And it came to pass in the third year of Hoshea the son of Elah, king of Israel, that Hezekiah the son of Ahaz, king of Judah, began to reign.
The chapter opens with a date. A new king takes the throne in Judah while the northern kingdom of Israel nears its end under Hoshea. The son of one of Judah's worst kings steps into power.
Hezekiah's name carries a meaning, and his record breaks with the reigns before it.
Hezekiah (strength of Jehovah) was the pious son of a very wicked father. The long list of kings who did evil in God's sight is behind us. It is refreshing now to read that Hezekiah "did what was right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father David did."
The verse names Ahaz as Hezekiah's father. One writer asks whether godliness passes from a father to a son at all.
If piety is not transmitted from father to son, grace can work in the heart and direct the steps of one who had the most wicked father. This was the case with the son of Ahaz. The way in which Hezekiah sought the glory of his God shows remarkable faith and energy.
Another writer weighs the influence of both parents, then sets both aside.
Hezekiah's mother was probably from a priestly or Levite family. No doubt, as we have often noted, the Lord used her in raising her son. His father Ahaz, on the other hand, could only have had a bad influence on him. But whatever these good or bad influences may have been, grace alone explains the characters of Hezekiah and of Josiah. The last kings of Judah prove it: they were ungodly despite their Jewish mothers and their godly father.
Hezekiah's reign begins one of two periods of renewal in Judah, and neither was expected.
We are entering the period of revivals in the true sense. The first is Hezekiah's, which we are about to look at; the second is Josiah's. The outstanding feature of these revivals is that they are entirely the fruit of the grace of God. They are not foreseen, no preliminary work introduces them, no sign of repentance on the part of the people comes before them. They are the direct work of the Spirit of God and break out in a brilliant way in the middle of the ruin of Judah.
Scripture measures earlier kings of Judah against the king just before them. One writer notes that Hezekiah is measured against David instead.
God traces his faithfulness back to the example given by David, a fact all the more remarkable in that it is not stated of his predecessors. Of Jotham it says, "he did what was right in the sight of Jehovah: he did according to all that his father Uzziah had done." Of Uzziah, "according to all that his father Amaziah had done." Of Amaziah, "according to all that Joash his father had done." The Word of God makes the same remarks about Josiah as about Hezekiah. This confirms that these two kings returned to what was there at the beginning. No revival today is a true revival unless it has this character.
One writer asks where a boy like this could have been trained.
The power and goodness of the Lord is clear. Hezekiah was a good king, while his father was the worst who had yet sat on the throne. Where was the youth Hezekiah trained — in his father's palace or in the city? Ahaz had surrounded him with idolatry. He had idols in every separate city, in every grove, on every high hill. He had shut the doors of the LORD's house. Wherever Hezekiah looked, an idol met his eye. And yet in the first year of his reign, the first month, he opened the doors of the house of the LORD.
The verse dates Hezekiah's start by Hoshea's third year. Those numbers raise a question, and one writer works through it.
The history of the fall of Samaria and the Assyrian invasions raises questions of dating. Some come from the record itself, some from comparing it with secular history. The margin has resolved the interval by an interregnum. This is at any rate in substance right, because Hoshea is said to have reigned nine years. Yet he begins to reign in the twelfth year of Ahaz. And Pekah was killed in the third year of Ahaz, since Ahaz began in the seventeenth year of Pekah, and Pekah reigned twenty years.
- Grace begins it. Hezekiah's goodness was not passed down from Ahaz; grace alone explains why a king rose out of that household.
- Grace surprises. These revivals were not foreseen, and no repentance in the people came first — they broke out in the middle of ruin.
- Grace reaches back. Hezekiah is measured against David, not against the king before him: a return to what was there at the beginning.
- Grace outlasts surroundings. Raised where an idol met his eye everywhere he looked, he opened the doors of the LORD's house in his first month.
- Grace is not inherited. The last kings of Judah had a godly father and still turned out ungodly. Upbringing does not explain Hezekiah.
He was twenty-five years old when he began to reign; and he reigned twenty-nine years in Jerusalem; and his mother's name was Abi, daughter of Zechariah.
This verse gives three plain facts about Hezekiah: his age, the length of his reign, and his mother's name. Each one carries weight. His age raises a famous puzzle about his father. The years of his reign date the illness that nearly killed him. His mother's name points to the person who shaped him.
Her name appears in Scripture in two forms:
Abijah. Daughter of Zechariah and mother of Hezekiah, 2 Chronicles 29:1: shortened to ABI in 2 Kings 18:2.
