CHAPTER EIGHT

KINGS OF JUDAH (Part II)

Objective

In the last chapter, twelve (12) kings of Judah were identified in

terms of their roles in Judah. In this chapter, you will read about

the reign of the remaining kings of Judah namely Hezekiah,

Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin

and Zedekiah. At the end of this chapter, you should be able to

identify any of these kings, especially in terms of their successes

and failures. Moreover, the roles of Major Prophets like Isaiah,

Jeremiah and Ezekiel in the regimes of some of these kings are

examined in this chapter.

Pre-test

1. Identify the following: (i) Hezekiah, (ii) Manasseh, (iii)

Amon, and (iv)Josiah

2. Identify the following: (i)Jehoahaz, (ii)Jehoiakim, (iii)

Jehoiachin and (iv)Zedekiah

3. What are the major themes of: (i) Isaiah’s message, and (ii)

Jeremiah’s message?

Content

Hezekiah or Ezekias

According to the Biblical narrative, King Hezekiah (the 13th

king of Judah) assumed the throne of Judah at the age of 25114Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

and reigned for 29 years (II Kings 18:2; II Chron. 29:1). Some

writers have proposed that Hezekiah served as coregent with

his father, Ahaz, for about 14 years. According to the Hebrew

Bible, King Hezekiah is the son of Ahaz, the 13th King of

Judah. He is considered a very righteous king (II kgs. 18-20; II

Chro. 29-30). For instance he removed the high places, broke

the images, cut down the groves, and broke in pieces the brazen

serpent (Nehushtan) that Moses made, but which the people

had turned into idol. He served the Lord wholeheartedly. He is

one of the prominent kings of Judah mentioned in the Bible and

in the genealogy of Jesus in the gospel of Mathew.

No king of Judah among either his predecessors or his successors

could be compared to him (see, II kgs.18:5).

The reign of Hezekiah saw a notable increase in the power of

the Judean state. He defeated the Philistine and thus increased

Judah’s land. At this time, Judah was the strongest nation on

the Assyrian-Egyptian frontier. There were increases in literacy

and in the production of literacy works. The massive water

construction project in which a pool and a conduit conveyed

water to Jerusalem was made during his reign; the city was

enlarged to accommodate a large influx of people such that

population increased in Jerusalem up to 25000, five times the

population under King Solomon (Tinkelstein and Amihai,

2020). Archaeologists Tinkelstein and Amihai (2020) say that

the sudden growth of population in Jerusalem and Judah in

general during King Hezekiah’s time must be as a result of

Israelites’ fleeing from Assyrian destruction of the Northern

kingdom of Israel (the Ten Tribes).

During Hezekiah’s reign, the Ten Tribes of Israel went into

Assyrian captivity. In 721 BC, Shalmaneser (Sargon II), king

of Assyria invaded Samaria, defeated Hoshea king of Israel

and carried away all Israel (that is, the Ten Tribes) to Assyria.

Still during the reign of Hezekiah, Sennacherib, who succeeded

Shalmaneser as king of115Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile

as his father displaced Israel. He demanded Judah’s submission

to his authority as the only condition for their safety. Not

willing to become Sennacherib’s subject, Hezekiah accepted

to pay off Sennacherib rather than becoming his subject. Not

satisfied with this, Sennacherib sent his personal assistants to

threaten Judah and destabilise them emotionally. He boasted of

his achievements and those of his father in the conquest of other

nations and thus advised Judah to take a cue rather than trusting

in the Lord for deliverance. Overwhelmed with Sennacherib’s

threats, Hezekiah went to the temple to solicit for divine help.

He also sent for Isaiah’s prophetic intervention. He was assured

of victory over Sennacherib. God sent His angel to Assyrian

camp to destroy 185, 000 Assyrian army. Thus, Sennacherib

became powerless to carry out his threats against Judah. In

shame, he returned to his own land at Nineveh where he was

assassinated by two of his own children as he was worshipping

in the house of Nisroch, his god (Ashnod, 2008).

After this, Hezekiah developed a fatal sickness with a boil on

his skin. According to II Kgs 20:1, the sickness came naturally

whereas rabbinic literature opines that Hezekiah’s dangerous

illness has some divine causation. Isaiah came with a death-

sentence-prophecy. To reverse this prophecy of doom, Hezekiah

prayed to God, stating his righteousness and loyalty to God as

a condition for divine healing, and preservation of life. Some

scholars observe that Hezekiah’s prayer was rather arrogant,

that he was praising himself rather than petitioning the Lord.

Levi (2020) says that Hezekiah’s word: “and have done what is

good in thy eyes” (I Kgs. 20:3), is a form of self-righteousness,

or selfjustification. Before Isaiah could leave the king’s court,

God heard Hezekiah’s prayer instantly and sent Isaiah back

with a message of divine healing and 15 additional years of

existence for the king.

When the Hezekiah had fully recovered from his sickness, he

received visitors from Babylon. The visitors were delegates of116Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

Berodach-baladan, King of Babylon. They came with gifts to

congratulate him on his recovery. Out of joy, Hezekiah not only

received them warmly but also showed them all his treasures.

After Hezekiah had displayed the kingdom’s treasures to

the Babylonians ambassadors, Isaiah paid him a visit and

prophesied that the Babylonians would, in the nearest future,

cart away all the treasures they had been shown. They would

not just take the treasures but they would also take away future

kings of Judah and made them eunuchs in the palace of the

king of Babylon. Notwithstanding this flaw, Hezekiah was

one of the righteous of Judah. He died and was succeeded by

Manasseh, his son.

Turah (2016) stated that, it is apt to re-assert that Hezekiah

resented Judah’s submissiveness to Assyria and he took steps

to reverse his father’s policies at every point. Proceeding first

cautiously, then boldly, he sought to get free of Assyria. In

this movement for independence, Hezekiah had the support

of patriotic people in Judah, loyal Yahwists, who found

the paganizing tendencies of Ahaz intolerable. The bid for

independence through reforms was strengthened by the

prophetic reminder that the disaster which overtook Israel was

Yahweh judgment on the Jews that have forsaken Him and those

that have broken the covenant. This meant that Judah would

have to reform if she wished to escape the fate of the Northern

Kingdom. Yet as long as Judah was subject to Assyria, no

satisfactory reform was possible. Any attempt at reform would,

in itself, have been an act of rebellion. He recalled that about

seven years after Hezekiah became king (i.e. in 711 BC.), a

revolt broke out against Assyria led by the Philistine king of

Ashdod, and encouraged by the Egyptians. Judah, Edom and

Moab were invited to join. Opinion was divided in Judah on

whether to join the revolt or not. People angrily opposed Isaiah

to the conspiracy, calling on Hezekiah to give the Ethiopian

envoys a negative answer, and symbolically illustrating the117Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile

foolishness of trust in Egypt by walking about Jerusalem, bare-

footed, and clad only in a loincloth. It appeared that Judah

did not join the rebellion, for when the revolt was crushed by

Sargon II (king of Assyria), Judah was not punished.

