2 Kings 17:31

Translation
King James Version
And the Avites made Nibhaz and Tartak, and the Sepharvites burnt their children in fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim.
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
And the Avites H5757 made H6213 Nibhaz H5026 and Tartak H8662, and the Sepharvites H5616 burnt H8313 their children H1121 in fire H784 to Adrammelech H152 and Anammelech H6048, the gods H430 of Sepharvaim H5617.
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
the 'Avim made Nivchaz and Tartak, and the S'farvim burned up their children in the fire as sacrifices to Adramelekh and 'Anamelekh the gods of S'farvayim.
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak, and the Sepharvites burned their children in the fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech the gods of Sepharvaim.
Ask
American Standard Version
and the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak; and the Sepharvites burnt their children in the fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim.
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
and the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak; and the Sepharvites burnt their children in the fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim.
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
And the Auims made Nibhaz, and Tartak: and the Sepharuims burnt their children in the fire to Adrammelech, and Anammelech the gods of Sepharuaim.
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
and the Avites have made Nibhaz and Tartak, and the Sepharvites are burning their sons with fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, gods of Sepharvim.
Ask
See also
2 Kings 17:242 Kings 17:172 Kings 19:37Leviticus 18:21Ezra 4:9Deuteronomy 12:31Deuteronomy 12:28
See on the biblical-era map
Hoshea and the Fall of Samaria
Hoshea and the Fall of Samaria View full PDF

Map © Biblica Open Bible Maps · CC BY-SA 4.0

In the KJVVerse 10,015 of 31,102

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

Second Kings 17:31 provides a chilling snapshot of the profound spiritual corruption that permeated the former Northern Kingdom of Israel after the Assyrian conquest and resettlement. It explicitly details the abhorrent pagan practices of two specific foreign groups, the Avites and the Sepharvites, highlighting their devotion to various obscure deities such as Nibhaz, Tartak, Adrammelech, and Anammelech. Most disturbingly, the verse records the Sepharvites' horrific act of burning their own children in fire as sacrifices to Adrammelech and Anammelech, unequivocally underscoring the deep idolatry and moral depravity that stood in stark opposition to Yahweh's exclusive claim on worship and His covenantal laws.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: This verse is situated within the broader theological narrative of 2 Kings 17, which serves as the biblical author's explanation for the downfall of the Northern Kingdom of Israel (Samaria) and their subsequent exile by the Assyrians in 722 BC. Following the deportation of the Israelites, the Assyrian king implemented a policy of population transfer, bringing various foreign peoples to resettle the land. 2 Kings 17:24-33 specifically describes these new inhabitants and their religious practices, which initially led to a syncretistic worship of Yahweh alongside their own gods. Verse 31, in particular, serves as a concrete and graphic example of the diverse and often abhorrent forms of idolatry introduced, demonstrating the spiritual vacuum filled by paganism and the subsequent syncretism that developed. It reinforces the Deuteronomistic historian's argument that the land remained spiritually defiled, necessitating continued divine judgment.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: The Assyrian policy of forced population transfer, as seen in 2 Kings 17:6 and 2 Kings 17:24, was a common imperial strategy designed to dismantle national identities, prevent rebellion, and integrate conquered territories into the Assyrian Empire. The Avites and Sepharvites were among these transplanted groups, originating from Avva (possibly in Syria) and Sepharvaim (likely a city in Mesopotamia, perhaps Sippar). Their religious practices, including the worship of deities like Nibhaz, Tartak, Adrammelech, and Anammelech, reflect the polytheistic landscape of the ancient Near East. The mention of child sacrifice to Adrammelech and Anammelech is particularly significant, as this was a practice vehemently condemned by Yahweh throughout the Law (e.g., Leviticus 18:21 and Deuteronomy 12:31), linking these deities to the abhorrent cult of Molech, which was a recurring spiritual danger for Israel.
  • Key Themes: This verse powerfully illustrates several key themes prevalent in 2 Kings and the broader Deuteronomistic History. Foremost is the theme of idolatry and its pervasive, corrupting nature, demonstrating how foreign gods and their associated abominable practices, such as child sacrifice, directly challenged Yahweh's exclusive claim to worship. It highlights the dangers of syncretism, where the worship of Yahweh was mixed with pagan rituals, leading to spiritual corruption rather than genuine devotion. The verse also implicitly underscores the theme of divine judgment, as these practices were precisely what God had warned against and what ultimately led to the exile of Israel and the continued spiritual decline of the land. Finally, it emphasizes the moral depravity that results when humanity deviates from God's standards, creating gods in their own image and engaging in practices that violate the sanctity of human life, revealing the ultimate consequence of turning away from the true God.

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Key Word Analysis

  • Avites (Hebrew, ʻAvvîy', H5757): This term refers to the inhabitants of Avvah, one of the regions from which the Assyrian king brought people to resettle Samaria. Their inclusion highlights the diverse origins of the foreign populations and the variety of pagan worship practices introduced into the land of Israel, contributing to the comprehensive spiritual defilement described in the chapter.
  • Adrammelech (Hebrew, ʼĂdrammelek', H152): Meaning "splendor of (the) king," Adrammelech was an Assyrian idol worshipped by the Sepharvites. The name suggests a connection to powerful, perhaps solar or storm, deities in the Mesopotamian pantheon. The suffix "-melech" (king) is significant, as it echoes the name of Molech, a Canaanite deity associated with child sacrifice, thereby immediately signaling the horrific nature of the worship directed towards this god.
  • burnt (Hebrew, sâraph', H8313): This primitive root verb means "to be (causatively, set) on fire" or "to burn (up) kindle, utterly." In this context, it describes the act of immolation, specifically the burning of children as a sacrifice. This stark and unambiguous term underscores the extreme and abhorrent nature of the ritual, which was a direct violation of Yahweh's commands and a profound abomination in His sight.

Verse Breakdown

  • "And the Avites made Nibhaz and Tartak,": This clause introduces the first group of foreign settlers, the Avites, and their specific deities, Nibhaz and Tartak. The verb "made" (H6213, ʻâsâh) suggests the creation of physical idols or images for worship, a practice explicitly forbidden by the first two commandments given to Israel (Exodus 20:3-5). Nibhaz and Tartak are obscure deities, possibly zoomorphic (e.g., dog-headed or donkey-headed) or associated with underworld or darkness, illustrating the diverse and often bizarre forms of pagan worship introduced into the land.
  • "and the Sepharvites burnt their children in fire": This second clause introduces another group, the Sepharvites, and their far more egregious and horrifying practice. The phrase "burnt their children in fire" is a chilling description of child sacrifice, a ritual act of extreme propitiation or dedication to a deity. This practice was a profound abomination to Yahweh, representing the ultimate perversion of life, family, and divine order, and a stark contrast to His covenantal love and demand for holiness.
  • "to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim.": This final segment specifies the recipients of the Sepharvites' sacrifices: Adrammelech and Anammelech. These are identified as "the gods of Sepharvaim," emphasizing their local, pagan origin and their distinctness from the God of Israel. The act of child sacrifice was performed as an offering to these specific deities, highlighting the depth of their devotion and the extreme demands of their false worship, revealing the moral depths to which humanity can sink when alienated from the true God.

