And Pekah the son of Remaliah, his captain, conspired against him, and smote him in Samaria, in the fortress of the king's house, with Argob and Arieh, and with him fifty men of the Gileadites; and he slew him, and reigned in his stead.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
And the rest of the acts of Pekahiah, and all that he did, behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel.
Pekahiah ruled the northern kingdom of Israel for two years. His reign closes with the same short formula used for king after king, and it raises two questions: what was that record book, and why did God keep so little of a king's life?
The closing formula points to a fuller record. But Scripture has already given its verdict on Pekahiah, and nothing in it is good.
Pekahiah continued the wearying list of godless kings in Israel. He reigned only two years and kept up the idolatry that Jeroboam the son of Nebat had introduced. The record holds nothing to his credit. One of his officers, Pekah the son of Remaliah, conspired with others to kill him.
His murder did not only end a life. It ended a family line on the throne.
His death ended the seventh dynasty of the kings of Israel.
Readers naturally reach for the biblical books of Chronicles. That is not what is meant.
Verse 26 tells us that the rest of the acts of Pekahiah are recorded in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel. But again, this is not the scriptural Book of Chronicles. Pekahiah is not even mentioned there.
These were the state annals of the kingdom, and their loss costs the believer nothing.
These chronicles were written during the reigns of all the rulers of those times, whether Jewish or Gentile. They have nothing to do with the Word of God. They hold what the Lord did not choose to record or explain. These chronicles have been lost; perhaps someone will one day find some fragments of them. The believer has no need for any of them; he has God's Word. In God's account he finds everything he needs, along with God's own evaluation of people, events, and things.
What Scripture keeps is God's own verdict: Pekahiah did not depart from the sins of Jeroboam. Those few words carry a standard that reaches past Israel's kings.
Pekahiah did evil in the sight of the Lord. He departed not from the sins of Jeroboam. God gives His verdict in these words, and it shows what He was looking for. He wanted Israel's kings to make a real break from the sins of Jeroboam, the king before them. "Cease to do evil, learn to do good" (Isa. 1:17) is the divine principle by which He expects us to act. The New Testament calls each of us to do the same. We are to turn away from wrongdoing, and to separate ourselves from vessels that dishonour our Lord. Only then are we vessels for honour, useful to the Master, ready for every good work. Non-participation in evil is not enough. God demands clear-cut separation from it.
The same writer looks back over the whole line of kings and finds the reason the verdict never changes.
We are now at the seventeenth king of Israel, and all of them were evil in varying degrees. Yet God has not changed His standards. The norms of society change, and with them even the rulings of our court systems. But God does not change. He will never alter His standards to fit our ever-changing ideas. He is absolutely holy and righteous.
Pekahiah's own name carries a quiet comment on how he died.
The man who killed Pekahiah was his own captain, Pekah, helped by two of his followers and a company of fifty Gileadites. These Gileadites seem to have been a rough, wild class, something like Hebrew highlanders, ready in Pekahiah's day for any kind of crime. They were so bold that they killed the king in his own palace. His name means Jah has observed. It implies that God had seen the murder of Shallum by his father Menahem, and that He repaid it in the death of Menahem's son Pekahiah. His name, like his father's and grandfather's, does not occur anywhere else in Scripture.
The same closing formula appears elsewhere in Kings. There one writer points to a second set of books.
"Now the rest of the acts of Ahaziah that he did, are they not written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel?" Yes, they are. And they, along with the wicked acts recorded here, are written in God's books above. Those books are not merely chronicles of the kings of Israel. They hold the deeds and doings of every life, whether good or evil. Solemn facts for us all!
- Recorded — the closing line points to the state annals of Israel's kings. It is not the biblical books of Chronicles, which never mention Pekahiah.
- Lost — those annals have disappeared, and nothing is missing. God's Word holds all the believer needs, including His own evaluation of people and events.
- Kept — what God chose to keep is the moral verdict: he did not depart from the sins of Jeroboam. Refusing to join evil is not enough; God looks for a clear break from it.
- Observed — his name means Jah has observed. God had seen Menahem murder Shallum, and He repaid it in the death of Menahem's son.
- Read — the earthly book is gone. Every life stands written in God's books above, good or evil alike, and that is the record that will be read.
In the fifty-second year of Azariah king of Judah, Pekah the son of Remaliah began to reign over Israel in Samaria, for twenty years.
Pekah took Israel's throne by murder, and twenty years later he lost it the same way. Scripture gives him one line of character — he did evil and clung to the sins of Jeroboam — and his long reign is the stretch in which the northern kingdom starts to come apart.
Pekah did not act alone. One commentator traces his reign from the conspiracy that began it to the deportations that marked it:
Pekah, the son of Remaliah, helped in his conspiracy by men of Gilead, kills Pekahiah along with two of his companions. He reigns twenty years in Samaria, and toward the Lord he follows the way of the kings of Israel. Verse 29 sums up the results of his reign. Tiglath-Pileser the Assyrian comes up against him. He carries away captive the Reubenites, the Gadites, and that half tribe of Manasseh — all the people settled beyond the Jordan.
A reference work adds the detail that his death came at the hands of Hoshea, and notes how his dates are reckoned:
Pekah was killed by Hoshea, in what is called the 20th year of Jotham, that is, the 4th year of Ahaz, which would have been the 20th of Jotham.
The same charge follows king after king through these chapters — he did not depart from the sins of Jeroboam. One writer marks the last time it appears:
How painfully this often-repeated testimony, like a sad refrain, falls upon the ear! But this is the last time. Under Hoshea, Pekah's killer and successor, God "put an end to the kingdom of the house of Israel" (Hosea 1:4). And he, though he did wrong, did it "not as the kings of Israel who were before him" (2 Kings 17:2).
