TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Commentary on 2 Kings 18 verses 17–37
Here is, I. Jerusalem besieged by Sennacherib's army, Kg2 18:17. He sent three of his great generals with a great host against Jerusalem. Is this the great king, the king of Assyria? No, never call him so; he is a base, false, perfidious man, and worthy to be made infamous to all ages; let him never be named with honour that could do such a dishonourable thing as this, to take Hezekiah's money, which he gave him upon condition he should withdraw his army, and then, instead of quitting his country according to the agreement, to advance against his capital city, and not send him his money again either. Those are wicked men indeed, and, let them be ever so great, we will call them so, whose principle it is not to make their promises binding any further than is for their interest. Now Hezekiah had too much reason to repent his treaty with Sennacherib, which made him much the poorer and never the safer.
II. Hezekiah, and his princes and people, railed upon by Rabshakeh, the chief speaker of the three generals, and one that had the most satirical genius. He was no doubt instructed what to say by Sennacherib, who intended hereby to pick a new quarrel with Hezekiah. He had promised, upon the receipt of Hezekiah's money, to withdraw his army, and therefore could not for shame make a forcible attack upon Jerusalem immediately; but he sent Rabshakeh to persuade Hezekiah to surrender it, and, if he should refuse, the refusal would serve him for a pretence (and a very poor one) to besiege it, and, if it hold out, to take it by storm. Rabshakeh had the impudence to desire audience of the king himself at the conduit of the upper pool, without the walls; but Hezekiah had the prudence to decline a personal treaty, and sent three commissioners (the prime ministers of state) to hear what he had to say, but with a charge to them not to answer that fool according to his folly (Kg2 18:36), for they could not convince him, but would certainly provoke him, and Hezekiah had learned of his father David to believe that God would hear when he, as a deaf man, heard not, Psa 38:13-15. One interruption they gave him in his discourse, which was only to desire that he would speak to them now in the Syrian language, and they would consider what he said and report it to the king, and, if they did not give him a satisfactory answer, then he might appeal to the people, by speaking in the Jews' language, Kg2 18:26. This was a reasonable request, and agreeable to the custom of treaties, which is that the plenipotentiaries should settle matters between themselves before any thing be made public; but Hilkiah did not consider what an unreasonable man he had to deal with, else he would not have made this request, for it did but exasperate Rabshakeh, and make him the more rude and boisterous, Kg2 18:27. Against all the rules of decency and honour, instead of treating with the commissioners, he menaces the soldiery, persuades them to desert or mutiny, threatens if they hold out to reduce the to the last extremities of famine, and then goes on with his discourse, the scope of which is to persuade Hezekiah, and his princes and people, to surrender the city. Observe how, in order to do this,
1.He magnifies his master the king of Assyria. Once and again he calls him That great king, the king of Assyria, Kg2 18:19, Kg2 18:28. What an idol did he make of that prince whose creature he was! God is the great King, but Sennacherib was in his eye a little god, and he would possess them with the same veneration for him that he had, and thereby frighten them into a submission to him. But to those who by faith see the King of kings in his power and glory even the king of Assyria looks mean and little. What are the greatest of men when either they come to compare with God or God comes to contend with them? Psa 82:6, Psa 82:7.
2.He endeavours to make them believe that it will be much for their advantage to surrender. If they held out, they must expect no other than to eat their own dung, by reason of the want of provisions, which would be entirely cut off from them by the besiegers; but if they would capitulate, seek his favour with a present and cast themselves upon his mercy, he would give them very good treatment, Kg2 18:31. I wonder with what face Rabshakeh could speak of making an agreement with a present when his master had so lately broken the agreement Hezekiah made with him with that great present, Kg2 18:14. Can those expect to be trusted that have been so grossly perfidious? But, Ad populum phaleras - Gild the chain and the vulgar will let you bind them. He thought to soothe up all with a promise that if they would surrender upon discretion, though they must expect to be prisoners and captives, yet it would really be happy for them to be so. One would wonder he should ever think to prevail by such gross suggestions as these, but that the devil does thus impose upon sinners every day by his temptations. He will needs persuade them, (1.) That their imprisonment would be to their advantage, for they should eat every man of his own vine (Kg2 18:31); though the property of their estates would be vested in the conquerors, yet they should have the free use of them. But he does not explain it now to them as he would afterwards, that it must be understood just as much, and just as long, as the conqueror pleases. (2.) That their captivity would be much more to their advantage: I will take you away to a land like your own land; and what the better would they be for that, when they must have nothing in it to call their own?
3.That which he aims at especially is to convince them that it is to no purpose for them to stand it out: What confidence is this wherein thou trustest? So he insults over Hezekiah, Kg2 18:19. To the people he says (Kg2 18:29), "Let not Hezekiah deceive you into your own ruin, for he shall not be able to deliver you; you must either bend or break." It were well if sinners would submit to the force of this argument, in making their peace with God - That it is therefore our wisdom to yield to him, because it is in vain to contend with him: what confidence is that which those trust in who stand it out against him? Are we stronger than he? Or what shall we get by setting briars and thorns before a consuming fire? But Hezekiah was not so helpless and defenceless as Rabshakeh would here represent him. Three things he supposes Hezekiah might trust to, and he endeavours to make out the insufficiency of these: - (1.) His own military preparations: Thou sayest, I have counsel and strength for the war; and we find that so he had, Ch2 32:3. But this Rabshakeh turns off with a slight: "They are but vain words; thou art an unequal match for us," Kg2 18:20. With the greatest haughtiness and disdain imaginable, he challenges him to produce 2000 men of all his people that know how to manage a horse, and will venture to give him 2000 horses if he can. He falsely insinuates that Hezekiah has no men, or none fit to be soldiers, Kg2 18:23. Thus he thinks to run him down with confidence and banter, and will lay him any wager that one captain of the least of his master's servants is able to baffle him and all his forces. (2.) His alliance with Egypt. He supposes that Hezekiah trusts to Egypt for chariots and horsemen (Kg2 18:24), because the king of Israel had done so, and of this confidence he truly says, It is a broken reed (Kg2 18:21), it will not only fail a man when he leans on it and expects it to bear his weight, but it will run into his hand and pierce it, and rend his shoulder, as the prophet further illustrates this similitude, with application to Egypt, Eze 29:6, Eze 29:7. So is the king of Egypt, says he; and truly so had the king of Assyria been to Ahaz, who trusted in him, but he distressed him, and strengthened him not, Ch2 28:20. Those that trust to any arm of flesh will find it no better than a broken reed; but God is the rock of ages. (3.) His interest in God and relation to him. This was indeed the confidence in which Hezekiah trusts, Kg2 18:22. He supported himself by depending on the power and promise of God; with this he encouraged himself and his people (Kg2 18:30): The Lord will surely deliver us, and again Kg2 18:32. This Rabshakeh was sensible was their great stay, and therefore he was most large in his endeavours to shake this, as David's enemies, who used all the arts they had to drive him from his confidence in God (Psa 3:2; Psa 11:1), and thus did Christ's enemies, Mat 27:43. Three things Rabshakeh suggested to discourage their confidence in God, and they were all false: - [1.] That Hezekiah had forfeited God's protection, and thrown himself out of it, by destroying the high places and the altars, Kg2 18:22. Here he measures the God of Israel by the gods of the heathen, who delighted in the multitude of altars and temples, and concludes that Hezekiah has given a great offence to the God of Israel, in confining his people to one altar: thus is one of the best deeds he ever did in his life misconstrued as impious and profane, by one that did not, or would not, know the law of the God of Israel. If that be represented by ignorant and malicious men as evil and a provocation to God which is really good and pleasing to him, we must not think it strange. If this was to be sacrilegious, Hezekiah would ever be so. [2.] That God had given orders for the destruction of Jerusalem at this time (Kg2 18:25): Have I now come up without the Lord? This is all banter and rhodomontade. He did not himself think he had any commission from God to do what he did (by whom should he have it?) but he made this pretence to amuse and terrify the people that were on the wall. If he had any colour at all for what he said, it might be taken from the notice which perhaps he had had, by the writings of the prophets, of the hand of God in the destruction of the ten tribes, and he thought he had as good a warrant for the seizing of Jerusalem as of Samaria. Many that have fought against God have pretended commissions from him. [3.] That if Jehovah, the God of Israel, should undertake to protect them from the king of Assyria, yet he was notable to do it. With this blasphemy he concluded his speech (Kg2 18:33-35), comparing the God of Israel with the gods of the nations whom he had conquered and putting him upon the level with them, and concluding that because they could not defend and deliver their worshippers the God of Israel could not defend and deliver his. See here, First, His pride. When he conquered a city he reckoned himself to have conquered its gods, and valued himself mightily upon it. His high opinion of the idols made him have a high opinion of himself as too hard for them. Secondly, His profaneness. The God of Israel was not a local deity, but the God of the whole earth, the only living and true God, the ancient of days, and had often proved himself to be above all gods; yet he makes no more of him than of the upstart fictitious gods of Hamath and Arpad, unfairly arguing that the gods (as some now say the priests) of all religions are the same, and himself above them all. The tradition of the Jews is that Rabshakeh was an apostate Jew, which made him so ready in the Jews' language; if so, his ignorance of the God of Israel was the less excusable and his enmity the less strange, for apostates are commonly the most bitter and spiteful enemies, witness Julian. A great deal of art and management, it must be owned, there were in this speech of Rabshakeh, but, withal, a great deal of pride, malice, falsehood, and blasphemy. One grain of sincerity would have been worth all this wit and rhetoric.