Soon after the death of Sargon II, Hezekiah instigated a sweeping

cultic reform. Not content with setting aside foreign practices

newly introduced by Ahaz, Hezekiah went ahead to takeaway

many cults that were long popularly related with Jews religion.

He destroyed a bronze image of a snake reputed to have been

made by Moses himself. He demolished the local shrines’ ‘high

places’, probably because of the paganizing practices associated

with them. Hezekiah did not confine his efforts to Judah. He

carried the reforms into the defunct Northern Kingdom, possibly

to reunite the north and the south under the Davidic throne (2

Chron. 30:1-12). It is probable that Hezekiah’s reforms had

social aspects as well. A return to normative Yahwism would

of necessity have involved an attempt to remove the economic

abuses that had existed. Excavations of vessels approximating

to the time of Hezekiah and bearing the King’s stamp, probably

indicates some sort of fiscal or administrative reform, perhaps

an attempt on the part of the state to regularize the collection

of taxes, and to curb dishonesty by the introduction of standard

measure (Gong, 2014).

Soon after Sargon’s successor, Sennacherib, came to the

throne of Assyria, a general rebellion broke out in the whole

of the Assyrian empire, headed by an able Babylonian patriot,

Berodach-baladan. He sent emissaries to Hezekiah, ostensibly

to congratulate him on his recovery from an illness, but more

probably to enlist his support. The help of Egypt was sought.

Hezekiah was under pressure both from the confederates and

from certain of his patriotic nobles. In spite of the earnest

warnings of Isaiah, who branded the whole thing as folly and

rebellion against Yahweh, Hezekiah joined in and sent envoys

to Egypt to negotiate a treaty. He played a leading role in the118Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

revolt. He imprisoned the King of Ekron in Jerusalem. He went

ahead with energetic measures of defence by strengthening the

walls of Jerusalem and increasing its stock of arms (Drewah,

2012).

This flagrant step brought the Assyrians down, and in the

gushing of 701 B.C., Sennacherib completely subjugated all the

rebels. Most of Judah’s territory was given to Philistine Kings

and Hezekiah and the rest of his troops were in Jerusalem.

While Sennacherib was still besieging Lachish, one of the

strong fortresses of Judah, Hezekiah sent to the Assyrian King

and sued for peace. Hezekiah had to strip the temple and the

royal treasury in order to raise it. After receiving the tribute, the

Assyrian King sent three top Assyrian officials to

Jerusalem with a large army to demand Hezekiah’s surrender.

It is probable that Hezekiah, at this time, had approached

Egypt for help. The Assyrian officials came and demanded

Hezekiah’s unconditional surrender. Hezekiah fully aware that

surrender would mean the end of Judah and the deportation

of its population, preferred to die fighting. In this, he had the

support of the aged Isaiah who, now convinced that Assyria

had over tried the patience of God, assured him that Jerusalem

would never be taken. In the end, Jerusalem survived (Popila,

2012).

The Assyrian king (Sennacherib) return to his own land after

the angel of the Lord had wiped out 185, 000 Assyrian soldiers.

Two explanations have been put forward to explain this

massacre, both of which are plausible: that

Sennacherib’s army was crippled by an epidemic; and that he

withdrew his soldiers when news came that his presence was

required at home. Hezekiah died the following year (687/76

BC).119Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile

Isaiah’s Contribution to the Political Affairs

of Judah

Passing references were made to the prophet Isaiah during

the reigns of both Ahaz and Hezekiah. In fact, the prophetic

activity of this prophet covered the entire reigns of these two

Judean Kings. The circumstances of Isaiah’s call and ministry

are examined as follows. The story of Isaiah’s call is found

in chapter six of his book. It came to him in a vision which

he experienced in the Jerusalem temple in the year that king

Uzziah died. Looking up, he saw the Lord upon a lofty throne

beneath the ministering Seraphims who cried one to another;

“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is full of

his glory”. As Isaiah listened amid the shaking of the foundations

of the thresholds and the thickening clouds of smoke, his first

thought was of the unfitness of himself and his whole people to

meet such awful presence. In response, he cried out: “Woe is

me! For 1 am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips; for my eyes

have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!” When his lips were

cleansed by a coal from off the altar by one of the Seraphims, he

heard Yahweh speak: “Whom shall I send, and who will go for

us?” Isaiah replied, “Here I am! Send me”. Thus, the prophet

was commissioned to speak to a people whom his words would

only harden, until desolation and exile should fall again and

again. Yet after the tree was felled, there would remain life to

sprout from the stump (Isaiah 6: 11ff) (Clarendom, 2018).