The verse gives a length of reign but no events. Another writer fills in those twenty years: land lost, and an alliance born of fear:
During the twenty years Pekah reigned there were major changes in Israel's situation. Assyria's mighty warrior kings conquered the northern and eastern parts of the land and deported their people to Assyria. Threatened by Assyria, Israel and Syria became allies and sought to overthrow the house of David in Judah. They did so because Ahaz, the wicked king of Judah, had become a payer of tribute to Assyria and was leaning on its king for help against these enemies.
One commentator weighs Assyria's invasion against what Pekah had aimed at Judah's royal house:
Pekah joined Rezin king of Damascus in an unprovoked and cowardly attack on Jerusalem. Then the king of Assyria invaded and devastated his land. That was his just reward for his "fierce anger" and "evil counsel" against the house of David, which he sought to overthrow by conspiracy and revolution.
The same writer finds a bitter irony in what the man's name means:
His name means watch. It comes from a root meaning "to open" (as the eyes), and by extension, to be observant. But watch as he might, the very friend he trusted became his killer, in God's ordering. It is impossible for the wicked to escape the punishment they deserve from the hand of Him who has said, "Vengeance is Mine; I will repay."
One writer draws a lesson from which tribes fell first:
The breaking up of the kingdom of Ephraim begins with the tribes that had chosen their portion on the other side of the Jordan for their own convenience. It is always so. Some Christians never take their stand firmly, and without a backward glance, on the ground where the death of Christ stands between them and the world like the Jordan — a barrier they cannot cross. Those Christians are the first the enemy attacks. They become the poor captives of the world, because, for all their real faith, they have not agreed to break with it completely.
- Seized. Pekah took the throne by conspiracy and murder, with help from men of Gilead.
- Same sin. His reign repeats the old charge: he clung to the sins of Jeroboam. This is the last time Scripture brings that charge against a king of Israel.
- Shrinking. While he reigned, Assyria stripped away the north and the east and deported the people. The kingdom came apart piece by piece.
- Struck down. His war on the house of David killed 120,000 in one day; Assyria's invasion of his own land repaid it. The man whose name means watch died at the hand of the friend he trusted. No one escapes the God who says, "Vengeance is Mine; I will repay."
- Separate. The tribes that chose their land for convenience fell first. Believers who will not break with the world completely are the first it takes captive.
And he did evil in the sight of Jehovah he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin.
Pekah killed the king he served, seized Israel's throne, and reigned twenty years — yet God's verdict on him is the same one already passed on the kings before him. Why does a sin committed generations earlier still name every king who follows?
The wording here is not new. This one chapter passes the same sentence four times. One writer draws out why that repetition is so striking:
Jeroboam stands out in the Old Testament as the great division maker. Under him the great mass of God's people, ten of the twelve tribes, broke away from God's centre at that time. The Spirit marks out this man with sad words that come back again and again, like a death knell: "Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin." This single chapter alone repeats it solemnly four times (2 Kings 15:9, 18, 24, 28). There is something appalling about it. Personal sins are bad enough. But to turn God's people away from the centre He has set up — what could be worse?
Jeroboam was Israel's first king after the nation split in two. His sin was a religion built to keep his people away from Jerusalem:
Judging by human wisdom and forgetting the fear of Jehovah, he made two golden calves. He wanted to break the strong links of a shared worship, so that they would no longer hold his subjects to Judah and Jerusalem. He had to set up a new priesthood. He devised everything to do with worship out of his own heart. Israel's sin became an established rule, and the phrase "Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin" became the sad description of their first king.
The charge is not only that Pekah sinned, but that the sin he kept was one that spread. One writer explains why that raises the stakes:
Notice here what the earlier chapters repeat so often: the sins of their kings made Israel sin. A person's sin becomes far more serious when it trips others up. Its consequences count against those who drag the ignorant and the unsteady into the path of their own disobedience.
Pekah is the last king to receive this sentence. What follows explains why:
How painfully this often-repeated testimony, like a sad refrain, falls on the ear! But this is the last time. Under Hoshea, Pekah's killer and successor, God made "to cease the kingdom of the house of Israel" (Hosea 1:4). And he, though he did wrong, did not do it "as the kings of Israel that were before him" (2 Kings 17:2).
The verses that follow show Assyria arriving in Pekah's own reign. The first tribes taken are the ones who had settled on the far side of the Jordan:
The Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser comes up against him. He carries away captive the Reubenites, the Gadites, and that half tribe of Manasseh, all the people settled beyond the Jordan… The breaking up of the kingdom of Ephraim begins with these tribes. For their own convenience, they had chosen their portion on the other side of the Jordan.
Pekah lost his throne to the very man he trusted. One writer notes the irony in his name:
His name, meaning watch, comes from a root meaning "to open" (as the eyes); figuratively, to be observant. But watch as he might, his very friend, the man he trusted, became his killer in God's ordering. It is impossible for the wicked to escape the punishment they deserve. It comes from the hand of Him who has said, "Vengeance is Mine; I will repay."
- Did not depart — the charge. The verdict on Pekah is not that he invented a new evil, but that he refused to leave an old one. Continuing in inherited sin is itself the guilt.
- Did not depart — the root. He clung to Jeroboam's invented religion: golden calves, a new priesthood, and worship devised out of his own heart. Its aim was to keep people away from Jerusalem.
- Did not depart — the reach. A sin grows far worse when it trips up others. The consequences count against those who lead the weak into their own disobedience.