Literary Devices

The author of 2 Kings employs several literary devices to convey the gravity of the spiritual situation. There is a clear Juxtaposition between the two clauses, contrasting the relatively obscure idol-making of the Avites with the profoundly disturbing child sacrifice of the Sepharvites. This highlights a spectrum of idolatrous practices, with the latter serving as the ultimate example of pagan depravity. The use of Cataloguing or Listing (Avites, Sepharvites, Nibhaz, Tartak, Adrammelech, Anammelech) emphasizes the widespread and diverse nature of the foreign idolatry that infiltrated the land, underscoring the spiritual chaos that ensued. Furthermore, the stark, almost clinical description "burnt their children in fire" functions as a form of Understatement or Euphemism, allowing the sheer horror of the act to resonate without overly emotive language. This directness makes the abomination even more impactful, inviting the reader to confront the moral implications of such worship.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

This verse stands as a chilling testament to the depths of human depravity when alienated from the one true God and the severe consequences of spiritual syncretism. Theologically, it underscores God's absolute holiness and His demand for exclusive worship, revealing the profound offense of idolatry, especially when it involves the sacrifice of innocent human life. The practices described here are not merely different ways of worshiping; they are an explicit rebellion against the Creator's moral order and His covenant with Israel. The shedding of innocent blood, particularly that of children, for the appeasement of false gods, represents the ultimate perversion of worship and a direct assault on the sanctity of life, which is divinely ordained. This verse, therefore, serves as a powerful warning against any compromise with ungodly practices and highlights the destructive nature of spiritual infidelity, demonstrating the devastating spiritual and moral consequences of rejecting the Lord.

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

The stark reality presented in 2 Kings 17:31 serves as a timeless warning against the insidious nature of idolatry and syncretism. While we may not literally "burn our children in fire" to stone idols today, the principle remains profoundly relevant. Modern idolatry often manifests in more subtle, yet equally destructive, forms: the worship of wealth, power, status, personal comfort, or even self-image. Anything that takes God's rightful place as supreme in our hearts and lives becomes an idol. This verse calls us to a radical self-examination, urging us to identify and dismantle any "altars" we might have unwittingly erected to worldly philosophies or cultural norms that contradict God's truth. It challenges us to maintain absolute, unwavering devotion to Christ, rejecting any attempt to mix His pure gospel with humanistic ideologies or practices that dilute its power. The abhorrent practice of child sacrifice also reminds us of the profound value God places on human life, especially the most vulnerable, prompting us to champion life and protect the innocent in our world today, advocating for justice and compassion where human dignity is threatened.

Questions for Reflection

  • What are the modern "gods" or idols that subtly compete for our ultimate devotion and allegiance in today's society, diverting our worship from God?
  • In what ways might spiritual syncretism manifest in contemporary Christian practice or personal faith, blending biblical truth with worldly values or practices?
  • How does the biblical condemnation of child sacrifice inform our understanding of the sanctity of human life, particularly the unborn and vulnerable, in our current cultural context?

FAQ

Who were Nibhaz and Tartak, and why are they mentioned alongside Adrammelech and Anammelech?

Answer: Nibhaz and Tartak were deities worshipped by the Avites, one of the foreign groups resettled in Samaria by the Assyrians. Unlike Adrammelech and Anammelech, who are more clearly linked to known Mesopotamian deities (Adad/Hadad and Anu, respectively) and associated with the horrific practice of child sacrifice, Nibhaz and Tartak are much more obscure. Scholarly speculation suggests Nibhaz might have been a dog-headed deity, possibly related to an underworld god, while Tartak could have been a donkey-headed deity or a god associated with darkness or the underworld. Their inclusion in 2 Kings 17:31 highlights the diverse and often bizarre pantheon of gods brought into the land, emphasizing the widespread nature of the idolatry that corrupted the spiritual landscape of the former Northern Kingdom. The text lists them together to illustrate the comprehensive spiritual defilement introduced by the foreign settlers, showcasing the variety of gods they served and the extent of their deviation from the worship of Yahweh.