There are elements of special significance in Isaiah’s inaugural

vision; the purification of the prophet’s lips, the commission

and the content of the message. On being confronted with the

holiness of God, Isaiah became aware that he and the whole

nation had unclean lips. This showed that he was conscious of

his own sinfulness and his participation in the iniquity of his

people. As a bearer of the divine word, as one who brought a

message from God, Isaiah must have his lips cleansed and so 124Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective
Northern Kingdom. Seen in this light, Isaiah may be looked
upon as a prophet-statesman (Erik, 2017).
Nevertheless, such an interpretation of the prophet’s teaching
overlooks the wider and deeper perspective in which Isaiah
viewed the crisis. For, beyond the political schemes of men
was the sovereign activity of Yahweh, whose purpose shaped
the course of events. The rulers of Israel and Damascus are men
and not God. Their plan will fail unless it has the backing of
Yahweh. So, Isaiah affirmed that the greatest resource in time
of trouble is faith, absolute trust and dependence upon God.
Abandon human alliance, and place your reliance in Yahweh
whose sovereign will control human affairs. It was the prophet’s
conviction that Yahweh would overthrow the Syro-Ephramite
coalition by bringing Assyria against these nations. Thus,
Isaiah advised Ahaz not to make a futile attempt to change the
situation by following the view of his political counsellors, but
rather accept Yahweh’s direction of historical events by placing
his reliance on Yahweh (Erik, 2017).
Isaiah’s prophetic role in Hezekiah’s regime
Ahaz recalled that about seven years after Hezekiah succeeded
Ahaz, a further attempt was made to involve Judah in a rebellion
against Assyria. The whole plot was hatched by the Philistine
city of Ashdod and backed by Egypt. Ambassadors from Egypt
and probably of the Philistines also waited on Hezekiah to
enlist his cooperation. Isaiah was vigorously opposed to this
move. While the plot was being hatched, Isaiah went about
Jerusalem barefooted and clad only in a loincloth like a war
prisoner, symbolically protesting the disastrous results of the
reliance upon Egypt. Possibly, the prophet was heeded; Judah
escaped harm when the rebellion was crushed; she apparently
did not commit herself.
After the death of Sargon in 705 B.C. there was a general125Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile
uprising throughout the Assyrian dominions, headed by
Babylon. The Babylonian king sent emissaries to Hezekiah,
ostensibly to congratulate him on his recovery from an illness,
but more probably to enlist his support. Hezekiah joined the
revolt, having negotiated with Egypt for assistance. Isaiah
condemned the negotiations Hezekiah made with Egypt and
predicted nothing but disaster for it. He counselled the king, as
he had counselled Ahaz, to stay out of the revolution. To seek
help from Egypt was futile. Sargon’s successor, Sennacherib
crushed Babylon and the eastern rebels in 703B.C. and then
turning to the west, captured Sidon and Ashkelon. He destroyed
many cities in Judah including Lachish. As he closed in upon
the capital, Hezekiah and the remnant of his soldiers were left
like “a bird in a cage”. During the siege of Lachish, Sennacherib
sent a delegation led by his chief deputy to Jerusalem to
demand Hezekiah’s unconditional surrender. At this stage,
Isaiah counselled resistance. He advised the king to stand firm
against Assyria and declared that Assyria could never take the
city. Assyria, he concluded, would be punished, and this would
mean the safety of Jerusalem (Rakit, 2013).
Adanab (2015) stated that in his dealings with Hezekiah, Isaiah
appeared to have pursued contradictory policies: counselling
submission to Assyria and later advocating for resistance
against Assyria. To resolve this apparently contradictory stand,
we have to look at Isaiah’s theology. His opposition of rebellion
against Assyria like his advice to Ahaz was not based on shrewd
political calculation that Assyria would eventually win in the
end. Uppermost on his mind was the conviction that Yahweh
was running history and that Assyria was called to serve his
purpose. Assyria is hailed as the rod of Yahweh’s anger. Behind
the Assyrian advance is the over-ruling sovereignty of God. The
terrible havoc wrought by the Assyrian invader is the sign of
Yahweh’s rule in human affairs, and particularly his judgment
upon a godless nation, the people of his own choice. Hence
the man of faith should willingly submit, not to the Assyrian126Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective
yoke, but to the yoke of Yahweh’s sovereignty. It is out of this
conviction that Yahweh is using Assyria as his instrument to
serve his purpose that Isaiah advised Ahaz to shun the revolution
against Assyria.
Lalabi (2010) said that Isaiah’s later advice to Hezekiah to
stand firm against Assyria was based on the conviction that
Assyria, too, was subject to Yahweh’s sovereign rule and would
be punished for her arrogant pride. Assyria wrongly believed
that her victory was due to her military might; but it is Yahweh
who is in full control of history. When Yahweh had carried out
his judgment against his own people, he will overthrow the
Assyrian tyranny. Since Assyria’s power was given to her by
God, that power could be revoked or checked when God chose
to do so. The prophet’s declaration that Jerusalem could not fall
and as such Hezekiah should resist Assyrian bluff is also based
on his belief in Zion as the dwelling place of Yahweh and His
faithfulness to His covenant established with David. Isaiah was
of the firm conviction that Yahweh’s purpose in history was
tied up with the city of Jerusalem (the place of the Temple, in
which the Ark rested). Jerusalem was the city that Yahweh had
founded. Mount Zion was the place of the name of Yahweh of
hosts’. Jerusalem was also the city of David, and the Davidic
dynasty, which had survived through the troubled centuries of
history. Jerusalem was the sign of a social stability.
Isaiah and Yahweh’s Holiness
Mention has been made of Isaiah’s view on Yahweh’s holiness
in connection with his inaugural vision. Let us now examine
this concept in some detail. Holiness was almost regarded as a
physical quality attached to things. It did not have any moral
connotations. Basically, it means set apart, devoted to Yahweh.
Thus, holiness implied anything that tended to appropriate
people or things to God. The holy object was one set apart from
all that was secular, cut off from men and from profane usage.127Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile
Isaiah stressed on the holiness of God, including in this quality,
not only Yahweh’s holiness, but also his moral purity. Thus,
with Isaiah, the ethical content of holiness was fundamental. As
the Holy One of Israel, Yahweh is Righteousness (Isaiah 5: 16).
In his presence, nothing unclean, nothing unrighteous, nothing
idolatrous survives. In reaction to Yahweh’s holiness, Isaiah
exclaimed: “Woe is me. For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean
lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my
eyes have seen the Lord of hosts” (Isaiah 6:5). Consequently,
nothing defiled or unclean could hold communion with that
perfect God. Yahweh was the Holy One of Israel and she
(Israel) in turn must be a holy people (Ryderland, 2017).
Isaiah’s visionary experience of the Holy One of Israel enthroned
in universal glory signified the divine sovereignty of Yahweh.
Thus in Isaiah’s view, the term Holy One of Israel is more than
a nationalistic concept. It is universal in scope. This holiness
which implies Yahweh’s universality demands that those who
are close to him should keep certain moral standards. In this
respect, Isaiah made a significant break away from the popular
understanding of the holiness of Yahweh by emphasizing the
moral or ethical demands of Yahweh and his universality.
However, he stressed this not only as an expression of the
essential being of Yahweh, but also as the unique characteristic
of the ethical imperatives which he lays upon all those who are
his creatures. Holiness was not merely a pure narrow religious
concept to Isaiah. It is that aspect of Yahweh’s being by which
men are led into fuller perception of his whole nature. Thus the
Holy One of Israel means that this God who has this character
has chosen Israel for a relationship with himself. In the original
sense, Israel is holy to Yahweh. Therefore, the consequences
for Israel are disastrous of her apostasy and wickedness. The
relationship is not automatic: it leads Yahweh to punish Israel
using other nations as his instruments. On Israel’s part, certain
attitudes become axiomatic for the Holy One of Israel is the
sovereign Lord of all the earth. Israel cannot run away from128Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective
Yahweh because she is in contact with the real source of power.
Lack of knowledge drives her to seek alliance with other
nations which is a denial of the true nature of Yahweh. Thus,