- Did not depart — the ruin. In Pekah's own reign Assyria starts to break up the kingdom. The first tribes taken are the ones who had chosen land beyond the Jordan for their own convenience.
- Did not depart — the last time. This is the last time the refrain appears. After Pekah, God brings the kingdom of Israel to an end, and Pekah dies at the hand of the friend he trusted.
In the days of Pekah king of Israel, Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria came and took Ijon, and Abel-Beth-Maachah, and Janoah, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and carried them captive to Assyria.
In Pekah's reign Assyria broke into the northern kingdom and carried whole regions away. The list of captured towns raises two questions: why did judgment begin there, and what did God later do with the emptied land?
The places named map out the loss. One survey of the captivities works through the geography:
In 2 Kings 15:29 there is another reference to Israel. Tiglath-pileser took Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh and Hazor, which are all in the north on the west of the Jordan. But then comes Gilead, which is on the east, and this may be meant to include the two and a half tribes. Then Galilee with all the land of Naphtali follows, again in the north on the west. So this may be a summary of everything this king carried away captive to Assyria.
Assyria had its own reasons for striking now. One writer weighs them against what Scripture tells us:
It seems Pekah had not followed this rule of submission to Assyria, as Menahem had. That would explain the political reasons for carrying these tribes away. The Word does not give us those political reasons, but Chronicles points to the divine reason in a word: "And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tiglath-pileser … and he carried them away."
Assyria's attack also answered something Pekah had done first:
This happened after Pekah's unprovoked and cowardly attack on Jerusalem, together with Rezin king of Damascus. The king of Assyria invaded and devastated his land. That was his just reward for his "fierce anger" and "evil counsel" against the house of David, which he tried to overthrow by conspiracy and revolution.
Gilead lay east of the Jordan. That was the side the two and a half tribes had chosen for themselves, and it is where the losses start:
The dismemberment of the kingdom of Ephraim begins with the tribes which, for their own convenience, had chosen their portion on the other side of the Jordan.
The same writer turns that old choice into a warning for believers now:
It is always so. Some Christians never step firmly, and without a backward glance, onto the ground where the death of Christ stands like the Jordan — a barrier between them and the world that cannot be crossed. Those Christians are the first to face the attacks of the enemy. They become the poor captives of the world, which, despite their real faith, they have not been willing to break with completely.
This was not the final captivity, only the first bite:
The cities of the north, and some of those on the other side of Jordan, are the first to be led captive by the king of Assyria.
Another writer sums up what this first loss meant:
This marks the beginning of the end.
Emptying Naphtali had a long consequence:
About B.C. 740 Tiglath-pileser carried away captive all the inhabitants of Naphtali. No doubt foreigners then settled the district. When the captivity of Israel was complete, they would be able to spread southward. So we get the term 'Galilee of the Gentiles,' or nations, which does not appear until Isaiah 9:1. Matthew 4:15 quotes the prophecy.
That despised corner is where God chose to shine:
Let the hand of oppression press on them harder than ever. There would still be this difference — and our Lord's first coming among them proved it! — that a great light would spring up among the darkest and most despised in the land. It was in Galilee, not Jerusalem, that the grace of Jesus shone.
- Choice. The first land taken was the land chosen for convenience — Gilead, east of the Jordan.
- Cause. Pekah's attack on Jerusalem came back on him. Chronicles names God as the One who stirred Assyria up.
- Creep. Judgment came by stages: the border towns first, then the whole captivity of Israel.
- Caution. Christians who keep one foot outside the death of Christ are the first the enemy attacks, and the first the world takes captive.
- Comfort. The stripped and overrun region became "Galilee of the Gentiles" — and there, not in Jerusalem, the grace of Jesus shone.
And Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remaliah, and smote him and slew him; and he reigned in his stead, in the twentieth year of Jotham the son of Uzziah.
For the last time, the throne of the northern kingdom changes hands by murder. The verse dates it by "the twentieth year of Jotham," a note that has long puzzled readers. It also introduces the last man ever to rule the northern kingdom.
One writer weighs Pekah's death against the blood he had already spilled:
He killed in his "fierce anger" one hundred thousand Jews in one day (2 Chronicles 28:6); and God repaid him in kind. He had shed man's blood by treachery, so by treachery a man shed his blood too.
The killer was no stranger. The same writer also looks at what Pekah's name meant:
Josephus says Hoshea was "a friend" of Pekah's. In his death the prophecy of Isaiah (Isaiah 7:16) was fulfilled. His name, meaning watch, comes from a root meaning "to open" (as the eyes); figuratively, to be observant. But watch as he might, his very friend in whom he trusted became, in God's ordering, his slayer. It is impossible for the wicked to escape the punishment they deserve from the hand of Him who has said, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay."
Isaiah had spoken to Ahaz, king of Judah, when two kings threatened him: Pekah of Israel and Rezin of Syria. The sign God gave was a child:
The prophetic announcement that such a child would be born was present evidence to faith. Whatever schemes men might make, the remnant could count on God... "For before the boy knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land whose two kings you dread will be deserted" ... And before this child could have grown up, Hoshea had killed Pekah, and the king of Assyria had taken Damascus and killed Rezin.
Scripture dates Hoshea's reign twice: here by Jotham's twentieth year, and later by the twelfth year of Ahaz. One writer works at the numbers and then stops:
The margin has explained the gap as a time with no king at all. That is substantially right, because Scripture says Hoshea reigned nine years. Yet he begins to reign in the twelfth year of Ahaz, while Pekah was killed in the third year of Ahaz. That is because Ahaz began in the seventeenth year of Pekah, and Pekah reigned twenty years... What Hoshea's position was, this man said to reign in place of the Pekah he killed, I do not know. That is why I say "substantially."