Who her father Zechariah was is not certain, and commentators only offer possibilities. What her son became, however, invites a conclusion about her:
"His mother's name was Abi the daughter of Zechariah." Her father was perhaps one of the two faithful witnesses of Isaiah 8:2. Or she may have been a descendant of the Zechariah who guided Uzziah during the earlier part of his reign; or even of the martyr Zechariah, killed by order of king Joash. Either way, she must have been a true "mother in Israel" to have raised so godly a son, with such a wicked father's example in front of him. Mothers, what a responsibility is yours, and what a privilege too! It is as if God says to you, "Take this child, and nurse it for Me, and I will give you your wages." Abi certainly had her "wages" when she saw her son renew and reform the ruined kingdom of his father David. Often, in truth, the hand that rocks the cradle rules the empire, whether for good or for harm.
A godly upbringing can be traced in Hezekiah, but one writer warns against turning that into a rule, since Judah's history supplies the counter-examples:
Hezekiah's mother was probably from the priestly or Levite family. No doubt, as we have often noticed, the Lord used her in bringing up her son. His father Ahaz, on the other hand, could only have had a bad influence on him. But whatever these good or bad influences may have been, grace alone explains the characters of Hezekiah and of Josiah. The last kings of Judah prove it: they were ungodly despite their Jewish mothers and their godly father.
Hezekiah came to the throne at twenty-five, straight from the reign of one of Judah's worst kings, and he broke the pattern:
His father set an unusually bad example, yet Hezekiah did not follow it. Every person should realise that he does not have to walk in his father's ungodly footsteps. Hezekiah's grandfather Uzziah had been a faithful man by comparison. But we are not told that Hezekiah did according to all that Uzziah had done — he did according to all that his father David had done. So David was his example, the first king of God's choice in Israel.
The age creates one of the best-known arithmetic problems in Scripture, because Ahaz was twenty when he began to reign and reigned sixteen years:
This seems to teach that Ahaz was only eleven years old when his son Hezekiah was born, which is highly unlikely, if not impossible… Fausset says "twenty" in 2 Kings 16:2 is "a copyist's error" for "twenty-five"… But one writer aptly replies: "We may observe that it is never advisable to find fault with the text except where there is no other tolerable solution, which is not the case here."
Rather than correcting the text, two explanations are offered that leave the numbers standing:
First, it is quite possible that a break of some years occurred in king Ahaz's reign… Second, Scripture does not say that Hezekiah began to reign immediately after his father's death. True, the usual wording is used — "Ahaz slept with his fathers … and Hezekiah his son reigned in his place"… So a number of years, Scripture allows us to believe, may have passed between the death of Ahaz (because of the unsettled state of his kingdom) and Hezekiah's accession. This would entirely remove any difficulty about Ahaz's young age at the birth of his firstborn.
The length of his reign fixes the date of the illness that nearly killed him:
"In those days Hezekiah became sick and was at the point of death." "Those days" must refer to the time of the Assyrian invasion, or just after Sennacherib came up. That was the fourteenth year of Hezekiah's reign, since the prophet promised him fifteen more years of life. As he reigned twenty-nine years, there is no difficulty at all in fixing the exact time of his sickness. Men make difficulties for themselves, where there really are none, by listening to uncertain monument records instead of holding to the simple and sure statements of Holy Scripture.
- Named — she is Abi here and Abijah in Chronicles, the daughter of Zechariah.
- Nurtured — she raised a godly son under a wicked father. The hand that rocks the cradle rules the empire.
- Grace — upbringing alone will not explain him. Later kings had godly mothers and still turned out badly. Grace alone accounts for Hezekiah.
- Free — his pattern was David, not Ahaz or even Uzziah. No one has to walk in a father's ungodly footsteps.
- Numbered — both numbers stand as written. The age problem has fair answers without changing the text, and the twenty-nine years date his illness to his fourteenth year.
And he did what was right in the sight of Jehovah, according to all that David his father had done.
Hezekiah took the throne of Judah after his father Ahaz, one of the worst kings the nation had known. Yet the record measures him by David — not by his father, not by his grandfather. That raises two questions: where does such a life come from, and who should we measure ourselves by?
Hezekiah grew up surrounded by his father's idolatry. So his upbringing cannot explain his faithfulness. Commentators point instead to grace at work in him.
If piety is not passed from father to son, grace can work in the heart and direct the steps of a man who had the most wicked father. This was the case with the son of Ahaz. The way Hezekiah sought the glory of his God shows remarkable faith and energy.
Another commentator looks at the mother who raised him, and at what God gives mothers to do.
She must have been a true "mother in Israel" to have raised so godly a son, with such a wicked father's example in front of him. Mothers, what a responsibility is yours! And what a privilege too, to have God say to you, as it were: "Take this child, and nurse it for Me, and I will give you your wages."
The phrase "according to all that David his father had done" breaks a pattern. The record usually measured a king by whoever came just before him.
God traces his faithfulness back to the example given by David, a fact all the more remarkable because it is not said of his predecessors. Jotham "did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, according to all that his father Uzziah had done." Uzziah did "according to all that his father Amaziah had done." Amaziah did "according to all that Joash his father had done." The Word of God says the same of Josiah as of Hezekiah. That confirms these two kings returned to what was there at the beginning. You cannot call a revival today a true revival if it does not have this character.
One writer points out whom Hezekiah did not copy, and whom we should.
Hezekiah's grandfather Uzziah had been a fairly faithful man. But we are not told that Hezekiah did according to all that Uzziah had done. We are told he did according to all that his father David had done. So David was his example, the first king of God's choice in Israel. Let us remember too that we ought to follow the example of the Lord Jesus, and not be satisfied with any lesser example.
Doing right "according to David" showed where better kings had stopped short. They left the high places standing.
Uzziah and Jotham had done what was right according to all their fathers had done, but not according to what David had done, for they tolerated the high places. It was different with Hezekiah, for "He removed the high places and broke the pillars and cut down the Asherah. And he broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made" (verse 4). How delightful it must have been for the Lord to see such zeal for Him in the faithful Hezekiah.
Hezekiah's right-doing had a place and a date.
His father had shut the doors of the house of the LORD. The first thing Hezekiah did was to open the doors and repair them. And this was in the first year of his reign, in the first month. There was no delay; he began at once. He fully realised one thing: to have the LORD's presence and blessing, the work must begin at the sanctuary.
In Hezekiah, tearing down idols and building up worship went together. One writer makes that balance the test of real spiritual power.
To resist evil and to bring in good shows the possession of divine power; it is not one-sided. Where there is only conviction or persuasion, and not divine power, there will always be a marked imperfection. "The legs of the lame are not equal." There may be a great effort to resist the enemy, without an equal effort to recover the truth… Hezekiah is not of this order; he is not lame; he resists evil and he seeks and supports the truth of God in its true force and excellence.
The writer quotes a proverb in an older translation here; the ESV reads, "a lame man's legs, which hang useless."
- Source. Hezekiah did not inherit his goodness from Ahaz. Grace can work in the heart of a man with the worst possible father.
- Standard. God measures him by David, not by the king before him. That return to the beginning is the mark of a true revival.
- Start. He began at the sanctuary. He opened and repaired its doors in the first month of his first year, with no delay.
- Scope. He went further than better kings had gone, removing the high places they had tolerated.
- Shape. Real obedience is not lame on one leg: it resists evil and recovers the truth of God together.
He removed the high places, and broke the columns, and cut down the Asherahs, and broke in pieces the serpent of brass that Moses had made; for to those days the children of Israel burned incense to it and he called it Nehushtan.
Hezekiah begins his reign by destroying every object his people had learned to bow to. The last one on the list is the bronze serpent Moses himself had made. How can a thing God once used become a thing God's servant must break in pieces?
Kings before Hezekiah had left the high places standing. He pulled them down, and that meant disagreeing with the most celebrated king in Israel's past.
How good to see that he removed the high places (v.4). Other kings before him had not done this. Solomon was the one who brought in worship at the high places. But by judging those high places, Hezekiah showed openly that he disagreed with Solomon. Solomon's reign was glorious, yet that gives no one the right to copy his acts of disobedience to God.
His measure was not his father or his grandfather but David, and that choice is what marks a genuine recovery.
"He did what was right in the sight of Jehovah, according to all that David his father had done" (v. 3). God traces his faithfulness back to the example given by David, a fact all the more remarkable in that it is not stated of his predecessors… The Word of God makes the same remarks about Josiah as about Hezekiah (2 Kings 22:2), thus confirming the fact that these two kings returned to that which was at the beginning. One cannot today call a revival a true revival which does not have this character.
Israel kept the serpent for centuries. The feeling behind that was warm and understandable, which is exactly what made it dangerous.
Is it not striking that the Word never mentions the bronze serpent again after Moses lifted it up in the wilderness? Yet Israel had kept it for more than seven hundred years, no doubt in memory of the wonderful deliverance that came to the people through it. Israel had been healed through it. Was it not natural for them to want to keep it as a visible witness to that healing? It was a respectable thing, an old picture of deliverance from sin and its consequences by the sacrifice of Christ. But in the hands of the enemy of our souls it had become a means of idolatry for the people, who burned incense to it. It took faithful Hezekiah to pick out this hidden idolatry and destroy it, dressed up as it was in the clothes of a divine institution. The serpent was a symbol. It had no miraculous power in itself.
Why was keeping it wrong? The answer lies in what God gave it for.
What happened with the bronze serpent shows us how the heart leans toward idolatry… It also teaches us how short the step is — with hearts like ours — from remembering a blessing to making an idol of the symbol of it. Faith gets rid of these things. God gave the bronze serpent to cure, not to be a keepsake to remember the cure by. Man kept it out of a very natural feeling. But this is not of God, and it soon became the instrument of Satan.
Why had no earlier reformer dealt with the serpent?
The kings who reformed before him probably lacked one of two things. Either they could not see the idolatry in the superstitious reverence people gave it, or they had no holy courage to destroy it against popular opposition. God had used it in the wilderness as a picture of Christ "made sin" for our salvation. But the nation had dragged it down, and themselves with it, by treating it with a half-idolatrous spirit… To his honour, Hezekiah did not hesitate to remove this cause of offence. He called it what it really was — a mere piece of brass.
The same danger did not die with Israel.
Like Nehushtan, the cross of Christ has given rise to superstitious practices. To own a piece of the "true cross," to kiss it, or to revere a piece of bronze or ivory showing the Lord dying on the cross — these are common practices in much of the Christian world. Man is attached to the symbol and sees some special value or power in it. He makes the symbol his God.
So how can you tell when a sacred thing has turned? Faith has a test.
Faith counts an ordinance valuable only while it brings God, in living power, to the soul — that is, while faith can enjoy Christ in it, as He Himself appointed. Beyond that it is worth nothing at all. If it comes between the heart and His precious work and His glorious Person, even a little, it stops being an ordinance of God and becomes an instrument of the devil. Superstition judges the other way: the ordinance is everything, and God is shut out.
- Given — God gave the serpent to cure, not to be a keepsake after the cure. The memorial was man's idea, not His.
- Kept — Israel held on to it for over seven hundred years, out of natural and even respectable gratitude.
- Degraded — a symbol with no power of its own became an object of incense. Idolatry dressed as a divine institution is harder to spot than the open kind.
- Broken — earlier kings lacked the discernment or the courage. Hezekiah called it Nehushtan, a piece of brass, and smashed it anyway.
- Tested — a sacred thing is worth keeping only while it brings Christ to the soul. The moment it stands between the heart and Him, faith lets it go.
He trusted in Jehovah the God of Israel; so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor [among any] that were before him.
Judah was near collapse when Hezekiah became king. Assyria had already swallowed the northern kingdom. Of this king one word says everything — he trusted — and that word lifts him above every other king of Judah.
Read the verdict against its moment. Judah was falling apart from the inside as much as from the outside.
Judah at this time was extremely low — never so low. They had been weakened by the kingdom of Israel... For a nation never falls to outside power until it has been undermined from within. And so it was with Judah. But God, of His grace, saw fit in that dark and desolate day, to raise up a blessed man.
Why should one word rank a king so high?
Nothing describes Hezekiah's spiritual character so truly or so strongly as trust in God. And trust in God is the root of all that is blessed, I may say, in a believing man. There may be other qualities... but nothing can make up for a lack of trust. Trust is what magnifies God, and what keeps us low before God. It is the great expression of dependence, and for a man nothing is more lovely than depending on God.
Real trust shows itself in what it turns down.
Here is the particular and very striking mark of Hezekiah, and of the revival that came with his reign. It is trust in God. This trust made him reject all human help. He does not, like other kings, seek Egypt's help to escape Assyria (Isa. 30:1-5; 31:1-3), or lean, like his father, on Assyria against enemies from outside. Still, even there his faith shows its weaknesses, as we shall see.
Which comes first — the trusting or the obeying?
It is not the commandments that produce trust, but it is trust that enables the man to keep the commandments. The only people who ever kept the law in Israel were those who had faith in God, who leaned on Him.
That rules out one common claim:
Let us beware of so-called trust in God which links itself to disobedience of His Word. If I trust in Him, I will cleave to Him; if I cleave to Him, I will keep His Word... One may find, no doubt, trust in Him mixed with much ignorance, but ignorance is not disobedience.
A later king, Josiah, receives a similar verdict, and commentators handle the overlap in different ways. One resolves it by noting that each is measured by his own distinguishing mark:
What set Josiah apart was his care to keep the law of Moses, the book that had been found in the temple. What marked Hezekiah was trust in the LORD. In these two marks, each is unequalled in his walk.
Another writer ranks them, and puts Hezekiah's trust on different ground:
Clearly Hezekiah is on higher ground than Josiah... He is noted for his trust in the Lord (2 Kings 18:5), that is, he took the ground of grace. Josiah took instead the ground of law. Hezekiah fell sick and nearly died, and he was tested, so that he might know all that was in his heart. Just the way of God with His saints who live by faith.
Trust brought Hezekiah fame, and fame carried its own danger.
Popularity, a great name like the names of the great men of the earth, is the result of faith — the faith of a man who dealt with God in the sense of his own nothingness... Hezekiah "was magnified in the sight of all nations from then on"; yes — but sadly, he was magnified also in his own sight. In all our times of prosperity let us say, "O Lord, hold me up!"
- Grace first. Judah was falling apart from the inside. In that dark day God raised up this man.
- Trust is the root. Other qualities may run higher in other men. Nothing makes up for a lack of trust. It magnifies God and keeps a man low before Him.
- Trust refuses. It showed itself in what Hezekiah would not lean on — not Egypt, not Assyria.
- Trust obeys. Commandments never produce trust. Trust produces obedience. A trust that lives with disobedience to His Word is not the real thing.
- Trust gets tested. The same faith that brought him fame left him open to being magnified in his own eyes; the cry for prosperity is "O Lord, hold me up."
And he clave to Jehovah, and did not turn aside from following him, but kept his commandments, which Jehovah commanded Moses.
Three short statements sum up Hezekiah's reign: he held fast, he did not turn away, and he kept what God had given through Moses. They explain the verdict in the line before — that no king of Judah was like him — and they show what lay underneath such a life.
The order matters. Commentators point out that law-keeping is not where this starts. It grows out of the trust named in the verse before.
This is a very important thing to observe. It is not the commandments that produce trust; it is trust that enables a man to keep the commandments. The only people who ever did the law in Israel were those who had faith in God, who leaned on Him. It was not looking at the law, or merely deferring to it. Of course they did that... but what produces obedience is always trust.
That trust showed in how he dealt with the great powers around him:
This trust caused him to reject all human aid. He does not, like other kings, seek Egypt's help to escape Assyria. He does not lean on the Assyrian against other enemies from outside, as his father did.
The verb behind "held fast" is not a mild one. It is used for the deepest human attachment and was pressed on Israel again and again.
To cleave is the word God used at the very beginning of human history. It expresses the undivided and unchanging affection a man should keep for the wife of his choice (Gen. 2:24). This love is so close and so unifying that by cleaving "the two shall become one flesh" (Eph. 5:31). Cleaving also expresses the loving obedience and worshipping service which should mark the people of God. Six times Moses and Joshua urged the children of Israel to cleave to the LORD their God.
The verse links three things in one breath. Writers warn against holding the first without the last.
This trust is inseparable from obedience... Let us beware of so-called trust in God which links itself to disobedience of His Word. If I trust in Him, I will cleave to Him; if I cleave to Him, I will keep His Word, and I keep it just as He entrusted it to me at the beginning... One may find, no doubt, trust in Him mixed with much ignorance, but ignorance is not disobedience. The result of Hezekiah's faith is soon apparent: "the LORD was with him; wherever he went out, he prospered" (v. 7). What a happy circle of blessings!
Hezekiah did not keep the customs of his own day. He kept what God had given through Moses, long before. Commentators treat that reach back as the mark of real revival.
The Word of God makes the same remarks about Josiah as about Hezekiah, confirming that these two kings returned to what was at the beginning. One cannot today call a revival a true revival which does not have this character. It was the same in the days of Ezra and of Nehemiah. In the very scene of ruin, the people returned to the divine foundations and to the Word of God... In no way did he compromise with the corruption that had entered Judah.
Scripture later says much the same of Josiah. The two men were not praised for the same thing.
What set Josiah apart was his care to keep the law of Moses, the book found in the temple. What marked Hezekiah was trust in the LORD. In these two things they are both unequalled in their walk.
Other writers press the difference further:
Clearly Hezekiah is on higher ground than Josiah, and Scripture says of him that none before or after were like him. What marks him is his trust in the Lord — that is, he took the ground of grace. Josiah took the ground of law instead. Hezekiah fell sick and came near death, and God tested him, so that he might know all that was in his heart. This is just the way of God with His saints who live by faith.
- Trust first. Commands never produce trust; trust produces the keeping of commands. Hezekiah obeyed because he leaned on God.
- Trust refuses props. Because he leaned on God, he would not buy safety from Egypt or Assyria the way his father had.
- Trust clings. "Held fast" speaks of an undivided, unchanging attachment — the word for marriage, and the call Moses and Joshua pressed on Israel six times.
- Clinging obeys. Trust, cleaving and obedience come as one package. A confidence in God that lives happily with disobedience to His Word is not the real thing. Ignorance, though, is not disobedience.
- Obedience goes back to the beginning. He kept what God said through Moses, not the religion of his own day. Commentators call that return to the original foundations the test of any real revival.
And Jehovah was with him; he prospered whithersoever he went forth. And he rebelled against the king of Assyria, and served him not.
Hezekiah's father Ahaz had bought protection from Assyria, the great power of the day. This verse shows what came of Hezekiah holding fast to God instead: God's presence, success, and freedom from Assyria.
The verse reports a result, not a coincidence. One writer ties it back to the trust and obedience of the verses before, and warns against separating the two.
This trust is inseparable from obedience: "He held fast to the LORD and did not depart from following Him, but kept the commandments that the LORD commanded Moses" (v. 6). Let us beware of so-called trust in God which links itself to disobedience of His Word. If I trust in Him, I will hold fast to Him; if I hold fast to Him, I will keep His Word... The result of Hezekiah's faith is soon clear: "The LORD was with him; wherever he went out, he prospered." What a happy circle of blessings! God's favour and spiritual prosperity accompany faithfulness.
How could a small kingdom defy an empire? The order of the verse answers: God's presence comes first, and the courage comes from Him.
Having sought the Lord in this way, it is not surprising that "the LORD was with him; wherever he went out, he prospered." Against this background "he rebelled against the king of Assyria and would not serve him." A king who trusted the Lord, and whom the Lord strengthened, could easily defy the mighty king of Assyria, even though he was weak in himself. Like his father David, he did not rely on his own strength when defying the mighty. He relied on the strength of the Almighty.
The subjection Hezekiah threw off came from his father's bargain, not from God. That history decides how the word "rebelled" should be read.
Hezekiah, it seems to us, acted according to God in not recognising this authority. It was not the same later on for Judah, when it had to do with Babylon... God had transferred the sovereignty to Nebuchadnezzar, and He was using that yoke as a judgment on Judah. So to revolt against Nebuchadnezzar was to revolt against God. In Hezekiah's case, he was refusing to grant the Assyrian an authority that God had not given him over Judah at that time. Hezekiah was God's servant and could not be the servant of the king of Assyria.
Another writer reads the move the same way — as a refusal to acknowledge something his father had wrongly agreed to.
The evil alliance with the king of Assyria, which his father had made, the God-fearing king refused to own. "He rebelled against the king of Assyria and would not serve him."
Not every writer treats the rebellion as pure faith. Commentators differ, and what followed explains why.
He had been drawn into this position of subjection by his ungodly father. I do not pretend to say that Hezekiah was quite right. There was a holy feeling behind it. But did he clearly see the chastening that God had put on Judah? That is another question. In any case, his rebellion against the king of Assyria brought him into serious trouble. God did show Himself wonderfully on his behalf, but not without great humiliation.
A third writer suggests the good king's zeal ran ahead of his faith.
It would seem that this effort to throw off the yoke of Assyria was too early, or perhaps the good king went beyond his faith. When Sennacherib invaded his kingdom, we are pained to read that he took all the fortified cities. His desire was right, but in his zeal for the prosperity and glory of his kingdom, he may have gone ahead of God's time. Because of their former sins, Israel had become subject to the Assyrian, whom God had called "the rod of His anger."
God's presence let Hezekiah do what the northern kingdom, carried away by Assyria in his own lifetime, could not do.
He held fast to the Lord, putting His interests first, keeping His commandments as declared in the law of Moses (v. 6). Therefore of course the Lord was with him, making him prosper in every undertaking. Also by the power of God he was able to do what the king of Israel could not do. He rebelled against the king of Assyria rather than serving him (v. 7).
Success brings its own danger, and Hezekiah met it.
Popularity, a great name like the name of the great men on the earth, is the result of the faith that, in the sense of his own nothingness, had to do with God... Hezekiah "was magnified in the sight of all nations from that time on"; yes — but, sadly, he was magnified also in his own sight. In all times of our prosperity let us say, "O Lord, hold me up!"
- Cause — Holding fast to God and keeping His Word came first; God's presence and blessing followed. Trust and obedience belong together.
- Gift — God's presence, not Hezekiah's resources, is the explanation. Weak in himself, he could face the strongest empire because he leaned on the Almighty.
- Reach — He prospered in every undertaking. God's presence let him do what the king of Israel could not.
- Freedom — The yoke he refused was his father's bargain, not God's appointment. Commentators differ on whether the timing was faith or zeal running ahead.
- Risk — The same prospering that came from a sense of his own nothingness later made him great in his own eyes. Prosperity needs the prayer, "O Lord, hold me up."
He smote the Philistines unto Gazah and its borders, from the watchmen's tower to the fortified city.
Hezekiah first cleared out what was wrong inside Judah, and only then pushed outward — driving Judah's army down the coast to Gaza, from the lone watchtower to the walled city. So how did so small a kingdom reach that far, and why was Philistia the target?
Just before this verse, Hezekiah stops serving Assyria. One writer ties the two together. He would not recognize Assyria's authority over him, and the victory over Philistia followed.
As we see it, Hezekiah acted according to God by not recognizing this authority... Hezekiah was God's servant and could not be the servant of the king of Assyria. And so victory over the Philistines (v. 8) comes to him as a result of his trust in God, which had led him to shake off this yoke.
Trust explains the man, not just this one victory:
Nothing describes Hezekiah's spiritual character more exactly or more powerfully than trust in God. And trust in God is the root of all that is blessed, I may say, in a believing man. There may be other qualities... but nothing can make up for lack of trust, for trust is the very thing that magnifies God and keeps us lowly before God.
Hezekiah's fighting comes second in the record, not first:
So, having set in order the spiritual matters of the kingdom, Hezekiah turned to the more material things in his dominion.
Philistia was not a distant foreign power. It sat inside the land itself, which made it a different threat from Egypt or Assyria.
They appear to me to represent the power of the enemy acting within the circle of God's people. They were in the territory of the Israelites — within the land... They were not, like the Egyptians or Assyrians, enemies from without. They were constantly hostile to Israel... and all the more dangerous because they were always close at hand, claiming the country as their own.
Gaza had changed hands again and again. Taking it was recovery, not fresh conquest:
The Anakim dwelt there, but Judah was able to take Gaza and the coasts of it (Joshua 11:22; Judges 1:18). By Samson's time, though, the Philistines held it, and they made him a prisoner there (Judges 16:21). Solomon later held it, 1 Kings 4:24... but Hezekiah had to take it again, 2 Kings 18:8.
Philistia celebrated when Ahaz died, thinking Judah's threat was over. Isaiah had warned them otherwise, and one writer sees this campaign as the answer.
This fulfilled what the prophet Isaiah had spoken in the year that King Ahaz died: "Rejoice not, O Philistia, all of you, that the rod that struck you [Uzziah] is broken [by the death of Ahaz]; for from the serpent's root [as they regarded him] will come forth an adder [Hezekiah], and its fruit will be a flying fiery serpent."
(Knapp cites Isaiah 14:29 from an older translation; the bracketed names are his.)
Commentators differ on how right this boldness was. Rossier defends the break with Assyria. Kelly is more cautious, weighing the size of the kingdom:
He did not only strike the Philistines. His kingdom had shrunk to so small a size — as I have said, Judah was very low — and he had enough on his hands already. Yet this little kingdom, with its lowly, pious king, dared to dispute the rights of the king of Assyria over him... I do not pretend to say that he was quite right. There was a holy feeling at the bottom of it.
The record to this point is all bright. One writer warns that it does not end there:
Bright, and only bright, would have been the portrait of this saint, had the record closed here... But the Spirit of God is a faithful biographer. The record He has given teaches two things at once. It answers both prayers: "Teach me what You are," and "Teach me what I am." Hezekiah has been proving the Lord. We have now to look at him in other circumstances proving himself.
- Trust is the root. Trust in God is Hezekiah's defining mark. Nothing else in a believer can make up for its absence.
- Trust cleans house first. He set the worship of God in order before he turned to the material affairs of his kingdom.
- Trust then takes ground. Hezekiah refused to serve Assyria because he belonged to God, and the victory over Philistia followed.
- Trust recovers what was lost. Judah took Gaza, Philistia seized it, Solomon held it, and Hezekiah had to take it back. The enemy inside the land keeps returning.
- Trust is still tested. The record here is bright, but it is not finished; the king who proved the Lord now had to prove himself.
And it came to pass in the fourth year of king Hezekiah, which was the seventh year of Hoshea the son of Elah, king of Israel, [that] Shalmaneser king of Assyria came up against Samaria and besieged it.
The verse dates the fall of the northern kingdom by two reigns at once: Hezekiah's fourth year in Judah, and Hoshea's seventh in Israel. The same Assyrian army that swallowed one kingdom would soon stand at the gates of the other.
Chapter 17 has already told the story of Samaria's fall. Dating it again by Hezekiah's reign sets Israel's end beside Judah's safety.
It was in the fourth year of Hezekiah that the king of Assyria began his siege of Samaria, taking the city captive in Hezekiah's sixth year. So the larger part of the nation Israel went into captivity. Judah and Benjamin came through safely, because the most faithful king was reigning over them at the time. Verse 12 repeats the reason for the captivity of the ten tribes. They did not obey the voice of the Lord their God, but transgressed His covenant conveyed to them through Moses. Not only did they not do what was commanded them: they would not listen.
Judah escaped Samaria's fate, but not because Judah was innocent. Under Hezekiah's father Ahaz, Judah was as guilty as Israel.
Judah had transgressed as well as Israel. The Lord has now prepared the Assyrian rod in righteous anger, and He raises it against Jerusalem as well as Samaria. The day of Ahaz there had been as the day of Hoshea here. But Hezekiah, who came after Ahaz, did what was right in the sight of the Lord. So the Lord argued with His rod, and the Assyrian did not prevail over Judah, as he had over Israel.
Hoshea was dealing with Egypt and Assyria at the same time. The prophet had already described that habit of playing both sides.
