The historical setting for chapter 7 is given in the introductory comments above but only in very general terms. Verse 1 is a summary description of the unsuccessful attempt by Syria and Israel to conquer Judah and Jerusalem. It may have taken place in 735 B.C.

Verse 1 consists of one sentence in the Hebrew, as can be seen in Revised Standard Version. However, many translators may feel that their translation will be clearer and more natural if the content of verse 1 is expressed in several shorter sentences. See the models at the end of the discussion on this verse.

In the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, son of Uzziah, king of Judah: See the comments on 1.1 and 6.1. The way in which a family line is recorded or remembered varies from one language to another. Some have a fixed formula for listing family members. So it may be necessary in some languages to first mention Uzziah, then Jotham, and finally Ahaz. The focus in this verse is on Ahaz, so translators should choose the appropriate order to highlight him. Good News Translation provides a helpful model here, but it may be slightly modified to read “Ahaz was king of Judah. He was the son of Jotham and the grandson of Uzziah [or, … Jotham who was the son of Uzziah]. During the time when Ahaz ruled over Judah….”

Rezin the king of Syria was the last of the Syrian kings. The Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser~III defeated him in 732 B.C. in response to Ahaz’s cry for help (see 2 Kgs 16.7-9). Instead of Syria, New International Version, Revised English Bible, and some other versions have “Aram,” which is a transliteration of the Hebrew here. The country of Syria was north of Israel and east of the mountains of Lebanon. Damascus was its capital, which was only 200 kilometers (125 miles) from Samaria and 250 kilometers (155 miles) from Jerusalem.

Pekah the son of Remaliah the king of Israel was the eighteenth king of Israel. He took the throne by murdering King Pekahiah (see 2 Kgs 15.25-31). The phrase the king of Israel refers to Pekah, not to his father Remaliah, who was a captain in the king’s army. Translators may avoid ambiguity by saying “Pekah, the king of Israel, who was the son of Remaliah” or “the king of Israel called Pekah, who was the son of Remaliah.” After the death of King Solomon the nation of Israel split into two. The northern part kept the name Israel (also called Ephraim), while the southern part was Judah. Israel refers to the northern kingdom of Israel. Its capital was Samaria. Because of the present context in which Judah is mentioned next to Israel, a footnote to point this out is probably not needed.

Came up to Jerusalem to wage war against it: The two kings combined their armies to fight against Judah. From the Assyrian records of Tiglath-Pileser~III it is possible to conclude that Ahaz, who was already paying tribute to the Assyrians, refused to join the wide rebellion against Assyria. The rebelling countries saw Judah as a possible weak point in their alliance. So they attacked Jerusalem, Judah’s capital. Although Jerusalem was in hill country, the verb came up does not necessarily mean that they went uphill. “Attacked Jerusalem” (Good News Translation) is a satisfactory translation. Bible en français courant has “came … in order to attack the city of Jerusalem.”

But they could not conquer it: The combined forces of Syria and Israel were unsuccessful (see 2 Kgs 16.5). There is a slight difficulty here since the Hebrew text is literally “and he could not fight against it.” There are two issues here. First of all, the pronoun “he” and the singular Hebrew verb form probably serve to focus on Rezin the Syrian king as leader of the forces. Hebrew Old Testament Text Project strongly favors “he” as being original (so New Jerusalem Bible), but translators can use a plural form without doing violence to the sense. A second issue is the verb “fight” rather than “defeat” (conquer). The most likely sense of the whole clause is that the two kings and their armies were unsuccessful, rather than that something prevented them from attacking. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh nevertheless translates “but they were not able to attack it” (similarly New Jerusalem Bible). New English Bible suggests “but [they] could not force a battle,” implying that although they besieged Jerusalem, they were not able to force Ahaz to come out and try to remove the siege. However, the point here is that they could not capture Jerusalem. New International Version has “they could not overpower it.”

Possible translations for this verse are:

• Ahaz was king of Judah. He was the son of Jotham and the grandson of Uzziah. During Ahaz’s reign Rezin the king of Syria and Pekah the king of Israel, who was the son of Remaliah, attacked Jerusalem but could not capture it.

• When Ahaz was king of Judah after his father Jotham and grandfather Uzziah, Rezin the Syrian king and Pekah the king of Israel, who was the son of Remaliah, attacked Jerusalem. They failed to capture it.

• King Rezin of Syria and King Pekah of Israel, son of Remaliah, attacked Jerusalem during the reign of Ahaz the king of Judah, but they were unable to capture it. Ahaz was the son of Jotham and grandson of Uzziah.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Sterk, Jan. A Handbook on Isaiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2011. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .