and the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak; and the Sepharvites burned their children in the fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim.
Parallel Translations
-
and the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak; and the Sepharvites burned their children in the fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim.
-
And the Avites made Nibhaz and Tartak, and the Sepharvites burnt their children in fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim.
-
and the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak, and the Sepharvites burnt their children in the fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim.
Cross-references (7)
Passages linked to 2 Kings 17:31 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- 2 Kings 17:24 The king of Assyria brought men from Babylon, from Cuthah, from Avva, and from Hamath and Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the children of Israel; and they possessed Samaria, and lived in its cities.
- 2 Kings 17:17 They caused their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire, used divination and enchantments, and sold themselves to do that which was evil in Yahweh’s sight, to provoke him to anger.
- 2 Kings 19:37 As he was worshiping in the house of Nisroch his god, Adrammelech and Sharezer struck him with the sword; and they escaped into the land of Ararat. Esar Haddon his son reigned in his place.
- Leviticus 18:21 “ ‘You shall not give any of your children as a sacrifice to Molech. You shall not profane the name of your God. I am Yahweh.
- Deuteronomy 12:28 Observe and hear all these words which I command you, that it may go well with you and with your children after you forever, when you do that which is good and right in Yahweh your God’s eyes.
- Deuteronomy 12:31 You shall not do so to Yahweh your God; for every abomination to Yahweh, which he hates, they have done to their gods; for they even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.
- Ezra 4:9 then Rehum the chancellor, Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions, the Dinaites, and the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Shushanchites, the Dehaites, the Elamites,
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (10 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain 2Ki 17:31 And the Avites made Nibhaz and Tartak,…
2Ki 17:31 And the Avites made Nibhaz and Tartak, and the Sepharvites burnt their children in fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim.
Ver. 31. Made Nibhaz and Tartak.] A dog and an ass, as 2Ki 17:30. So the Africans worshipped a dog; the Persians, a cock; the Mendesians, a goat, &c. The people of the East Indies, in the isle Ceylon, having an ape’s tooth got from them which they had consecrated, offered an incredible mass of treasure to recover it.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain So they feared the Lord,.... Worshipped the God of…
So they feared the Lord,.... Worshipped the God of Israel in the manner they were taught:
and made unto themselves of the lowest of them priests of the high places, which sacrificed for them in the houses of the high places; these were made after the manner of Jeroboam's priests, Kg1 12:31, and were to sacrifice to the God of Israel in the high places, and temples built there; for otherwise they had, no doubt, priests of their own to sacrifice to their gods, and which they brought with them.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 31. The Avites made Nibhaz] This was supposed…
Verse 31. The Avites made Nibhaz] This was supposed to be the same as the Anubis of the Egyptians; and was in form partly of a dog, and partly of a man. A very ancient image of this kind now lies before me: it is cut out of stone, about seven inches high; has the body, legs, and arms, of a man; the head and feet of a dog; the thighs and legs covered with scales; the head crowned with a tiara; the arms crossed upon the breasts, with the fingers clenched. The figure stands upright, and the belly is very protuberant. See below. 2Kg 17:41.
And Tartak] This is supposed by some to be another name of the same idol; Jarchi says it was in the shape of an ass. Some think these were the representations of the sun in his chariot; Nibhaz representing the solar orb, and Tartak the chariot. See below. 2Kg 17:41.
Read full note →
Adrammelech] From אדר adar, glorious, and מלך melech, king. Probably the sun.
Anammelech] From anah, to return, and מלך melech, king. Probably, the Moloch of the Ammonites. Jarchi says, the first was in the form of a mule, the second in the form of a horse; this was probably the moon.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain Nibhaz and Tartak are either gods of whom no…
Nibhaz and Tartak are either gods of whom no other notice has come down to us, or intentional corruptions of the Babylonian names Nebo and Tir, the great god of Borsippa, who was the tutelar deity of so many Babylonian kings. The Jews, in their scorn and contempt of polytheism, occasionally and purposely altered, by way of derision, the names of the pagan deities. Anammelech is possibly an instance of the same contemptuous play upon words.
Adrammelech, “the glorious king,” signifies the sun. The Assyrian inscriptions commonly designate Tsipar, or Sepharvaim 2Ki 17:24, “Sippara of the Sun.” The title “Adrammelech” has not yet been found in the inscriptions hitherto; but it would plainly be a fitting epithet of the great luminary.
Read full note →
The sun-god of the Babylonians, Shamas, was united at Sippara and elsewhere with a sun-goddess, Anunit, whose name may be represented in the Anammelech of the text. The Hebrews, taking enough of this name to show what they meant, assimilated the termination to that of the male deity, thus producing a ridiculous effect, regarded as insulting to the gods in question.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Hevites, who came from Ava. --- Nebahaz. "Nebo the…
Hevites, who came from Ava. --- Nebahaz. "Nebo the seeing, or living and possessing." Nebo was a famous idol of Babylon. --- Tharthac; perhaps Sar, (prince) Sak, or Sesac, (Jeremias xxv. 26., and li. 41.) the sun, &c. --- Adramelech, "the magnificent king," and Anamelech, "the king of clemency," may denote the sun and moon; as these were the divinities commonly adored in the East, under various names. The same victims were offered to these as to Moloc and Saturn; whence we may infer, that they were the same idols. St. Jerome translates the work of Eusebius on the Hebrews, (Calmet) and places without any disapprobation of his opinion, that Socoth-benoth, &c., were the names of towns, which the people built in Samaria. (Haydock)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain Nibhaz--under that of a dog--that Egyptian form of animal-worship…
Nibhaz--under that of a dog--that Egyptian form of animal-worship having prevailed in ancient Syria, as is evident from the image of a large dog at the mouth of the Nahr-el-Kelb, or Dog river.
