AHAZ (אָחָ֣ז, he has possessed; LXX ̓́Αχαζ; Josephus, ̓Αχαζης). The name is shortened from Jehoahaz (whom Jehovah has possessed) which, in turn, is the same as Ahaziah by transposition of the elements, -iah (=jah) and Jeho- being abbreviations of Jehovah, or, Yahweh. A cuneiform inscr. of Tiglath-pileser III mentions Ahaz among those from whom he received tribute by the name “Yauhazi [i.e. Jehoahoz] of Judah” (FLAP, pp. 207, 208, ANET, p. 282; ANEA, p. 193, ARAB, sect. 801, BDB, p. 28 cf. p. xiv). His story is told in 2 Kings 16:1-20 and 2 Chronicles 27:9-28:27, the second account enlarging greatly on his disastrous religious, military and diplomatic ventures. Isaiah 7-12, the “Book of Immanuel,” relates to his time also. He was the thirteenth king of Judah of David’s line.

1. Ahaz’ family connections. His father, grandfather, and great-grandfather were among the best of the Davidic line (2 Chron 27:6; 26:4, 5). His son Hezekiah is the most noted for godly faith of the entire dynasty (2 Kings 18:5, 6).

2. Chronology of life and reign. There is a serious problem with the numerical data. According to 2 Chronicles 28:1 and 2 Kings 16:2, Ahaz would have died at the age of thirty-six, yet, according to 2 Chronicles 29:1, his son Hezekiah succeeded to the throne at the age of twenty-five, upon the death of his father, Ahaz—thus making Ahaz only eleven years of age at the birth of his son Hezekiah. The LXX has twenty years in 2 Kings 16:2 for the age of Ahaz at his accession, but in 2 Chronicles 28:1 the figure is ἔι κοσι και πεντε (twenty and five). Biblia Hebraica notes considerable textual support for the higher figure in the Chronicles text, but not in the Kings text. The lower figure is not, however, impossible, for as is well-known, children of very young age—below ten—are frequently married in the Orient. The kings of Judah, more often than not, were conceived when their fathers were in middle or late “teens.” Coming to the throne about 735 b.c., Ahaz’ reign lasted sixteen years. By supposing a co-regency with his father, Jotham, a somewhat longer reign is possible. Accordingly, scholars frequently assign his reign’s length as twenty or twenty-one years.

3. Events of reign. Early in his reign the two nearest northern neighbor kingdoms, Israel under Pekah the son of Remaliah and Syria under Rezin of Damascus, formed an alliance bent on conquest of Judah and termination of the reign of the Davidic dynasty by placing a certain “son of Tabeel” (Isa 7:6) upon the throne. Who this person might have been is unknown—the name suggests a non-Heb., hence likely, a scion of some leading Syrian family. That the king of Israel would co-operate in a project so alien to the history and faith of the Mosaic institutions speaks volumes for the low state of affairs in the northern kingdom at that time. In this time of national peril and of testing for Ahaz the young king, Isaiah, with holy zeal and great faith, encouraged the king, by the Word of the Lord, promising early deliverance of Jerusalem, if not of the whole land of Judah (Isa 7:3-9). Ahaz responded with a great lack of faith (Isa 7:10-13). The prophecy was fulfilled anyway, for though great losses were sustained, Jerusalem was spared, to the encouragement of Isaiah and his faithful disciples (Isa 7:14-8:22).

The narratives are not crystal clear at this point, but presumably in connection with the attacks of the combined forces of Israel and Syria, a truly enormous number of captives were taken from outlying portions of Judah and transported to Samaria (2 Chron 28:8ff.). Supported bravely by several Ephraimite chieftains (2 Chron 28:12) the remonstrances of the prophet Oded, who pointed out the contrariety of such action to the Mosaic law and threatened divine judgment, brought about return of the captives, with provisions for life and decency, to their homes. The vile Pekah, king at Samaria, however, had slain 120,000 “in one day” in the process of his depredations—a loss which could not be restored (2 Chron 28:5, 6). The author of Chronicles states that these disasters came because they of Judah “had forsaken the God of their fathers” (2 Chron 28:6).

At this time Judah, till now a strong power in the Levant, suffered other serious losses of territory and strength. The Edomites not only reasserted their independence of Judah, but captured Elath, long time seaport for Judah on the Gulf of Aqabah to the S (cf. 2 Kings 14:22) and even successfully invaded the S of Judah (2 Chron 28:17-19; 2 Kings 16:6). (It is possible that the expulsion of Jews from Elath may have been by Syria. The obscurity roots in similarity of אֲרָ֤ם [Syria] and אֱדֹ֛ום [Edom] in Heb. script. See the textual notes in BH on 2 Kings 16:6.) The long quiescent Philistines raided cities of Judah in the Negeb and Shephelah and occupied them (2 Chron 28:17-20).

Ahaz, apostate from the Mosaic faith and lacking both courage and ingenuity, in such exigencies did not shrink from breaking Mosaic Law to seek help from foreign kings and—what turned out to be the ultimate disaster—from foreign gods as well. The two accounts show that Ahaz appealed to the king of Assyria to send forces to deliver him from his enemies on every side (2 Kings 16:7; 2 Chron 28:16-19). The Assyrians had been probing deeper and deeper into Syria for several decades. The then reigning king, Tiglath-pileser III, already planning a war of conquest against the kings of the area, gladly sent his “assistance.” The result was the immediate end of the Syrian kingdom of Damascus and death of Rezin its king (2 Kings 16:9). Not long afterward Ahaz witnessed the end of the northern Israelite kingdom which, after suffering earlier losses of territory to Tiglath-pileser III (= Pul, cf. 2 Kings 15:18-20), now suffered final national demise from the attacks of Shalmaneser V who destroyed it (2 Kings 17:1-23). The spineless Ahaz, in order to save the deteriorating situation, had done the worst possible thing—militarily, diplomatically, spiritually—when he called on the Assyrians for help. True he would no longer be in danger from Israel and Syria, but in their place the Assyrians threatened the national existence of Judah. He had to accept the position of vassal or tributary king to Assyria. That meant that he would have no military power except such as the Assyrians would allow him to have; the laconic Chronicles account states, “So Tiglath-pilneser king of Assyria came against him, and afflicted him instead of strengthening him” (2 Chron 28:20). Diplomatically Judah was now fully isolated, without power to exist except by Assyrian sufferance. This sufferance Ahaz purchased at the price of robbing the Temple of all its treasures as well as its most costly furnishings (2 Chron 28:21; 2 Kings 16:8), in addition to draining the national treasury (2 Kings 16:8) and confiscating the resources of leading citizens (2 Chron 28:21).

4. The spiritual significance of Ahaz. Spiritually Ahaz was a disaster to the whole nation. All three accounts—Kings, Chronicles, Isaiah—point out that Ahaz imported the corrupt pagan religious practices of Mesopotamia to Jerusalem. This involved worship of the heavenly bodies (stars and planets), child sacrifice and consulting with wizards and necromancers (2 Chron 28:22-25; Isa 8:19). His name is connected with heathen abomination (sun worship) which survived until the times of Josiah nearly a cent. later (2 Kings 23:11). Of course there were minor cultural “benefits” from the importations—enough to provide their advocates (of false religion) a certain plausibility (then as now), for a beautiful “altar of Damascus” was adopted—no doubt to the delight of “modernizing” esthetes (2 Kings 16:10-16) and the courts now had the benefit of a “timepiece”—a sundial prob. imported (Isa. 38:8).

A certain Micah, great-grandson of King Saul through Jonathan, had a son named Ahaz (1 Chron 8:35, 36; 9:42). Nothing is known of the history of this person.