Lastly, We are told what the commissioners on Hezekiah's part did. 1. They held their peace, not for want of something to say both on God's behalf and Hezekiah's: they might easily and justly have upbraided him with his master's treachery and breach of faith, and have asked him, What religion encourages you to hope that such conduct will prosper? At least they might have given that grave hint which Ahab gave to Benhadad's like insolent demands - Let not him that girdeth on the harness boast as though he had put it off. But the king had commanded them not to answer him, and they observed their instructions. There is a time to keep silence, as well as a time to speak, and there are those to whom to offer any thing religious or rational is to cast pearls before swine. What can be said to a madman? It is probable that their silence made Rabshakeh yet more proud and secure, and so his heart was lifted up and hardened to his destruction. 2. They rent their clothes in detestation of his blasphemy and in grief for the despised afflicted condition of Jerusalem, the reproach of which was a burden to them. 3. They faithfully reported the matter to the king, their master, and told him the words of Rabshakeh, that he might consider what was to be done, what course they should take and what answer they should return to Rabshakeh's summons.
As I have already said, Sennacherib is a type of the devil, and this hypothesis is perfectly confirmed by the words that in this passage the Rabshakeh boastfully speaks against God when he makes false promises to the people, trying to take away from [God] the praise of his supreme power and giving assurance of a land of fertile soil and abundant crops in order to persuade them to abandon the region given to them by God and to move to the new dwelling places promised by the Assyrian. With a very similar artifice the accomplices and envoys of the devil endeavor to seduce a simple soul. And for this reason, in the first place, they try to uproot all the opinions that are inspired by divine providence.
Continue studying 2 Kings 18:26 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
During the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem, as recorded in 2 Kings 18:26, King Hezekiah's chief officials—Eliakim, Shebna, and Joah—intervene with Rabshakeh, the Assyrian envoy. They urgently request that he conduct their negotiations in Aramaic, the widely understood diplomatic language, rather than continuing to speak in Hebrew, the common tongue of Judah. This plea is a strategic attempt to prevent the demoralization of the Jewish populace gathered on the city wall, who, unlike the officials, would fully comprehend Rabshakeh's inflammatory and fear-mongering rhetoric. This pivotal moment highlights the officials' awareness of psychological warfare and their desperate effort to control the flow of information to protect the morale and resolve of their people.
CONTEXT
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The passage employs several potent literary devices to convey the tension and strategic maneuvering. Psychological Warfare is the overarching strategy of Rabshakeh, whose deliberate choice of Hebrew aims to demoralize the common people directly, bypassing the diplomatic channels. The officials' response highlights the stark Contrast between the diplomatic language (Aramaic) and the vernacular (Hebrew), emphasizing how language can be a powerful tool for inclusion or exclusion, for fostering communication or for strategic manipulation. There is a subtle Irony in the officials' plea: they are attempting to use the very tool of language control (by requesting Aramaic) to counter Rabshakeh's cunning use of language (Hebrew) for psychological effect. The scene also contains elements of Foreshadowing, as the officials' palpable fear of the people's demoralization sets the stage for King Hezekiah's subsequent actions, which involve turning to God in earnest prayer rather than relying solely on human strategy, ultimately leading to a divine intervention that transcends all human linguistic and military maneuvers.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
This exchange in 2 Kings 18:26 offers profound theological and thematic insights into the nature of communication, the responsibilities of leadership, and the reality of spiritual warfare. It vividly highlights the immense power of words, not merely to convey information, but to profoundly shape perceptions, instill fear, or inspire hope. The officials' desperate attempt to control the narrative reflects a universal and timeless challenge: how to protect vulnerable minds and hearts from deceptive or demoralizing rhetoric, especially during times of intense crisis. Theologically, it underscores the constant spiritual battle where truth and deception contend fiercely for the allegiance of hearts and minds. Just as Rabshakeh sought to undermine faith and trust through cunning words, so too does the spiritual adversary employ lies, intimidation, and accusations to sow doubt, despair, and division among God's people. Wise leadership, therefore, involves not only military or political strategy but also discerning communication, diligently protecting the flock from harmful influences, and ultimately pointing them to the unwavering truth, steadfast promises, and sovereign power of God.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
The dramatic scene in 2 Kings 18:26 offers timeless and profoundly relevant lessons for contemporary life, particularly concerning the immense power of communication and the solemn responsibility of leadership in an age of pervasive and often overwhelming information. Just as Rabshakeh sought to demoralize the people on the wall with his carefully crafted words, so too are we today constantly bombarded with messages designed to sow fear, doubt, and division, whether through traditional media, social media, or political discourse. This verse challenges us to become deeply discerning consumers of information, understanding that not all public discourse is benign; indeed, much is strategically crafted to manipulate opinions and incite specific reactions. For leaders in any sphere—church, family, community, or nation—it underscores the vital and sacred role of protecting those under their care from harmful, deceptive, or demoralizing narratives, ensuring that truth prevails over propaganda. It calls us to critically examine how we ourselves communicate, asking whether our words build up or tear down, and whether we are mindful of the profound impact our messages have on vulnerable audiences. Spiritually, it serves as a powerful reminder that our faith is constantly under assault by the "accuser of the brethren," who relentlessly seeks to undermine our trust in God and His promises. Our ultimate response, mirroring Hezekiah's, must be one of turning to God in earnest prayer and trusting in His sovereign deliverance, rather than succumbing to fear or the cunning rhetoric of the enemy.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did Rabshakeh speak Hebrew in the first place, if Aramaic was the diplomatic language?