Another writer notes what Scripture leaves out of that gap, and what it does record:
We have no way of knowing why there was this gap with no king, or how the time was spent... But God's word has recorded Hoshea's wickedness like this: "he did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, yet not as the kings of Israel who were before him."
"Reigned in his place" sounds like a victory. It was nothing of the kind:
Hoshea was the nineteenth and final king of the northern kingdom, Israel. Scripture tells us that he reigned in Pekah's place, but gives us two different dates for when his reign began. Apparently he had trouble securing his hold on the fast-sinking kingdom, or perhaps he had to have his right to rule approved by the powerful Assyrians. At any rate, his rule was only that of a vassal to the Assyrian king.
Hoshea's name carries a hint that outlives the kingdom he lost:
Scripture does not reveal what finally became of Hoshea. He may be the king meant in the prophet's poetic words, "Samaria's king shall perish like a twig on the face of the waters" (Hosea 10:7). His name means deliverer, and may have a prophetic meaning. It would be a gracious reminder to the now long-scattered nation of that great "Deliverer" who "will come from Zion" (God's grace) and will "banish ungodliness from Jacob." And then, and so, "all Israel will be saved" (Romans 11:26).
The kingdom was falling apart. One writer says that is exactly when God speaks:
Prophecy always comes at a time of ruin... A time of evil is not necessarily a time of evil for the people of God. It is evil for those who are false; it is evil for those who would take advantage. But a time of evil is a time when God works especially for the blessing of those who may have failed. So let no one use the ruin around them as an excuse.
- Blood. Pekah shed blood on a huge scale, and his own friend shed his — treachery repaid by treachery, under the God who says vengeance belongs to Him.
- Word. The murder fulfilled Isaiah's sign to Ahaz: the two kings he dreaded would be gone before a child could grow up.
- Silence. Two dates point to a gap between Pekah's death and Hoshea's real reign. Commentators call it a time with no king, and admit they know no more.
- Vassal. Hoshea "reigned in his place," but held a sinking kingdom as a servant of Assyria — the last of nineteen kings.
- Deliverer. Hoshea's name means deliverer, yet he delivered no one. The name points past him to the Deliverer who will come from Zion — God's answer in the hour of ruin.
And the rest of the acts of Pekah, and all that he did, behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel.
Pekah's twenty years as king of Israel end with the line used for king after king before him. The rest of what he did sits in a book the Bible does not hold. So what was that book, and why did God leave a king's life to it?
These records were written during the kings' own reigns. They were never part of the Bible. One writer explains why their loss costs the reader nothing:
These books often refer to the chronicles of the kings of Israel, or to those of the kings of Judah. Those chronicles were drawn up during the reigns of all the rulers of that time, whether Jewish or Gentile. They have nothing to do with the Word of God. Whatever it has not pleased the Lord to record or explain is written down there. These chronicles have been lost; perhaps someone will one day find fragments of them. The believer needs none of them; he has God's Word. In God's account he finds everything he needs, and God's own assessment of people, events, and things.
Yet the writer of Kings did draw on such sources, and that does not weaken the result:
Several times the writer refers to the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel (1 Kings 14:19; 2 Kings 15:31)... The author of the books of Kings was able to use these "references" under the guidance of the Holy Spirit while writing his God-inspired work.
God's record of Pekah keeps the same sad verdict He gave king after king. With Pekah it is heard for the last time:
How painful it is to hear this testimony again and again, like a sad refrain! But this is the last time. Under Hoshea, the man who killed Pekah and took his place, God put an end to "the kingdom of the house of Israel" (Hosea 1:4).
Pekah's reign is remembered for what Israel lost. The tribes east of the Jordan went first:
Tiglath-Pileser of Assyria comes up against him. He carries off as captives the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh — all the people settled beyond the Jordan... The breaking up of the northern kingdom of Ephraim begins with the tribes that had chosen their share of land on the other side of the Jordan, because it suited them.
Rossier reads their choice of ground as a warning to anyone who wants both worlds at once:
Some Christians never step firmly, and without a backward glance, onto the ground where the death of Christ stands between them and the world like the Jordan — a barrier no one can cross. Those Christians are the first to meet the enemy's attacks. They become the sad captives of the world, because, real as their faith is, they have not agreed to break with it completely.
Hoshea killed Pekah and took his throne. Pekah's own name carries the irony:
Josephus says Hoshea was "a friend" of Pekah's... His name means watch. It comes from a root meaning "to open" (as the eyes are opened), and so it pictures being observant. But watch as he might, the very friend he trusted became his killer, and God ordered it so. That is how impossible it is for the wicked to escape the punishment they deserve from the hand of Him who has said, "Vengeance is Mine; I will repay."
Another writer notes where Pekah spent his strength — not on Assyria, but on Judah:
Though Pekah was unable to resist Assyria, he did have the more dubious distinction of killing 123,000 men of Judah in one day! How often it seems we do more damage to our own brothers and sisters than we do to the power of our enemies!
One writer meets this same closing line earlier in the history. He looks past the lost archive to books that still stand:
Yes, and they, along with the wicked acts recorded here, are written in God's books above. Those books are not just "the chronicles of the kings of Israel." They hold the deeds and doings of every person's life, good or evil. Solemn facts for us all!
- Two books. The kings' chronicles held the acts; God's Word holds His assessment — and only one of the two survived.
- Two verdicts. Men's records keep a king's acts; God's record keeps His judgment of the man — and over Pekah that sad refrain sounds for the last time.