Tartak--According to the rabbis, it was in the form of an ass, but others understand it as a planet of ill-omen, probably Saturn.
Read full note →
Adrammelech--supposed by some to be the same as Molech, and in Assyrian mythology to stand for the sun. It was worshipped in the form of a mule--others maintain in that of a peacock.
Anammelech--worshipped in the form of a hare; others say in that of a goat.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 31. Nibhaz and Tartak, idols of the Avites, are…
31. Nibhaz and Tartak, idols of the Avites, are also unknown, save that rabbinical conjecture assigns to Nibhaz the form of a dog, and to Tartak the form of an ass. Of the character of the gods of Sepharvaim more can be said. The sacrifice of children as burnt offerings to them clearly indicate that they were fire-gods, akin to Molech. Hence Adrammelech and Anammelech would obviously seem to be respectively the male and female deities of fire. “The male and female powers of the sun,” says Rawlinson, “whose worship at Sippara was celebrated throughout the East, were with more than their usual accuracy identified by the Greeks with the Apollo and Diana of their own mythology; and they are, of course, represented in Scripture by the Adrammelech and Anammelech to whom the Sepharvites burnt their children in the fire. The meaning of these Hebrew names is not very certain. Adrammelech may be ‘the fire-king,’ or it may be ‘the royal arranger,’ ediru and gamilu, ‘the arranger’ and ‘benefactor,’ being epithets which, together, are frequently applied to the gods, and which are sufficiently applicable to the sun. Anammelech, for the female sun, cannot be explained, unless it be connected with the name Anunit. The female power of the sun is named Gula or Anunit; but her primitive Babylonian name seems to have been Ai, and it is under that form that she is found in most Babylonian documents to be associated as an object of worship with the sun. It is possible that Ai, Gula, and Anunit may represent the female power of the sun in his three different phases of rising, culminating, and setting, for the names do not appear to be interchangeable, and yet they are equally associated with the sun-god.” — Herodotus, vol. i, p. 497.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 31. And the Avites [R.V. Avvites] made Nibhaz] Of…
31. And the Avites [R.V. Avvites] made Nibhaz] Of Nibhaz (for which the LXX. gives a very different word, Ἐβλαζὲρ) nothing is known with certainty. The Jewish commentators explain the word as connected with a root signifying ‘to bark’, and say that the idol was a human figure with a dog’s head. The dog was worshipped, or rather some divinity represented with a dog’s head, by the Egyptians. And the want of any better information forces us to be content with supposing that the explanation of the Rabbis may be correct. The varied form of the name in the LXX. seems however to throw doubt on the form Nibhaz.
and Tartak] The same Jewish tradition represents Tartak as worshipped under the form of an ass. But there is very little evidence that such a form was used anywhere as a representation of a divinity. The ass in hieroglyphics is the symbol of the Egyptian Typho, but there is no proof that Typho was worshipped under this form. Others suggest that the word is of Persian origin and signifies ‘intense darkness’. Thus they arrive at the idea that Tartak represents the planet of ill-luck.
Read full note →
the Sepharvites burnt their children in fire] This was a species of Moloch-worship, and the names given to the divinities indicate this. Adrammelech is explained as the male power of the Sun, and Anammelech as the female power. So that the worship of the Sepharvites would be that of the Sun-god. This agrees with what Berosus (Frag. 7) says in explanation of the name Sippara, which is identified with Sepharvaim. He calls it ἡλίου πόλιν, the city of the Sun.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (31) Nibhaz and Tartak are unknown, but the forms…
(31) Nibhaz and Tartak are unknown, but the forms have an Assyrio-Babylonian cast. (Comp. Nimrod, Nergal with the former, and Ishtar, Namtar, Merodach, Shadrach, with the latter.) Before Nibhaz the LXX. have another name, Abaazar, or Eblazer (? ’abal Assûr “the Son of Assur”).
Adrammelech.—Comp. 2Ki_19:37. Identified by Schrader with the Assyrian Adar-mâlik, “Adar is prince” (? Adrum).
Read full note →
Anammelech—i.e., Anum-mâlik, “Anu is prince.” Adar and Anu are well-known Assyrian gods.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain And the Avites made Nibhaz and Tartak. "Nibhaz" and…
And the Avites made Nibhaz and Tartak. "Nibhaz" and "Tartak" are very obscure. The Sabians are said to have acknowledged an evil demon, whom they called Nib"az or Nabaz (Norberg, "Onomastieen," p. 100); and Tartak has been derived by Gesenius from the Pehlevi Tarthak, "hero of darkness;" but these guesses cannot be regarded as entitled to much attention. We do not know what the religion of the Avites was, and need not be surprised that the names of their gods are new to us. The polytheism of the East was prolific of deities, and still more of divine names. Nibhaz and Tartak may have been purely local gods, or they may have been local names for gods worshipped under other appellations in the general pantheon of Babylonia. And the Sepharvites burnt their children in fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim. The god principally worshipped at Sippara was Shamas, "the sun." It is probable that "Adrammelech" (equivalent to adir-melek, "the glorious king," or edir-malek, "the arranging king") was one of his titles. Shamas, in the Babylonian mythology, was always closely connected with Anunit, a sun-goddess; and it is probably this name which is represented by Anammelech, which we may regard as an intentional corruption, derisive and contemptuous.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.