No King But Caesar

Thanks to Toby Sumpter, Peter Roise, and Joshua Appel for the discussion that led to these observations.

How should we take the phrase “because of the king of Assyria” in v. 18? It has sometimes been taken to mean that Tiglath-Pileser forced liturgical changes on Ahaz, but recent studies of Assyrian religious policy has cast doubt on the notion that the Assyrians required conquered what Dale Ralph Davis calls “semi-independent vassal states” to conform to Assyrian religion. It has also sometimes been taken to mean that Ahaz was making changes in the temple to gather tribute for Assyria, but v. 17 talks only about bronze and no bronze was sent to Assyria (v. 8).

It’s possible that “because of the king of Assyria” means “because the king of Assyria was coming for a state visit.” Ahaz goes to visit Tiglath-Pileser in Damascus, a city that the Assyrians have recently conquered (v. 9), and it seems reasonable that the Assyrians would also want to check out the capital of the vassal state of Judah.

This fits neatly with the specific changes that Ahaz makes. Essentially, he removes from the temple any suggestion of Israel’s superiority to the Gentiles and his own prominence in Yahweh’s covenantal system. The bronze sea represented the Gentile nations, and the fact that it is lifted up on the back of 12 bulls indicates that Israel is the nation responsible for all nations. With Tiglath-Pileser’s visit, Ahaz apparently begins to think such a claim pretentious, and removes the sea from the bulls (v. 17). The sea is still in the temple, but it’s no longer carried by Israel. The location and function of the “way for the sabbath” (which I take as identical to the “outer entry for the king”) is uncertain, but it appears to be some special entry for the Davidic king to get to the temple. When Ahaz removes this architectural feature, he is demoting himself from the exalted status of “son of Yahweh” (2 Sam 7:14). Instead, as he has said earlier, he is the “son” of Tiglath-Pileser (v. 7).

The removal of the walkway might also signal a declaration of independence from Yahweh. If the walkway is in fact a royal path and entry to the temple, cutting down the walkway suggests that Ahaz was “secularizing” his palace, un-hooking it from the temple. This is another way of emphasizing that Ahaz has determined to be son of Assyria rather than son of Yahweh.

In short, Ahaz makes the same declaration that, centuries later, the leaders of Israel would make. Renouncing his divine king, Ahaz declares, “I have no king but Caesar.”