- Two losses. The tribes who chose land east of the Jordan to suit themselves lost that land and their freedom first. Where you stand still decides who falls first.
- Two names. Pekah's name means watch, yet Hoshea, the friend he trusted, killed him. No watching outruns the God who repays.
- One reckoning. The book men kept is gone; the books above are not, and they hold every life's deeds, good or evil.
In the second year of Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, Jotham the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, began to reign.
Pekah had murdered his way to Israel's throne, and the Bible dates Jotham's reign in Judah from Pekah's second year. Jotham came to power as an upright son of a father God had judged.
A Bible dictionary records what kind of man this Pekah was:
Son of Remaliah and captain to Pekahiah, king of Israel, whom he murdered, and then seized the throne: he reigned 20 years. He invaded Judah, and killed 120,000 in one day, and carried away 200,000 women, sons and daughters.
Why date a king of Judah by a king of Israel? One writer explains the plan of these two books:
The two Books of Kings retrace the history of the kings of Israel. They bring in the kings of Judah only as landmarks in the account, or to show how the two royal lines stood in relation to each other.
God's judgment had already fallen on his father Uzziah, and Jotham was running the kingdom in his place. One writer draws two conclusions from this — one about timing, one about the home Jotham came from:
"Jotham was twenty-five years old when he began to reign, and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem." Jotham was regent over the kingdom after the judgment of God had fallen upon his father. "And Jotham his son was over the king's household, governing the people of the land." This shows that Uzziah committed his irreverent trespass in the very last part of his long reign. Jotham was only a young man of twenty-five when his father died... His mother was Jerushah, whose name means "possessed," and she was the daughter of Zadok, whose name means "just." This suggests that she truly belonged to the Lord, and was just before Him. Like every true mother, she would have had great influence in shaping her son's character.
Jotham did what was right, yet he stayed outside the temple. One writer finds two very different fears behind that:
The divine judgment on his father clearly moved King Jotham deeply, for "he did not enter the temple of the LORD." David was "afraid of the LORD" after Uzzah died for touching the ark, and Jotham was plainly the same. Reverential fear made king Jotham do what was right in the eyes of the LORD. But slavish fear kept him from God's presence.
Jotham was a builder, and one writer finds the clue to his whole reign in a single gate:
The "upper gate" led from the king's house to the temple, and Jotham's building it (rebuilding, or repairing) is very significant. He wanted free access from his own house to that of the Lord. He wanted to strengthen the link between the two houses. To use a military picture, he kept his supply line open to the source of his strength and wisdom. This is one of the secrets of his prosperity and power.
Jotham walked uprightly. His people did not, and that did not cancel the blessing on his reign:
Jotham, the son of Uzziah, walks uprightly. He avoids his father's fault. But the people are still corrupt. Even so, Jotham's faithfulness brings him blessing and prosperity. For it is always the state of the king which is the object of God's judgment. The people as such had failed long before.
He left one thing undone. Another writer names it, alongside all that made his reign strong:
Jotham became mighty "because he ordered his ways before the LORD his God." With so much to commend his reign, it is sad to read, "Nevertheless, the high places were not removed." How good it would have been if Jotham had shown the same zeal for removing what offended his God that he showed in his wars and in building his cities, castles and towers.
One writer measures Jotham against every other king in the line, then sets a careful limit on what that record proves:
Jotham is the only one of all the Hebrew kings, from Saul onward, against whom God has nothing to record. His character matches his name, Jehovah-perfect. "The whole world," we know, is "held accountable to God." "All have sinned," God says. But in his public life, Jotham, like Daniel, was perfect, or blameless... Man saw nothing to condemn: Daniel knew God's eye saw much.
- Dated — Pekah's second year clocks the start of Jotham's reign. Kings follows Israel's line and brings Judah in as a landmark beside it.
- Shaped — He ruled for his father under God's judgment. His mother's name marked her as the Lord's. Both shaped the king he became.
- Restrained — His father's judgment kept Jotham out of the temple. Reverent fear made him do right; slavish fear held him back from God's presence.
- Connected — He built the gate between palace and temple. That open line to God, not his walls, is a secret of his power.
- Unfinished — The high places stayed, and the people stayed corrupt. God's judgment weighed the king's own state, not the nation's.
He was twenty-five years old when he began to reign; and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem; and his mother's name was Jerusha, the daughter of Zadok.
Jotham's reign opens with three plain facts: his age, his years in Jerusalem, and his mother's name. Behind that short summary stands a rare king — Scripture records nothing evil against him — yet his people stayed corrupt.
Jotham came to the throne at twenty-five. He had already been running the kingdom while his father Uzziah lived under God's judgment. One commentator reads his age as a clue to when Uzziah's sin happened:
Jotham ruled the kingdom in his father's place after God's judgment fell on Uzziah. "And Jotham his son was over the king's house, judging the people of the land" (2 Chronicles 26:21). This shows that Uzziah committed his sin against God in the very last part of his long reign. Jotham was only a young man of twenty-five when his father died, so he could not have been judging the people of the land many years before this.
Why was the son governing at all? His father had reached for authority that was not his:
The idea of his dignity, of his great importance as king, led him, the civil power, to take over religious authority. The Lord judges Uzziah by striking him with leprosy. This authority, which he was so proud of and for which he had not given the Lord the honour, passes from him to his son Jotham years before his death.
The verse bothers to record Jerusha, daughter of Zadok. That habit is itself worth noticing:
His mother, Jerusha, daughter of Zadok, was probably of the priestly family. In her we again see the blessed role that the mothers of Judah's kings played. There is nothing like this among the kings of Israel.