the conduct of her national life and her international relations
are profoundly affected. It means exclusive devotion to and
trust in Yahweh (Aronid, 2012).
It is instructive to note that there are several points of contact
between Amos’ concept of Yahweh’s Righteousness and
Isaiah’s concept of the Holiness of God. Each, in its own way,
made a significant break away from popular understanding. The
popular notion of righteousness was that Yahweh had chosen
Israel and he was to protect his people under all circumstances.
To this, Amos said, no. The righteousness of Yahweh extends
to all nations and this leads him to punish other nations for acts
of inhumanity. Moreover, Yahweh would punish Israel because
she did not keep to the ethical demands of Yahweh. Thus, Isaiah
added a moral content to the holiness of Yahweh, the sovereign
ruler, whose Holiness demands purity from his people. In
fact, both Amos and Isaiah emphasized the moral demands of
Yahweh as not only an expression of his essential being but
also the unique characteristic of the ethical imperatives he lays
upon all who are his creatures. Righteousness and Holiness
were thus not two purely narrow religious concepts, but that
aspect of Yahweh’s being which led to fuller understanding of
his whole nature (William, 2019).
Some distinctive elements in Isaiah’s
prophetic teaching
1. The futility of sacrifice without righteousness is
expressed in Isaiah 1:13 thus:
Bring no more vain offerings; incense an abomination
to me. New moon and the Sabbath and the calling
of assemblies. I cannot endure iniquity and solemn129Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile
assemblies. (Isaiah 1:13)
Isaiah repudiated the sacrificial worship of the sanctuaries and
the observance of the festival days like new moon and Sabbath.
He declared the lavish cults by which Judah had hoped to
satisfy Yahweh’s demands to be unacceptable and offensive
to him. This was because the elaboration of the sacrificial
cults both misrepresented Yahweh’s character as expressed in
the covenant. Yahweh’s demands could not be met by ritual
and sacrifice alone. Righteousness in human relation is the
alternative which Yahweh requires. Thus it appears that Isaiah
was not merely denouncing corrupt practices associated with
the sacrificial cults, but fundamentally rejecting the whole
cults as means of recalling the people to the true demands of
Yahwism (Toradin, 1984).
2. Obedience is better by far than disobedience
What was there to do for my vineyard that I have not
done in it? Where I look for it to yield grapes, why did it
yield wild grapes? (Isaiah 5:4)
Isaiah likens the nation to a good- cared garden that supposed
to have bred good grapes but did not. The contrast is between
the righteousness which God expected of the people he had
cherished and the rebellion he suffered from them. Instead of
living according to the moral demands of Yahwism which had
been made explicit to them, the people had taken to immorality,
wickedness and apostasy and thought that Yahweh’s demands
could be met by ritual and sacrifice.The failure of the southern
kingdom to respond to God’s grace to righteousness, Isaiah
declared that they are like wild grapes in the vineyard.
3. Benevolence is enjoined while Greed is condemned
Woe to those who join house to house, who add fields
to field, until there is no more room, and you are made to
dwell alone, in the midst of the land. (Isaiah 5:8)130Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective
In this verse, Isaiah condemns the activities of the property
magnates of Judah who had taken the land of the poor and
rendered them homeless. Isaiah’s attack is based on the notion
of the Promised Land. Yahweh, real owner of the land in
faithfulness to his promise, had given the land of Canaan to the
various tribes and clans. This means that the Promised Land
is for all and as such land-grabbing were ruled out by the very
nature of the covenant community. However, the commercial
basis of the society has tended to nullify covenant notion of the
land. The money economy which Judah now enjoyed had led to
the amassing of wealth, and in the process, individual Israelites
were dispossessed and turned into serfs. By condemning the
property magnates, Isaiah was only reaffirming the ancient
basis of land tenure. He denounced the amassing of wealth as
morally wrong (Toradin, 1984).
4. Divine call should be accepted and fulfilled
And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, ‘Whom shall
I send who will go for us? ‘Then I said ‘Here I am! Send
me’.(Isaiah 6:8)
In his inaugural vision in the Temple, Isaiah is called to
prophetic office after he had been cleansed of his un-holiness
with a burning coal. The cleansing of the prophet means that
the prophet himself needs purification. The call to become a
prophet or a messenger of God must evoke a response from the
individual. Either he responds positively by accepting the call
or negatively by declining the call. Isaiah’s positive response
meant that he was willing to become a messenger of God.
5. Spiritual delusion and hardness of heart is part of the
prophetic ministry as well as divine purpose.
Making the heart of this people fat, and their ears
heavy, and shut their eyes. (Isaiah 6:10)
The verse then represents the results of Isaiah’s preaching. The131Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile
significance of this passage lies in whether the ‘hardening’
of Israel expresses the purpose of Isaiah’s ministry or a later
reflection on the failure of his ministry. If this verse is taken
as an expression of the purpose of Isaiah’s ministry, then he
was merely to speak God’s word which will be heard but never
understood. Indeed, the only effect of his preaching will be
to stultify his hearers and render their obedience impossible.
But the purpose of preaching is to awaken the people to true
repentance and to lead them to establish right relations with
each other and with God. Men who close their ears to the divine
word ultimately become incapable of response. Since the people
were deeply engrossed in their wickedness and immorality, his
word would only make their situation worse.
6. Prophetic declaration about the Messiah
Behold a young woman shall conceive and bear a son,
and shall call his name Emmanuel. (Isaiah 7:14)
Ahaz refused to place his reliance upon Yahweh to crush the
Syro-Ephraimite alliance and further declined to seek a sign
from God to confirm Yahweh’s word. So, Isaiah said that
Yahweh would give a sign that would confirm the prophetic
word of doom upon the Syro-Ephraimite coalition. The sign
promised was the birth of a child whose name would be
Emmanuel (God be with us). The language presupposes that
the mother is already or soon will be pregnant; the child would
be born in the near future. Even before he reaches the age of
choosing between good and evil, the Syro-Ephraimite alliance
will have been broken up and the king of Assyria would have
wrought havoc on Judah. Thus, the prophetic sign was a way
of affirming for the Judean king that within a short time his
enemies would disappear.
The primary fulfilment of the prophecy probably took place
in birth of Josiah, king of Judah, who was a righteous king.
However, the secondary fulfilment of the prophecy, according132Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective
to Christian theology, took place in the Virgin birth of Jesus
Christ to whom was given the name Emmanuel (God is with
us). It appears that the passage is to be understood in its primary
fulfilment in the person of Josiah within the context of the
political situation of the time. The ‘sign’ is the child himself,
not the manner of his birth. Before Josiah reaches maturity, the
danger Syro-Ephraimite alliance and Assyria had become a
thing of the past.
7. God can use unrighteous people as instrument of His
punishment
Ah Assyria, the rod of my anger, the staff of my jury.
(Isaiah 10:5)
In this verse, Isaiah is expressing the conviction that Yahweh is
the sovereign Lord of history and consequently, he uses human
agents to punish offenders.
Assyria was an instrument in Yahweh’s hand to punish his
rebellious people. Behind the political schemes of men is the
deep conviction of Yahweh’s sovereignty. But when Yahweh
had finished all his works on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem; he
will punish the arrogant boasting of the king of Assyria and his
haughty pride. Assyria thought that it was through her military
might that she had won all her victories, not realizing that
Yahweh had given her that power.
8. It is futile to trust in man
Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help and rely
on horses, who trust in chariots because they are many
and in horses because they are strong; but do not look to
the Holy One of Israel or consult the Lord. (Isaiah 10:5)
Isaiah condemned Hezekiah for turning to Egypt for help in his
rebellion against Assyria. Isaiah was against such reliance upon
foreign aid because it amounted to lack of faith and confidence in Yahweh who was the real source of power. If Egypt is