Answer: Rabshakeh deliberately chose to speak Hebrew (the "Jews' language") despite Aramaic being the diplomatic norm because his primary objective was not a formal diplomatic negotiation with King Hezekiah's officials, but rather a direct psychological assault on the morale of the common people of Jerusalem. By speaking directly to them in their vernacular, he aimed to bypass the officials, sow seeds of doubt, fear, and disloyalty, and persuade the populace to surrender without a fight. This was a calculated and sophisticated move of psychological warfare, designed to break their will to resist by undermining their trust in King Hezekiah and their God, as powerfully evident in his preceding speech found in 2 Kings 18:19-25.
What was the outcome of this exchange, and did the officials' request succeed?
Answer: The officials' request in 2 Kings 18:26 did not succeed in stopping Rabshakeh from speaking Hebrew to the people. Rabshakeh explicitly rejects their plea and, with even greater vehemence, continues to address the people in Hebrew in the subsequent verses (2 Kings 18:28-35). This highlights Rabshakeh's unwavering determination to execute his psychological strategy. However, despite Rabshakeh's continued taunts and blasphemies, the people, following King Hezekiah's earlier instruction, remained silent and did not respond (2 Kings 18:36). Ultimately, the city was miraculously delivered by God, not through human diplomacy or military might, but through overwhelming divine intervention in response to Hezekiah's earnest prayer (2 Kings 19:35-36).
What is the significance of the "Syrian language" being Aramaic?
Answer: The "Syrian language" (Aramaic) was profoundly significant because it had become the common diplomatic and administrative language across the entire ancient Near East during the Assyrian imperial period. Its widespread use by officials from various nations facilitated inter-state communication, negotiation, and the administration of vast empires. For King Hezekiah's officials, understanding Aramaic was a clear mark of their education, diplomatic competence, and their role within the broader geopolitical landscape. Their request for Rabshakeh to speak in Aramaic was a pragmatic and strategic attempt to contain the conversation to the diplomatic elite, thereby preventing Rabshakeh's inflammatory and demoralizing message from reaching and inciting fear among the common Hebrew-speaking people on the wall. This crucial distinction between the elite diplomatic language and the common vernacular powerfully underscores the strategic and psychological use of language in ancient warfare and diplomacy.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The desperate attempt by Hezekiah's officials to shield their people from Rabshakeh's demoralizing words profoundly foreshadows the ultimate protection and truth offered by Jesus Christ. Rabshakeh, acting as a type of the accuser and deceiver, employed words to sow fear, undermine trust in God, and discredit His appointed king. In stark contrast, Jesus Christ is the living Word made flesh (John 1:14), whose very words bring life, truth, and liberating freedom, never demoralization (John 6:63). He is the Good Shepherd who sacrificially protects His sheep from the "wolf"—the spiritual deceiver who comes only to steal, kill, and destroy (John 10:11-12). While human officials sought to establish a physical language barrier to protect their people, Christ transcends all linguistic and cultural barriers, proclaiming the gospel in a way that all can understand, as powerfully evidenced by the miracle of Pentecost where the "language" of the Holy Spirit enabled the disciples to speak to people from every nation in their own native tongues (Acts 2:4-8). Ultimately, the miraculous victory over the Assyrian accuser in 2 Kings points forward to Christ's definitive and triumphant victory over Satan, the great accuser of the brethren, whose power to deceive, accuse, and condemn is utterly broken by the blood of the Lamb of God (Revelation 12:10-11). In Christ alone, we find true security, spiritual nourishment, and the ultimate message of hope that overcomes all fear, despair, and the cunning rhetoric of the enemy.