One commentator draws meaning from the two names themselves:
His mother's name, Jerusha, means "possessed," and Zadok means "just." This seems to imply that she was really the Lord's, and just before Him. Like every true mother, she would have had considerable influence over her son in forming his character.
His reign was short. The verdict on it is unlike any other king's:
"All his wars" implies that he fought his enemies throughout his sixteen-year reign. He subdued some, like the Ammonites, and drove back the invasions of others (Rezin king of Syria, and Pekah king of Israel). His "ways" too were written. God calls His saints to walk as well as to fight... Jotham is the only one of all the Hebrew kings, from Saul down, against whom God has nothing to record. In this, his character matches his name, which means "the Lord is perfect." "All have sinned," God says. But in his public life Jotham was perfect, or blameless.
He put his energy into war and building, and he left the high places standing:
Like his father, Jotham prospered in battle, and he made his name as a builder of cities and towers. He became mighty "because he prepared his ways before the Lord his God." So much in his reign is worth praising. That makes it sad to read, "The people still acted corruptly" (2 Chronicles 27:2), and "Nevertheless, the high places were not removed. The people still sacrificed and made offerings on the high places" (2 Kings 15:35). If only Jotham had shown the same zeal for removing what offended his God that he showed in his wars and in building his cities, castles and towers.
The crown changed what God required of him:
Before he came to the throne, judgment fell on his father for wrongly forcing his way into the holy place to burn incense, and Jotham governed the land (chapter 26:21). But God's estimate of his character and reign refers to him after his father's death. As the anointed king, God held him more directly responsible — for his own state, and for the state of his people and kingdom. Everywhere in Scripture the higher the position, the greater the responsibility. In the Lord's own words, to whom much is given, of him much is required.
- Home first. The verse names Jerusha, daughter of Zadok. Judah's kings have their mothers recorded; Israel's kings do not.
- Training next. At twenty-five he was no beginner. He had already judged the people while his father lived under God's judgment.
- Record clean. Sixteen short years, and not one charge against him. No other Hebrew king from Saul onward has that record.
- Strength borrowed. He became mighty because he prepared his ways before the Lord his God; that, not his walls, was the source.
- Reach limited. The high places stood and the people stayed corrupt. A faithful king can leave standing what he never had the zeal to attack.
And he did what was right in the sight of Jehovah he did according to all that his father Uzziah had done.
Kings sums up Jotham's reign in one line: he did right, in the pattern of his father Uzziah — the headstrong king who had lifted himself up before the high priest. Commentators weigh both halves of that verdict.
The phrase "according to all that his father Uzziah had done" is praise with a ceiling. One writer weighs what it means that a son copied this particular father:
We may still ask what exactly is meant by Jotham walking in his father's steps. It means, we judge, that it was good as far as it went, but it was not godliness or obedience of the highest kind. Of both Hezekiah and Josiah the record says that David their father was their model. David was the man after God's own heart; Uzziah was not, and to remember this is to see the difference... Believers today fall into the same mistake. They make their parents' walk their standard, or the walk of other Christians they admire — instead of the walk of the only perfect Example.
Chronicles explains where this king's power came from:
The account in Chronicles teaches us that Jotham "became mighty, because he ordered his ways before the LORD his God." Godliness is a source of strength for us too, and of spiritual power. The moment our ways are no longer ordered before God, strength leaves us. That is serious for all of us, and a thousand times more serious for anyone who carries a particular responsibility toward the people of God. But being aware of that strength carries a danger. We saw with Uzziah how that feeling pushed him to lift himself up before the high priest.
Chronicles adds one limit to the same verdict. Commentators differ on whether that limit is credit or loss. One sees a son who kept out of the place where his father had pushed in:
So we read that he did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, "except he did not enter the temple of the LORD." He avoided the folly of his headstrong father. He did not rush in where angels fear to tread.
Another reads the same clause as a gap in his life, and turns it into a question for ordinary believers:
Jotham was not a worshipper, and so he did not meet the mind of the Lord... It is plain, therefore, that the Spirit of God marks it as a failure that Jotham did not enter the temple of the Lord. If so, is there no warning for us through Jotham? Sadly, many who profess to be Christians are not worshippers — and some of them are real Christians.
Jotham left the high places standing, yet he still cared about the temple itself:
Verse 35 tells us that, though Jotham failed to remove the high places from Judah, he did build the upper Gate of the house of the Lord. So despite his lack of faith in getting rid of the high places of worship, he did have serious respect for the house of the Lord, God's only centre of worship. 2 Chronicles 27 tells us also that he did a lot of building on the wall of Ophel — that wall speaks of godly separation.
One writer ties the corruption among the people to the king's own neglect:
As the anointed king he was responsible to know the Lord's mind, and to walk according to it, so that he might lead the people in the way of God's commandments. The higher the position, the greater the influence; and so Jotham's neglect of the temple could not fail to open the door to the corruptions which the Spirit of God has pointed out.
For all these limits, no charge stands against this king. One writer notes how rare that is:
Jotham is the only one of all the Hebrew kings, from Saul down, against whom God has nothing to record. In this his character is in beautiful accord with his name, Jehovah-perfect. The whole world, we know, is "held accountable to God." "All have sinned," God says. But in his public life, Jotham, like Daniel, was perfect, or blameless.
- Pattern — Jotham copied his father Uzziah. That was good as far as it went, but not the highest obedience: Uzziah was not the man after God's own heart.
- Standard — David was the model for Hezekiah and Josiah. Copy a parent or an admired Christian instead of the one perfect Example, and you repeat Jotham's mistake.