strong, then it was by the power given to her by Yahweh, the

sovereign Lord. To leave the actual source of power and help

and seek human aid is an apostasy, since it amounts to a denial

of Yahweh’s presence and power. The expression ‘Holy One of

Israel’ in the conception of Isaiah is more than a nationalistic

title. It also expresses the universality of Yahweh, whose

character demands that those close to him should maintain

certain moral standards (Mayes, 1983).

9. The unfathomable divine forgiveness of sin

Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be whiter

than snow. (Isaiah 1:18)

In the preceding verse, Isaiah recounts the sins of Judah

apostasy, corruption at the courts, social injustice, immorality

and irreligiousity. Now, Yahweh invites the people to argue out

the case as before a judge. The people deserve to be punished,

but Yahweh in his mercy will pardon their sins. This invitation,

similar in tone to Hosea, is extended to the people. It is a free

offer of justification; an unconditional forgiveness with Yahweh

himself taking the initiative.

Manasseh (14th king of Judah)

Hezekiah’s bid for independence failed and at the time of his

death, Judah was under Assyrian control. His son and successor,

Manasseh apparently became a vassal of Sennacherib and

during his entire reign, he remained the subject of Nineveh.

Sennacherib was murdered and succeeded by one of his sons,

Esarhaddon in 661 B.C. The new Assyrian king led his country

to the conquest of Egypt and seized Mephis in 671 B.C. after

subjugating Babylon. His son

Ashurbanipal was able to hold his father’s empire during

the first part of his reign. He advanced to Upper Egypt and134Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

destroyed Thebes and, for a short while, Egypt was held within

the orbit of Assyrian power. In fact, it was during the reign

of Manasseh that Assyria reached the summit of her political

glory. Essarhaddon and Ashurbanipal succeeded in building the

greatest empire in history. During the entire reign of Manasseh,

the Assyrian Empire was still intact; and to have resisted it,

would have been both fatal and suicidal. Like Ahaz before him,

Manasseh believed that the best policy for Judah was to play

safe with Assyria, as a faithful vassal. Therefore, he declared

himself a king vassal of Assyria and deserted the battle. Both

Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal list ‘Manasseh king of Judah’

among their twenty-two subjects (Yohanan, 2010).

Since in the Ancient Orient political subservience normally

involved the recognition of the overlord’s gods alongside that

of national religion, Manasseh reversed the religious policy of

his father and reverted to Ahaz’s recognition of Assyrian cults.

He reintroduced the practises in the high places with its altars

to the Baal, its Asherim and all the accompaniments of natural

religion. Desiring to flatter his Assyrian master, Manasseh

brought in also the worship of the heavenly bodies prevalent

in Nineveh and Babylon, especially that of Ishatar, ‘the queen

of heaven’. The worship of the host of heaven was part of

Assyrian astrological cults, which was based on the belief

that the sun and stars controlled human destiny. The wicked

ceremonial of child sacrifices he, likewise, sponsored, denote

his own son. Along with these ritual practice came in the use

of augury, necromancy and those other means of controlling

human destiny. Those who protested against this wholesale

apostasy were ruthlessly silenced. In fact, there was no record

of prophetic activity in his reign.

Ohajawa (2009) observed that the effect of Manasseh’s

religious policies was that it threatened the very existence

of Yahwism. Pagan rites were practised alongside the cult of

Yahweh. Yahwism was in danger of slipping unawares into135Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile

outright polytheism. Since Yahweh had always been thought

of as surrounded by his heavenly host, and since the heavenly

bodies had been popularly regarded as members of that host,

the introduction of the cult of astral deities encouraged the

people to think of these gads as members of Yahweh’s court

and to accord them worship as such. Had this not been checked,

Yahweh might soon have become the head of a pantheon,

and Israel’s faith might have been adulterated altogether. In

addition to this, the decay of the national religion brought with

it contempt of Yahweh’s law and new incidence of violence and

injustice together with an uncertainty regards to God’s ability

to act in the situations.

The writer of the book of Kings condemned Manasseh as the

worst king ever to sit on David’s throne. He is said to have

seduced the people into doing more evil than the surrounding

nations. However, it appears that Manasseh had no choice.

His apostasy was a matter of political expediency. So long as

Assyria’s power remained intact, he had to play safe in order

to safeguard Judah. King Hezekiah raised the spiritual level

of the Jewish people to its highest degree since the days of

David but his wicked son, Manasseh, undid all his works. His

disastrous reign for 55 years introduced paganism on a national

level and created a mass movement to imitate the surrounding

nations’ idolatrous way. Manasseh also ruthlessly suppressed

any dissent and even executed the great prophet Isaiah, perhaps

his harshest critic. Although, he repented later in life, but the

damage he caused was irreversible. His son, Amon, outdid

his father in wickedness. To demonstrate his love for cruelty,

Amon burned Tarah scroll and placed an idol in the holiest part

of the temple. Manasseh’s son, Amon who succeeded his father

for two years continued in the policies of his father (Drewah,

2012).136Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

Amon

Amon was twenty-two years old when he became king and he

reigned two years in Jerusalem. But he did evil in the sight of

the Lord as his father, Manasseh, had done. Amon sacrificed to

all the carved images which his father Manasseh had made and

served them. He did not humble himself before the Lord, but

he trespassed more and more. Amon succeeded Manasseh for

two years before he was murdered in a court conspiracy. His

servant conspired against him and killed him in his house. The

conspiracy was probably machinated by anti-Assyrian features

who took struck to avenge the national policy of continued

subservience to Assyria with its worship of Assyrian deities.

The people of land executed all those who had conspired

against king Amon. It seems that there were some who felt that

the time was not yet ripe for this and they, at once, executed the

assassins and placed the eight-year-old Josiah on the throne.

But the people of the land slew-all those who had

conspired against King Amon, and the people of the land

made Josiah his son king in his stead. (II kgs. 21:24)

The executors are referred to as ‘the people of the land’. This

was more or less a term during the period of the monarchy

for a social class in the community consisting of male citizens

who owned land and had full rights and responsibilities in the

kingdom. In the social hierarchy, they seemed to follow the

priesthood and were mentioned as playing a significant part

in the ascension to the throne not only of Josiah but also of

Joash of Judah (II Kings 11: 12, 18-20) and Jehoahaz (II Kings

23:30).

Josiah

This highly righteous monarch represented the last hope to save

both the kingdom and the temple from divine wrath. During his

31 years of reign, Josiah almost single handily forestalled the137Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile

destruction of Judah. He initiated national revival movement

and nearly eradicated idol worship in his kingdom. Josiah also

made badly needed repairs in the temple of the Lord (Bais

Hamikdash) and purified it from all vestiges of idolatry. Josiah

also hid the Holy Ark and several others scared objects to

prevent them from falling into the enemies’ hands. Along with

prophet Jeremiah, Josiah brought back remnants of the Ten

Tribe (Israel) from their exile in the east (Zeifah, 1988).

