The Terms “Servant” and “Son” Mean Vassal

Much of our understanding of covenant relationships with God comes from ancient Near Eastern parallels of covenants between emperors and vassal kings. Under the terms of those covenants, a “servant” or “son” identifies a “vassal” to an emperor. As the prophets use this model to define God’s covenants with Israel and with Israel’s kings, we can learn much about how God’s covenants work by comparing them with their ancient Near Eastern counterparts. When the disloyal Jewish King Ahaz, for example, seeks to establish a covenant relationship with the Assyrian emperor Tiglath Pileser, he calls himself the emperor’s “servant” and “son” (2 Kings 16:7).

Although the terms “servant” and “son” both mean “vassal,” an emphasis on the term “son” suggests that a covenant relationship has become unconditional. In other words, after a vassal proves exceedingly loyal to an emperor, the emperor legally adopts him as his own “son.” The vassal’s privileges under the covenant then become “everlasting.” In that light, the goal of covenant keeping with Israel’s God is to prove loyal under all conditions with which he may test his “servant.” Only then does the covenant—whether with his people as a nation or with individuals—become unconditional. Only then do its blessings and privileges become “everlasting.”

See more here and here
Study more in-depth