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

The gruesome idolatry described in 2 Kings 17:31, particularly the abomination of child sacrifice, finds its ultimate contrast and fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. The Old Testament's relentless condemnation of human sacrifice, epitomized by the practices of the Sepharvites, points forward to the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice of God's own Son. Unlike the pagan gods who demanded the blood of innocents, the true God, in Christ, gave His innocent Son as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. This singular, sufficient sacrifice on the cross (Hebrews 10:10-14) completely abrogates the need for any human offering, demonstrating God's boundless love and His provision for atonement without human cost. Furthermore, the Old Testament's call for exclusive worship of Yahweh is fulfilled in the New Covenant's demand for exclusive devotion to Christ, who is the image of the invisible God and through whom alone we have access to the Father (John 14:6). Believers are called to flee from idolatry in all its forms, recognizing that any allegiance divided from Christ is spiritual adultery, and that true worship is found in Him alone, for in Him all the fullness of God dwells bodily.

Copy as

Commentary on 2 Kings 17 verses 24–41

Never was land lost, we say, for want of an heir. When the children of Israel were dispossessed, and turned out of Canaan, the king of Assyria soon transplanted thither the supernumeraries of his own country, such as it could well spare, who should be servants to him and masters to the Israelites that remained; and here we have an account of these new inhabitants, whose story is related here that we may take our leave of Samaria, as also of the Israelites that were carried captive into Assyria.

I. Concerning the Assyrians that were brought into the land of Israel we are here told, 1. That they possessed Samaria and dwelt in the cities thereof, Kg2 17:24. It is common for lands to change their owners, but sad that the holy land should become a heathen land again. See what work sin makes. 2. That at their first coming God sent lions among them. They were probably insufficient to people the country, which occasioned the beasts of the field to multiply against them (Exo 23:29); yet, besides the natural cause, there was a manifest hand of God in it, who is Lord of hosts, of all the creatures, and can serve his own purposes by which he pleases, small or great, lice or lions. God ordered them this rough welcome to check their pride and insolence, and to let them know that though they had conquered Israel the God of Israel had power enough to deal with them - that he could have prevented their settling here, by ordering lions into the service of Israel, and that he permitted it, not for their righteousness, but the wickedness of his own people - and that they were now under his visitation. They had lived without God in their own land, and were not plagued with lions; but, if they do so in this land, it is at their peril. 3. That they sent a remonstrance of this grievance to the king their master, setting forth, it is likely, the loss their infant colony had sustained by the lions and the continual fear they were in of them, and stating that they looked upon it to be a judgment upon them for not worshipping the God of the land, which they could not, because they knew not how, Kg2 17:26. The God of Israel was the God of the whole world, but they ignorantly call him the God of the land, apprehending themselves therefore within his reach, and concerned to be upon good terms with him. Herein they shamed the Israelites, who were not so ready to hear the voice of God's judgments as they were, and who had not served the God of that land, though he was the God of their fathers and their great benefactor, and though they were well instructed in the manner of his worship. Assyrians begged to be taught that which Israelites hated to be taught. 4. That the king of Assyria took care to have them taught the manner of the God of the land (Kg2 17:27, Kg2 17:28), not out of any affection to that God, but to save his subjects from the lions. On this errand he sent back one of the priests whom he had carried away captive. A prophet would have done them more good, for this was but one of the priests of the calves, and therefore chose to dwell at Bethel for old acquaintance' sake, and, though he might teach them to do better than they did, he was not likely to teach them to do well, unless he had taught his own people better. However, he came and dwelt among them, to teach them how they should fear the Lord. Whether he taught them out of the book of the law, or only by word of mouth, is uncertain. 5. That, being thus taught, they made a mongrel religion of it, worshipped the God of Israel for fear and their own idols for love (Kg2 17:33): They feared the Lord, but they served their own gods. They all agreed to worship the God of the land according to the manner, to serve the Jewish festivals and rites of sacrificing, but every nation made gods of their own besides, not only for their private use in their own families, but to be put in the houses of their high places, Kg2 17:9. The idols of each country are here named, Kg2 17:30, Kg2 17:31. The learned are at a loss for the signification of several of these names, and cannot agree by what representations these gods were worshipped. If we may credit the traditions of the Jewish doctors, they tell us that Succoth-Benoth was worshipped in a hen and chickens, Nergal in a cock, Ashima in a smooth goat, Nibhaz in a dog, Tartak in an ass, Adrammelech in a peacock, Anammelech in a pheasant. Our own tell us, more probably, that Succoth-Benoth (signifying the tents of the daughters) was Venus. Nergal, being worshipped by the Cuthites, or Persians, was the fire, Adrammelech and Anammelech were only distinctions of Moloch. See how vain idolaters were in their imaginations, and wonder at their sottishness. Our very ignorance concerning these idols teaches us the accomplishment of that word which God has spoken, that these false gods should all perish (Jer 10:11); they are all buried in oblivion, while the name of the true God shall continue for ever. 6. This medley superstition is here said to continue unto this day (Kg2 17:41), till the time when this book was written and long after, above 300 years in all, till the time of Alexander the Great, when Manasse, brother to Jaddus the high priest of the Jews, having married the daughter of Sanballat, governor of the Samaritans, went over to them, got leave of Alexander to build a temple in Mount Gerizim, drew over many of the Jews to him, and prevailed with the Samaritans to cast away all their idols and to worship the God of Israel only; yet their worship was mixed with so much superstition that our Saviour told them they knew not what they worshipped, Joh 4:22.