Josiah was a religious reformer per excellence. Josiah’s reforms

were largely influenced by religious and political considerations.

The discovery of the book of the Law in the course of repair

to the Temple accelerated and gave direction to the reforms.

When the Law-book was brought to the notice of the king, he

consulted the oracle and summoned the elders of the people to

the Temple. He read the Law to them and entered with them into

a solemn covenant before Yahweh to obey it. This among other

things implied ensuring the pure worship of Yahweh by ridding

the country of alien forms of worship. The prophetic movement

at this time also influenced the religious policy of Josiah. By

asserting that the nation was under judgment and would know

the wrath of Yahweh if she did not repent, the prophets helped

to prepare the ground for reform. The prophets Zephaniah

and young Jeremiah denounced Judah’s sins and declared that

the nation had no hope save in repentance. Preaching of this

sort undoubtedly increased the sympathy for Josiah’s policy.

Aside from the religious factors, there were strong political

undercurrents which made the reforms possible. Josiah’s reign

witnessed a singularly favourable international situation which

made possible a reversal of Manasseh’s religious policies.

Josiah’s coming of age coincided roughly with the weakened

state of Assyria caused by rebellion during the last years of

Ashurbanipal. First, Egypt and then Babylon rebelled against

the imperial power and regained their Independence. Finally,

the Medes exploited Assyria’s weakness and in alliance with

the Babylonians, sacked Nineveh, the Capital in 621 B.C. This138Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

momentous shift in the balance of power gave Josiah the much

needed breathing space to initiate thorough-going religious

reforms (McKeneth, 2016).

Taking advantage of the imminent collapse of the Assyrian

Empire, Tyda (2011) asserted that the king made a brave

attempt to restore the religious and political independence of

Judah. As already noted, the worship of Assyrian deities was

a necessary concomitant of Judah’s political subservience to

Assyria. Whereas in Manasseh’s reign, Assyrian power was

at its zenith and therefore, any attempt at religious reforms

would have been interpreted as a political move to secure

Judah’s independence and would have been ruthlessly crushed.

The reign of Josiah saw the decline of Assyria. The religious

reforms were therefore an assertion of political independence.

They were an overt rejection of Assyrian sovereignty, and

therefore, a kind of unilateral declaration of independence.

The extension of the religious reforms into the former northern

Kingdom of Israel betrayed further the political ambitions of

Josiah. John (2018) noted that it was an attempt to unite the two

parts of Israel under his rule as in the times of David. In short,

Josiah sought to restore the kingdom of David with its capital at

Jerusalem. Josiah’s interception of the Egyptian army led by

Neco at Megiddo in 609 B.C., in which he lost his life, was a

political move aimed at consolidating his religious and political

gains. Egypt was going to help Assyria against the Babylonians

who had virtually annihilated Assyria and were simply engaged

in wiping out the last remnants of Assyrian resistance. If Egypt

succeeded in reviving Assyrian’s power, Judah would inevitably

come under Assyrian yoke. This would of course mean the loss

of not only Judah’s independence but also a total negation of his

religious reforms which, as already observed, were a rejection

of Assyrian lordship. Thus, to forestall any negative trend that

might reverse the clock of religious and political freedom,

Josiah confronted Neco at Megiddo. Unfortunately, the king139Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile

lost his life in the ensuing battle and, for a brief period, Judah

came under Egyptian rule.

Thus, Josiah was motivated by religious and political

considerations to effect necessary reforms in Judah. Philip

(2019) noted that it would be unfair to suggest that Josiah

was motivated by purely political factors to carry out his

reforms. Religion and politics were not rigidly separated in the

ancient world and religion and security depended on political

independence. Hence in asserting the independence of Judah,

Josiah was at the same time paving the way for religious

freedom.

Significance of Josiah’s Reforms

Amon, Manasseh’s successor, was assassinated after two

years on the throne and his younger brother, Josiah (who was

just eight years old) was made king of Judah. Josiah’s reign

is remembered for the sweeping reforms which he initiated in

the eighteenth year of his rule, if not before. In the wake of

the reforms the king abolished the Canaanite Baal worship,

the Assyrian Cult, and the worship of other deities such as

the Ammonite Milcom. He cleansed the Temple of all foreign

objects: the male god Baal and the mother goddess Asherah,

the horses dedicated to the sun, and the astral altars on the roof.

The practice of sacred prostitution, child sacrifice in the valley

of Hinnon, and the consultation of mediums and wizards were

discontinued. The reforms did not stop with the cleansing of

the Jerusalem Temple. The outlying sanctuaries of high places

and their idolatrous priests were deposed. Josiah’s reforms

extended into the territory of the former Northern Kingdom

which had become the Assyrian province of Megiddo and

Samaria. The rival temple of Bethel with its golden calf erected

by Jeroboam, the son of Nebat and its Asherah were destroyed

along with other outlying high places. On his return to Judah,

a covenant ceremony was performed and the celebration of the140Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

Passover was reinstated (Ojiggin, 1998).

The immediate effect of the Josiah’s reforms was the

centralization of all worship of Yahweh in the Jerusalem

Temple as the sole legitimate sanctuary. This centralization

purged the worship of Yahweh of syncretic tendencies. In other

words, it checked the abuses which the prophets denounced.

On the other hand, this centralization led to disgruntlement and

dissatisfaction among the country-side priests of the abolished

Yahwistic shrines. They were naturally not eager to surrender

their ancient prerogative and meekly integrate themselves with

the priesthood of Jerusalem, and many of them refused to do

so. Nor was the Jerusalem clergy willing to receive them save

on a status of inferiority. The reforms thus paved the way for

the later development of a class of subordinate clergy. It also

set in motion a priestly monopoly in Jerusalem which could

hardly have been entirely healthy, since spiritual monopolies

seldom are. Moreover, the abolishment of the local shrines and

the attendant reduction of cultic activities in which the people

could participate must inevitably have resulted in a certain

secularization of life in the outlying areas, a separation of cultic

and common life never known before (Lalabi, 2010).

The reforms undoubtedly gave Yahwism a breathing space and

it is probable that public morality and the administration of

justice underwent, at least for a time, a significant improvement.

However, it does appear that the reforms were not thoroughly

successful. Basically, the reforms set out to organize religious

activity and herein lay its inherent weakness. What the

reformers did not see is that true religion is not a thing that can

be organized. It must spring spontaneously from the contact

of the human spirit with the living God, and the attempt to

manipulate can only result in hypocrisy (Lalabi, 2010).