- Strength — He grew strong because he ordered his ways before God. When our ways are no longer ordered before God, strength leaves us.
- Restraint — He stayed out of the temple. Commentators differ on this: one sees a son who refused his father's folly, another sees a king who was not a worshipper.
- Reach — He left the high places standing. The higher the position, the greater the influence — and his neglect of the temple opened the door to corruption among the people.
Only, the high places were not removed the people still sacrificed and burned incense on the high places. It was he who built the upper gate of the house of Jehovah.
Jotham's record in Kings is short and mostly good. Then one word turns the verdict: he built a new gate at the temple, but the shrines on the hills still stood.
One writer places Jotham between the idol-worshipping kings and the wholehearted ones. His weakness was the order of his priorities.
Jotham, king of Judah, held a position midway between these two classes. He was not an idolater, and yet the house of the Lord did not hold the place in his thoughts that it deserved. You could say he began his work outside the sanctuary. He went out to the mountains to build before he had gone into the sanctuary to worship. He stood on the battlefield before he had stood at the altar… True, he did much. He built castles and towers. He even went so far as to build the high gate of the temple of the Lord. Yet despite all this there was a "nevertheless" — the high places were not removed, and the people still sacrificed and made offerings on the high places.
God named one place for sacrifice, and that settled the matter.
The Word alone must govern them in everything to do with worship, as indeed in everything else. The Lord would choose His own centre. There His people must come with their burnt offerings and sacrifices… The time soon came, sadly, when Israel chose high places for themselves. Some of these were for idol worship, and some for the worship of the Lord. But all the high places were offensive in His sight, whatever the motives of those who set them up. They were the expression of self-will — of hearts not subject to His commandments. Some of Judah's best kings tolerated high places, not those dedicated to idols, we may be sure, but those where people professed to worship the Lord. This weakness is specially recorded of Jotham (2 Kings 15:35), Asa (2 Chron. 15:17), and Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. 20:33).
Another writer shows why worship in the wrong place was still dangerous.
True, they offered the sacrifices and incense to the Lord. But Scripture said Jerusalem was "the place where people ought to worship." Many godly Israelites probably thought this departure unimportant. It only paved the way for greater and more serious violations of the law. God's people are only safe while they hold closely to the very letter of the word of God. The slightest departures are often the first step toward wide and serious disobedience to God's will as revealed in His Word.
One writer sees a deliberate choice in the gate at the end of the verse.
The "high gate" led from the king's house to the temple, and Jotham's building it (rebuilding, or repairing) is very significant. He wanted free access from his own house to that of the Lord. He would strengthen the link between the two houses. To use a military picture, he kept his line of supply open to the source of his strength and wisdom. This is one of the secrets of his prosperity and power.
One writer links the two halves of Jotham's record.
Could there be a connection between Jotham not being a worshipper and the idol worship of the people? If the Lord had held His rightful place in Jotham's heart, such open disobedience and rebellion would have been an unbearable grief to him.
The same writer applies this to servants today.
There are servants today who work hard and eagerly, caring, or seeming to care, for the Lord's interests… They seek to guard God's people from the enemy's attacks. They are first to draw the sword in defence of the truth they have received. Yet they have never entered into the enjoyment of their highest privileges themselves. They serve outside, but they have not learned what it is to worship in the holiest. It was in this very thing, we judge, that Jotham failed.
Jotham's son Ahaz used the shrines his father had left standing.
"He sacrificed and made offerings on the high places" (not removed in Jotham's day, 2 Kings 15:35), "and on the hills and under every green tree." It seems strange that the best of men often have the worst of sons.
- Left — The high places stayed. A shrine of human choosing is self-will, however sincere the worship offered there.
- Built — The gate Jotham raised linked palace to temple. He kept his own line to God open, and it made him strong.
- Missed — He built outside before he worshipped inside. Service can run ahead of worship and still earn a good name.
- Spread — The king's heart shaped the nation. A heart that held God would have grieved over what the people did.
- Inherited — What one generation tolerates, the next uses. Ahaz burned incense in the very high places his father never pulled down.
And the rest of the acts of Jotham, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
Verse 36 closes Jotham's reign the way Kings closes most reigns. The fuller account, it says, lies somewhere else. Two questions follow: which book it means, and what kind of king left a record this short.
The verse ends by pointing to another book. One writer lists books of this kind and shows how the writer of Kings used them.
In several places we find references to other books. They contain more about the life of the king in question, and the writer may have based his accounts on them. One is the book of the acts of Solomon (1 Kings 11:41). Others, named several times, are the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel (1 Kings 14:19; 2 Kings 15:31) and the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah (1 Kings 14:29; 2 Kings 24:5)... The author of the books of Kings was able to use these "references" under the guidance of the Holy Spirit while writing his godly inspired work.
The fuller record kept two things about this king: his wars and his ways. One commentator takes each word in turn.
"All his wars" implies that he kept fighting enemies through his sixteen years' reign. He subdued some, like the Ammonites. He drove back the invasions of others (Rezin king of Syria, and Pekah king of Israel). His "ways" too were written. God's saints are called to walk, as well as to war. "I have fought the good fight," said one; "I have finished the race," he also adds. This last was his "ways." Ours, like king Jotham's, "are written in the book." May we say then, like another Hebrew king, "I will guard my ways"!
What the record does not contain is itself striking, and writers read it in two ways. One treats the silence as a clean sheet:
Jotham is the only one of all the Hebrew kings, from Saul down, against whom God has nothing to record. In this his character is in beautiful accord with his name, Jehovah-perfect. We know the whole world is "held accountable to God." "All have sinned," God says. But in his public life, Jotham, like Daniel, was perfect, or blameless.
