh [TH7307, ZH8120] occur in 2:9; 1 Kgs 18:12 (cf. the notes on those verses).
19:8 Lachish . . . Libnah. For the city of Lachish, see the note on 18:14, as well as the second note on 14:19. For Libnah, see the second note on 8:22.
19:9 King Tirhakah of Ethiopia. The third (as reckoned in Manetho) and best-known of the pharaohs of the 25th (Nubian or “Kushite”) Dynasty of Egypt. Spelled “Thrk” in Egyptian (“Taharqa” in Nubian), “Tarkos” in Greek, and “Tarqu” in Assyrian, he reigned 690–664 BC, so the invasion of Sennacherib in 701 BC took place some 11 years prior to Tirhakah’s accession to the throne as “of Kush” (which is what the Hebrew reads here). This chronological incongruity has been a major impetus for positing a second Palestinian invasion by Sennacherib late in his reign (cf. the commentary on 18:13-18). The Nubian kingdom of Napata (located on the Nile River south of Egypt in what roughly corresponds with the northern part of present-day Sudan; cf. Barnes 1991:73) had placed considerable pressure during and before 712 BC on the balkanized regions in the delta area (which had no fewer than three different “pharaohs” on the throne at the same time; cf. the commentary on 15:13-15). But in that year, one Shabako, “King of Kush” (see Spalinger 1973:97; also the convenient summary in Barnes 1991:97-99), had taken over, and this is, effectively, the first year of the reign of the 25th Dynasty over all of Upper and Lower Egypt. Tirhakah (son of Piye [or Piankhy, c. 735–712 BC], who was the effectual founder of the dynasty) was probably the brother of Shebitku, his immediate predecessor on the throne (accession c. 701 or earlier [cf. Kitchen 1996:155-156, 557]; recently, Kahn [2001:1-18] has argued for 706 BC). In any case, he easily transcends in fame all the family who preceded him, both in his building projects (“for the first time in five centuries Egypt experienced a building boom of major proportions” [ABD 6.572]), as well as in his military prowess (Redford 1992:355-358; cf. Spalinger 1978). In summary, the ancient Greek traditions of Tirhakah as a conquering warrior, though roundly discounted by many moderns, are not without foundation (see Barnes 1991:106-108; cf. Redford 1992:355-356, and the references cited there; also cf. Morkot 2000:262-264).
The historicity, however, of Tirhakah actually leading an Egyptian force against Sennacherib in 701 BC remains problematic for many (of course, he was hardly “King of Kush” at the time, but the title may be taken as proleptic). Kitchen (1996:154-161, 553-558) has argued vigorously for its accuracy, and he has been followed by several others (cf. Barnes 1991:103). But this must be discussed in the light of the battle on the plain of Eltekeh, a prominent military confrontation between Egypt and Assyria that took place during Sennacherib’s third campaign (Eltekeh was a Levitical city in the original territory allotted to the tribe of Dan [Josh 21:23]; it was located near Timnah, although its precise location remains uncertain [cf. ABD 2.483-484]). According to Sennacherib’s annals, the Assyrians were victorious (cf. Cogan and Tadmor 1988:338 for the text), but some scholars doubt their accuracy (Redford 1992:353 suggests that it was “an unexpected and serious reverse” for Assyria); and if the present verse in 2 Kings has any connection with this—which I strongly suspect is the case—we would have independent corroboration for this conclusion. However the cryptic notice is meant to be understood, it could not be a good omen for Assyria.
In summary: Tirhakah was a powerful pharaoh, but not in 701 BC. He could have been a military leader of some prominence then, but this remains, at best, problematic. However, the positive reality of an effective Egyptian force sent against Sennacherib is indicated by this brief notice. And Egypt is therefore no longer to be characterized simply as a “reed that splinters beneath your weight and pierces your hand,” as the Rabshakeh asserts in 18:21. Both Egypt and Yahweh have proven to be dependable allies for the beleaguered little land of Judah.
19:12 Have the gods of other nations rescued them . . . ? See the notes on 18:33; 18:34 (and the related commentary) concerning this effective line of reasoning on the part of the Assyrians (also see Hezekiah’s own words concerning these embarrassing assertions in his prayer to Yahweh in 19:17-18).
19:14 spread it out before the LORD. Cogan and Tadmor (1988:236) suggest that, because of the national emergency, Hezekiah was allowed to enter the Holy of Holies where the wings of the cherubim stretched over the Ark of the Covenant, a privilege normally restricted to the priests.
19:15 enthroned between the mighty cherubim! See the first note on 1 Kgs 6:23. Sweeney (2007:417-418) points out that this form of address was also frequently associated with the procession of the Ark (1 Sam 4:4; 2 Sam 6:2; Ps 80:1 [2]; cf. Ps 99:1).
19:16 listen! Hezekiah’s impassioned pleas for Yahweh “the living God” to “see” and to “listen” to Sennacherib’s defiant words against him recall Solomon’s prayer of dedication (1 Kgs 8:23-53) for Yahweh to see and to hear from heaven (cf. 1 Kgs 8:52) and respond favorably to the petitions of his people addressed toward the Temple.
19:19 then all the kingdoms of the earth will know that you alone, O LORD, are God. This is a powerful concluding petition, truly international in scope (cf. the figure of Solomon back in 1 Kgs 4:20-34; and also, to some degree, Moses himself with his reference to the Egyptians in Exod 32:11-13; Num 14:13-16).
COMMENTARY [Text]
As noted in “Earlier Editions of Kings” in the Introduction, King Hezekiah is one of the two Deuteronomistic kings considered “incomparable”; that is, to be placed in a category uniquely above and beyond all the others (the other king in this category is King Josiah). A commonplace conundrum among Kings commentators is to ask, then, which of these two kings was the better (contrast 18:5 with 23:25, and then try to decide!). And a commonplace response is to say the answer is “yes”; or if any distinction is to be made, that King Hezekiah was incomparable in the area of trusting in Yahweh (cf. 18:5; also the commentary on 19:20-37), whereas Josiah was clearly incomparable in the area of cult-reform (virtually the entirety of 23:1-25 illustrates that with a vengeance). But I suspect more should be said about our current hero, King Hezekiah, and his “incomparability”: In light of the text we have just read, Hezekiah is clearly incomparable in the area of prayer.
In my conservative Protestant circles, I recall senior pastors and church officials some years ago saying something to the effect of: “Now make that a $5,000 prayer.” Obviously $5,000 was reckoned as needed at the time, so a “$5,000 prayer” was also what was perceived to be needed—that is, a prayer to move the people (and to move God?) to meet that monetary goal. Well, Hezekiah needed a city to be saved miraculously from a ferocious Assyrian army, so he had to offer a “Jerusalem-sized prayer” to accomplish the task. And that is exactly what he did. (Later on, he will have to offer a prayer for personal healing from an apparently mortal wound [see 20:1-11, and especially 20:2-3], and he will do so once again.) That king could pray!
So I suspect that, just as Josiah was incomparable in reforming the worship system to match the Deuteronomic ideal, Hezekiah was nothing less than incomparable in the intercessory prayers he could, and did, offer up to Yahweh. And just as the prophet Isaiah would later change his direction of walking (20:4-5) in reference to another such prayer from the king, in the present passage it would appear that Isaiah had to change his mind completely about the future of the city of Jerusalem—and not least, about the place that Egypt would play in such a future (cf. the note on 18:21)—again, due largely to the powerful prayer of King Hezekiah. Whether or not that was precisely the case, Isaiah will offer up a stirring, powerful prophecy about the fatal hubris of Assyria and the newly acquired inviolability of Jerusalem in the very next section of this chapter. As James (Jas 5:16) says, “The earnest prayer of a righteous person has great power and produces wonderful results.”
Now whether Egypt was somehow involved in this victory, or whether the victory was won by Yahweh alone, is a question to which the answer is still uncertain (cf. the extended discussion on Tirhakah in the note on 19:9). But certainly, the current structuring of Account B would suggest that one consider the idea that Egypt was indeed involved (see the commentary on 18:13-18 regarding Account B). Perhaps in deference to the previous “anti-Egyptian” policy of the prophet Isaiah (see note on 18:21), the narrator is soft-pedaling the subject; but I do see the present Tirhakah reference in 19:9 serving as a clear rejoinder to the Rabshakeh’s mocking remarks back in 18:19b-25 that it was futile to trust either in Egypt or in Yahweh. Of course, Yahweh was the reason Jerusalem was spared and the prayers of Hezekiah answered, but Egypt did indeed play a role, however minor. The narrator draws our attention to that fact, at least in passing. We should not miss this signal, as so many commentators these days seem to do. Pharaoh Tirhakah, whatever his role may have been in 701 BC, grew to be a very significant force in the Levant over the next number of years. Yahweh was faithful; Egypt apparently also (at least to some degree), and Isaiah, on this occasion, was led to change his mind about Egypt—they were no longer simply to be characterized as a “reed which splinters and pierces your hand” (cf. Ezek 29:6-7). And somehow, I don’t think this great prophet minded one bit that he may have been proven inconsistent about the power of that nation, for his powerful words about Jerusalem and about Hezekiah did indeed carry the day (see 19:21-34 and the miraculous fulfillment in 19:35-37). (On the idea that the prophet may have been proven “wrong” about Hezekiah’s personal future, see the commentary on 20:1-11; and for a reminder that a prophet need not be “woodenly” correct in his or her predictions to be a true prophet of God, see endnote 28 of the Introduction.)
In summary, a true prophet must predict the future accurately (Deut 18:15-22; cf. the note on 1 Kgs 13:3, where I have labeled this important criterion “the test of short-term prediction”), but with the proviso that either individual and/or corporate “free will” can alter the result (Jer 18:1-12). Isaiah was of course a true prophet, yet at least in 2 Kings 20:1-11 (and I suspect in the present text as well) his initial prophecy proved to be “inaccurate” (in the sense that Hezekiah’s free will significantly altered the future result). This would not be a problem for the ancients, and we today make it a problem only if we interpret biblical prophecy as some sort of inflexible and inalterable fortune-telling.