The reform was superficial and bred nothing but hypocrisy

and its resultant false sense of security. It failed to achieve a

genuine spiritual revival and renewal of the covenant. It tended to have satisfied external measures which, while not profoundly

affecting the spiritual life of the nation, endangered a false sense

of peace that nothing could penetrate Judah. For instance, the

centralization of worship in Jerusalem made the people think

that God was on the side of his people and as such no evil could

befall them. Jeremiah, who had earlier supported the reform

became disillusioned and testified to its superficiality when he

complained that the reform had produced nothing but increased

cultic activity without a real return to the ancient paths (Jer. 6:

16-21) and that the sins of the society continued without protest

from the clergy (Jer. 5: 20-31). Moreover, the reform did not

lead to a restoration of faith in Yahweh. It did not have much

impact since it did not result in the circumcision of the heart.

The mere fact that Jeremiah later advocated for a new covenant

meant that the reform did not achieve a real deepening of the

spiritual nature of Israel’s religion (Leisus, 2014).

The reform led to undue attention to the letter of the law that, in

the end it, replaced prophetic activity. The official promulgation

of a written law, in fact, marked the first step in that process

which progressively elevated the law until it became, in post-

exilic times, the organizing principle of religion and, at the

same time, the first step in the concomitant process whereby

the prophetic movement, and its message were rendered

progressively superfluous, ultimately, came to an end. Thus,

there began that later devotion to the law that marked Judaism.

In conclusion, therefore, it can be said that the reforms of

Josiah, though well intentioned and zealously pursued, did not

achieve the desired result, that is, the spiritual re-awakening and

renewal of the nation. This is because it led to externalization

of religion as evidenced in increased cultic activity and undue

legalism and its failure to satisfy the ethical and moral demands

of Yahwism.142Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

Jeremiah: Pre-Exilic Prophet

Okalawon (2013) posited that Jeremiah was the prophet who

ministered during the reigns of the latter kings of Judah just

before the fall and Babylonian captivity of Judah. He was

thus a pre-exilic prophet. He started prophesying in the days

of Josiah, the son of Amon, king of Judah (Jeremiah 1:1-3).

Jeremiah was born into a priestly family. He was the son of

Hilkiah, of the priests in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin. He

was familiar with the story of God’s gracious dealings with

Israel, the religious traditions of his people, and the teaching

about obedience which God cherished. His bowl against the

priests of the old was that they were not totally committed to the

will of God. They failed to fulfil their calling to teach or instruct

their people in the ways of the Lord. He lived in Anathoth, in a

small village, a few miles north-east of Jerusalem, near enough

for him to know exactly what prevailed in a city so large.

He protested against political and religious policies which he

regarded as powerless to change and possibly could result in

the demise of his people. He was accused of being a traitor to

his religion and to his country. His conduct, particularly his

detestation of the truth in the midst of national tragedy led to

the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in 587 B.C.

He was inclined to act as midwife at the birth of a faith which

enabled his people to see in their own tragedy the working out

of the purposes of their God. When other nation perished, their

gods disappeared; when Judah perished, new faith raised from

the ashes of Jerusalem. This certainly was the Lord’s doing and

His agent was Jeremiah.

God had known Jeremiah before he was formed in the womb.

The word ‘know’ reflects a personal relationship or experience

like that similar to husband and wife (Gen. 4:1). This knowing

has a purpose, for God has chosen him. This is a reflection of

God’s own nature which makes him omniscient, omnipotent143Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile

and omnipresent Lord. Jeremiah is no doubt different from us.

The service to which he was called is described as that of being

a “prophet to the nation” a God’s spokesman, not merely to

his friends or country men but the nations. Jeremiah’s era was

when power politics was being played by people of the ancient

near east.

His message had relevance beyond the narrow gates of his

people. The description of Jeremiah as a “prophet to the nation”

is not a sign of political realism in that the God in whose name

Jeremiah speaks is not merely the God of Judah but the God

of the entire universe, the God under whose sovereignty all

decisions of power are taken. His ministry was therefore,

geared towards challenging other gods that are hinged towards

limiting or challenging the power of Yahweh, God of Israel

(Ahujah, 1992).

Jeremiah’s day witnessed the situation where some people

were too eager to use God’s name for their personal or national

interests (see, Jeremiah 28). God, however, called him to serve

Him. When he delivered his sermon in the temple (in which

he said if the people refused to amend their ways and doings,

then the temple and Jerusalem would be destroyed), he was

arrested. Although Zedekiah knew and recognised Jeremiah

as God’s prophet yet he always ignored his message. In the

service of Yahweh, Jeremiah faced some many oppositions;

he experiences and endured intense persecutions to the point

of contemplating suicide, and was eventually carried as exile

into Egypt. Because his message was not what the people

expected, he was described as the prophet of doom by his

hearers whereas he was the true mouthpiece of God. He was

called a traitor by many people of Jerusalem simply because

of his negative prophecy about Jerusalem and its inhabitants.

He warned the kings and people of Judah to no avail until the

prophetic invasion and captivity of Judah by the Babylonians

was fulfilled (Anach, 2010).144Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

When Judah fell in 587/586 BC, the temple was completely

destroyed; Jerusalem burnt and the walls were broken down

and the talented people among the population were taken to

Babylon. Jeremiah was first captured by the Babylonians, after

bringing him out of prison. Upon his recognition as the prophet

of God, he was released and given the choice of remaining in

the land in the custody of Gedeliah. After the exile, Jeremiah

wrote to the exiles and advised them to live as normally as

possible in Babylon (Jeremiah 29:4-6); be good citizens; and

pay no attention to the super patriots and false prophets (29:8-

9); and that when the time is right, the Lord will bring the exiles

back home. When Gedeliah was assassinated, Jeremiah was

deported to Egypt where he died.

Jehoahaz

He was the son of Josiah that became king of Judah after his

father Josiah’s death. He was twenty-three years old when

he became a king and he reigned three months in Jerusalem.

Neco, the king of Egypt deposed him at Jerusalem to Egypt and

imposed on the land a tribute of one hundred talents of silver

and a talent of gold. Then, the king of Egypt made Jehoahaz’s

brother Eliakim king over Judah and Jerusalem changed his

name to Jehoiakim.

Jehoiakim

He was twenty-five years old when he became king of Judah

and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem and did evil in the

sights of the Lord. King Jehoiakim seems to have reciprocated

Jeremiah’s feelings since he treated him with studied contempt

as a charlatan of a prophet. Jehoiakim was a self-indulgent depot

whose reign was based on no justice and no righteousness.

Keeping up with the royal beauty of his days was his number

one priority. Jeremiah prophesied the king will die unlamented,

his burial no better than the burial of an ass, his body dumped145Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile

unceremoniously like that of an unclean animal outside

the city wall (Jeremiah 36:18-19, 30). In fulfilment, King

Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came up against Jehoiakim and

bound him in bronze fetters to Babylon. King Nebuchadnezzar

also carried some of the articles from the house of the Lord

to Babylon and put them in his temple. His son, Jehoiachin,

reigned in his place (Akinlade, 2016).