Another writer finds a real failure in him. Jotham let the high places of worship stand.
Even Jotham, who was mostly faithful to God, failed by allowing the high places of worship to continue (ch. 15:34-35).
Among the acts that were written down, the building of the upper gate of the temple is given special weight — and connected to the strength his reign enjoyed.
The "high gate" led from the king's house to the temple (see 2 Chron. 23:20), and Jotham's building it (rebuilding, or repairing) is very significant. He wished free access from his own house to that of the Lord. He would strengthen the link between the two houses. To use a military picture, he kept his line of communication open with the source of his supplies of strength and wisdom. This is one of the secrets of his prosperity and power... That high gate between the palace and the temple was better than a wall right around his kingdom. It is in communion with God that all real prosperity and power is found.
The record lists what Jotham built. It does not say why. One writer stops at that gap and applies it to servants today.
As a builder he excelled, here too following in his father's footsteps. We are not told whether he built to secure the Lord's inheritance, or to promote his own might and glory in his kingdom. There are servants today who work hard and with zeal, caring — or seeming to care — for the Lord's interests. Their motives may be mixed, and still the Lord can use them for the good of His people. They work to guard the people of God from enemy attack. They are the first to draw the sword in defence of the truth they have received. Yet they have never entered into the enjoyment of their own highest privileges. They serve outside, but they have not learned what it is to worship in the holiest place.
- Written elsewhere. The closing question points to other records the writer of Kings drew on — used, one writer says, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
- Written as wars. His sixteen years were years of conflict: Ammon subdued, Syria and Israel pressing in from outside.
- Written as ways. The fuller record keeps not only his battles but his walk. Our ways are written in the book too, one writer presses.
- Written with a gate. The gate he built kept the road open between his house and God's house. That open link was one secret of his strength.
- Written unfinished. Commentators differ on the verdict. One finds nothing on record against him. Another points to the high places he left standing.
In those days Jehovah began to send against Judah Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah.
Two kings march on Judah in this verse, but the Lord Himself is the one who sends them. Jotham's reign was one of the better ones in Judah's history, so why did the trouble start then — and why did it only begin?
One writer gives the reason behind the sending:
Judah, like Israel, was getting worse fast, and the LORD disciplined them with judgments.
The verse names Pekah by his father, Remaliah. His record shows how he got Israel's throne, and what he later did to Judah:
He was the son of Remaliah and captain to Pekahiah, king of Israel. He murdered him, then seized the throne, and reigned 20 years... He invaded Judah, and killed 120,000 in one day, and carried away 200,000 women, sons and daughters... Later Pekah formed an alliance with Rezin, king of Damascus, against Judah. But Ahaz, king of Judah, called Tiglath-pileser to help him, and he killed Rezin and destroyed Damascus.
Israel and Judah were two halves of the same people, so this attack is a family quarrel. One writer traces where such weakness comes from:
When it is not the faith of God's people that is the source of their strength, one enemy destroyed only makes room for another. The Assyrian soon appears on the scene... The Assyrian invades the land. Israel, allied with the king of Syria, turns its last efforts against Judah. A sorrowful picture of the people of God! The alliance between Syria and Israel brings out the king of Judah's unfaithfulness, and entangles him in the snares of the Assyrian.
Jotham himself did what was right. One writer shows what was still missing in his reign:
The notice of Jotham is very brief... In a general way he did right in the sight of the Lord, but it seems he showed no energy. While he did right, the people still acted corruptly... Two things mark his reign: the king was personally righteous but without zeal, while the people, acting corruptly, were getting themselves ready to follow Ahaz in all his abominations.
Another writer connects the people's idolatry to something missing in the king himself:
May there not be a connection between Jotham's not being a worshipper, and the idolatrous practices of the people? For if the LORD had held His rightful place in Jotham's heart, it would have been unbearable grief to him to watch such open disobedience and rebellion.
Two reigns had looked prosperous on the surface. One writer looks underneath them:
If we examine these two reigns, we see prosperity, and in part fidelity. It is said of Uzziah that "he did what was right in the eyes of the LORD," and the same of his son Jotham. God not having yet withdrawn His hand, there were blessings belonging to them; but look at what there was below... He takes account of evil, and that before it shows itself; for He does not withdraw His hand until there is no remedy.
So why did the attack stop short? One writer points to the king himself:
The sin of Judah required the discipline of God, but the godliness of their leader could take away the consequences of that discipline. This happened later under godly Hezekiah when the Assyrian came. It seems also that this may have been the case during the reign of Jotham.
The next chapter shows the same two kings at the walls of Jerusalem, and the difference is the man on the throne:
The judgment prepared for the people under Jotham now overtakes Ahaz because of his unfaithfulness. We are told, "Then Rezin king of Syria and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, came up to wage war on Jerusalem, and they besieged Ahaz but could not conquer him."
- Sender. The armies belong to Rezin and Pekah, but the sending belongs to the Lord — He answered Judah's decline with discipline.
- Began. He takes account of evil before it shows itself, and He does not withdraw His hand until there is no remedy. The invasion starts as a warning, not a verdict.
- Gap. Jotham did right, yet the people still acted corruptly; a righteous king without zeal cannot make a corrupt people right.
- Delay. The godliness of a leader can hold back the consequences of discipline — the threat began in Jotham's days, but the blow did not fall then.
- Arrival. What was prepared under Jotham fell on Ahaz, and even then Jerusalem stood — the same pressure tests whoever holds the throne.