II. Concerning the Israelites that were carried into the land of Assyria. This historian has occasion to speak of them (Kg2 17:22), showing that their successors in the land did as they had done (after the manner of the nations whom they carried away), they worshipped both the God of Israel and those other gods; but what did the captives do in the land of their affliction? Were they reformed, and brought to repentance, by their troubles? No, they did after the former manner, Kg2 17:34. When the two tribes were afterwards carried into Babylon, they were cured by it of their idolatry, and therefore, after seventy years, they were brought back with joy; but the ten tribes were hardened in the furnace, and therefore were justly lost in it and left to perish. This obstinacy of theirs is here aggravated by the consideration, 1. Of the honour God had put upon them, as the seed of Jacob, whom he named Israel, and from him they were so named, but were a reproach to that worthy name by which they were called. 2. Of the covenant he made with them, and the charge he gave them upon that covenant, which is here very fully recited, that they should fear and serve the Lord Jehovah only, who had brought them up out of Egypt (Kg2 17:36), that, having received his statutes and ordinances in writing, they should observe to do them for evermore (Kg2 17:37), and never forget that covenant which God had made with them, the promises and conditions of that covenant, especially that great article of it which is here thrice repeated, because it had been so often inculcated and so much insisted on, that they should not fear other gods. He had told them that, if they kept close to him, he would deliver them out of the hand of all their enemies (Kg2 17:39); yet when they were in the hand of their enemies, and stood in need of deliverance, they were so stupid, and had so little sense of their own interest, that they did after the former manner (Kg2 17:40), they served both the true God and false gods, as if they knew no difference. Ephraim is joined to idols, let him alone. So they did, and so did the nations that succeeded them. Well might the apostle ask, What then, Are we better than they? No, in no wise, for both Jews and Gentiles are all under sin, Rom 3:9.

Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 24–41. Public domain.
Copy as
John ChrysostomAD 407
HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 33.1
How, then, did the Samaritans not know what they worshiped? Because they thought that God was confined to a place and divisible; at least it was in that way that they worshiped him. And it was in this spirit that they sent to the Persians and announced that the God of this place was displeased with them. According to this, their idea of him was no greater than their conception of their idols. Therefore, they continued to worship both evil spirit and him, combining things that were altogether incompatible. But the Jews for the most part were free of this taint and knew that he is God of the universe, even though not all of them [were faithful].
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as

Continue studying 2 Kings 17:31 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

Read & Compare

Commentaries

Original Language & Research

Sermons, Hymns & Audio

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.