King Coniah or Jehoiachin

According to Davidson (1985), when Coniah succeeded to

the throne, he took a royal title of Jehoiachin. He was quickly

deposed by the Babylonians to whom he has surrounded the

city and then sent into exile with his queen mother (Jeremiah

30:26) and other leading citizens. He was eight years old when

he ruled in Judah and ruled only three months. Nevertheless,

Jehoiachin presided over a major event in Jewish history.

Eleven years before Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the temple,

he took Jehoiachin into Babylonian exile along with 1000 of

the era’s greatest Torah scholars, which were divine blessing

in disguise. These scholars were well treated in Babylon. The

scholars were able to set up a thriving Jewish community with

the infrastructure necessary to lessen the traumatic adjustment

of the late exile. Indeed, Babylon became a major Torah centre

for the next 1,500 years. As such, it was used to build a special

holy synagogue. Davidson (1985) adds that no son of his ever

sat on the throne of David. So king Coniah had no future. In

the poem of Jer.30: 28-30, he is compared to a despised broken

pot, a vessel no one cares for, that is, a mere figure head and a

lifeless shape or puppet fit to be thrown out.

Zedekiah (20th King of Judah)

He was twenty-one years old and he reigned eleven years in

Jerusalem. He did what was evil in the sight of the Lord and did

not humble himself before the prophet Jeremiah who spoke from146Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

the mouth of God. All the elders of the priests and the people

transgressed more and more according to all the abominations

of their neighbouring nations, by defiling the house of Lord

which He had consecrated in Jerusalem. This tragic figure was

the last king of Judah. Although, he was personally righteous,

he did not try to challenge the powerful, wicked noble men

and as a result the first temple (Bais Hamikdash) was destroyed

during his reign. Judah fell in 587/586 BC during the reign of

Zedekiah (Kolade, 2018).

The Fall of Judah in 586 BC

Since the beginning of divided Monarchy, Judah (southern

kingdom) had to struggle in order to survive. Apart from

foreign invasions, she was in constant conflict with the North.

Judah had only two tribes namely Judah and Benjamin.

The capital city was Jerusalem. The topography of the area was

not favourable and so made life unbearable for the inhabitants.

The people of Judah were more loyal to Yahweh than the

Israelites (the Northerners). They had political and spiritual

advantages than the North. There was relative peace in Judah,

religiously and politically. The peace was threatened first by

Assyria and later by Babylon. When Assyrian power was

declining, Babylon was rapidly rising to power and religion and

social conditions was growing worse. Judah survived only 105

years after the fall of Israel (Northern Kingdom). The people

of Judah were carried to the land of Babylon in the 586 BC. In

their land of captivity, the Jews were generally well treated. Yet

they suffered hardships and the devotees among them longed

for Jerusalem. However, the prophets among them were source

of encouragement (Moore, 2014).

Some factors that led to the fall of Judah include: her solitary

and exposed position to foreign attacks after the fall of the

Northern kingdom; the neglect of God’s command to wipe out147Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile

the original Canaanites, who therefore, became the heaven of

the corruption among God’s people; socio-political alliance

with idolatrous neighbours; and loss of moral strength through

apostasy and refusal to repent at the call of the prophets.

Ezekiel: Exilic Prophet

Ezekiel was the son of Buzi, a priest and a man of some

influence in priestly circles. Ezekiel was born about 623 B.C in

Jerusalem where his father worked in the great temple. When

Judah obtained her independence, Ezekiel was relatively young.

He grew up during the last years of independence of his home

state Judah, which was militarily subjugated at that time. His

native city of Jerusalem was defeated by the powerful armies of

the Babylonian Emperor, Nebuchadnezzar. In 597 B.C., many

of Jerusalem’s key citizens and families were taken off as exiles

to live in Babylon, a region that is now part of Iraq. Ezekiel was

part of the people of a community which was established in

Babylon at a place known as Tel-Abib, by the “River” Chebar,

which was an irrigation canal, drawing waters from the river

Euphrates near the city of Babylon. God appeared to him there

and commissioned him as a prophet, hence, he could aptly be

described as exilic prophet (Alaba, 2013).

It is a fact that the exiles were known to have built houses

for themselves with mud bricks, and settled there in a strange

environment not far from the capital city of the Emperor

Nebuchadnezzar. Ezekiel had a profound religious experience

during his fifth year as an exile in Tel-Abib. At the age of 30,

Ezekiel had been living in Jerusalem where he would have

assumed the full responsibilities of priesthood. But in Babylon,

he was made a prophet, the spokesman of God. In fact, he

served as a prophet among the exiles for more than 20 years. In

571 B.C, he gave his last prophecy when he was in the middle-

age.148Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective

He probably died in exile. According to Craigie (1983), “there

still exists today a tomb in Iraq which is regarded as the tomb

of Ezekiel. It is situated at Al-Kifli, not far from the ruins of

ancient Babylon”.

Ezekiel communicated God’s word to the people of Israel. He

employed speech but his words were rarely simple sermon. He

also recounted visions, expounded allegories, and propounded

parables. His actions were extraordinary in their symbolism.

His words, particularly the prosaic and poetic, were penetrated

with symbolism and hidden meanings that lay beneath the

surface of the words. Ezekiel’s ministry was the richest of

any of the Biblical prophets. He fulfilled his responsibilities

through many means. In fact, all the varieties of prophetic

experience were packages into the life of Ezekiel. He was

diverse is his religious experience. Although, his character and

experience were unique, there is considerable parallel between

his experience and that of other prophets.

Summary

In this second part of the stories of Judean kings, the reigns

of Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim,

Jehoiachin and Zedekiah have been examined. Their successes

and failures have been highlighted. Among these kings,

Manasseh is undoubtedly the worst while Josiah was the

most righteous king of Judah. Some of the teachings of Major

Prophets like Isaiah and Jeremiah in the regime of some of

these kings have been highlighted. Their major task was to call

erring/sinful people back to God, and the path of righteousness.

As it was for Israel, the people’s gross failure to heed prophetic

message was the main reason for the Babylonian captivity of

Judah in 587/586 BC.

Post test

1. How would you explain Isaiah’s advice to Ahaz during the149Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile

Syro-Ephramite crisis?

2. Examine Isaiah’s call and its significance.

3. What were the distinctive elements in Isaiah’s Prophetic

teaching?

4. Consider the view that Isaiah is to be regarded more as a

statesman than a prophet.

5. How would you explain Isaiah’s counsel to Ahaz and

Hezekiah?

6. Examine critically Isaiah’s concept of the Holiness of

Yahweh.

7. Examine: (i) the background and (ii) the significance of

Josiah’s reforms.

8. What are the factors that Led to the fall of Judah?