The prophet mentions this two-faced, suspicious conduct of the king: "Ephraim feeds on the wind and pursues the east wind all day long; they multiply falsehood and violence; they make a covenant with Assyria, and oil is carried to Egypt" (Hosea 12:1). He says again, "Ephraim is like a dove, silly and without sense, calling to Egypt, going to Assyria" (Hosea 7:11). So, discovering Hoshea's conspiracy, Shalmaneser "shut him up and bound him in prison."
This verse names Shalmaneser as the king who came up and laid siege. From the next verse on, the text uses only the title "the king of Assyria".
Notice that Shalmaneser's name appears only in these two passages. Afterwards the text uses the term "the king of Assyria". And in 2 Kings 18:10 it says, "at the end of three years they took it." This leaves room for Sargon, the next king of Assyria, to have finished the siege and to have carried away the captives. He came to the Assyrian throne in the year B.C. 722, and on his monuments he claims to have taken Samaria in his first year.
(Note: this argument rests on the older reading "they took it" in verse 10; the ESV renders it "he took it.")
Assyria's own inscriptions describe this siege.
From these inscriptions we learn that the siege of Samaria had lasted two years when Sargon succeeded Shalmaneser. Sargon took Samaria in the first year of his reign. The record here does not mention Sargon. Still, it is significant that it does not credit the capture of Samaria to Shalmaneser. These inscriptions say that Sargon captured Samaria, carried away 27,290 of its people, and appointed a governor over the city. What would these interesting ancient inscriptions mean if it were not for the Bible? Again we say they are proven true because the Word of God confirms them.
Israel's fall left its mark on Hezekiah himself.
God often allows things to happen to teach us to know our own hearts, so that we might have no confidence in them. Hezekiah's first false step comes in the very trust that marks his walk above all else. Israel's terrible disaster through Shalmaneser's invasion no doubt shook his confidence. But when Hezekiah saw all the cities of Judah fallen into the hands of the king of Assyria, his heart failed him.
- Dated twice — Hezekiah's fourth year and Hoshea's seventh mark the same siege, setting the two kingdoms side by side.
- Cause — Hoshea courted Egypt while under Assyria. The prophet had already named that double-dealing.
- Verdict — the ten tribes went into captivity because they did not obey the voice of the Lord and would not listen.
- Instrument — Shalmaneser begins the siege, but the text stops naming him. That leaves room for Sargon, whose monuments claim the city and count its captives.
- Contrast — Judah had sinned as Israel had, yet came through under a faithful king. Even so, Israel's collapse shook Hezekiah's own confidence.
And at the end of three years they took it; in the sixth year of Hezekiah, that is, the ninth year of Hoshea king of Israel, Samaria was taken.
This verse marks the fall of Samaria, the chief city of the northern kingdom, after a three-year siege. It dates that fall by the reign of Hezekiah, king in Jerusalem — so why is Israel's end measured by Judah's king?
The siege starts and ends inside Hezekiah's reign. That dating puts the two kingdoms side by side at the same hour.
Verses 9-11 refer to what we have already read in connection with Hoshea, king of Israel. It was in the fourth year of Hezekiah that the king of Assyria began his siege of Samaria, taking the city captive in Hezekiah's sixth year. So the larger part of the nation Israel went into captivity. Judah and Benjamin came through safely, because they had the most faithful king reigning over them at the time.
The book has already told this story in full. It comes up again here because of what happens next.
We get just a brief link back to the destruction of the other kingdom before we come to the attack on Jerusalem.
Some translations end this verse with "they took it" rather than "he took it." One writer reads that plural as a clue about who was actually leading Assyria when Samaria fell.
after-note: DELETE
Once the Assyrians had taken the king of Israel prisoner, "the king of Assyria overran the whole land, and went up against Samaria, and besieged it three years." Shalmaneser did not take the city himself. We are told, "And at the end of three years they took it." In the meantime Sargon had taken over from Shalmaneser, or was at least leading the army during a short gap between reigns.
Assyria's own records name that successor and supply the numbers the Bible does not give.
Shalmaneser besieged Samaria again about 723 B.C., but the city held out for three years, and Sargon finally took it. The people now went into captivity. One Assyrian inscription records Sargon's own words: "The city of Samaria I besieged, I captured; 27,280 of its inhabitants I carried away."
Those first six years of Hezekiah were not silent years for the north. Before Samaria fell, an appeal had already gone out to Israel.
This was a sweeping judgment of God against His people Israel, and the ten tribes have never returned to their land since that time. It seems this took place before the captivity. During the first six years of his reign in Judah, Hezekiah sent messengers to Israel to invite them to come to Jerusalem for his great Passover.
Judah was not innocent, and the same Assyrian power that swallowed Samaria came up against Jerusalem. The difference lay in the man on the throne.
Judah had sinned as well as Israel. The Lord has now prepared the Assyrian rod in righteous anger, and He raises it against Jerusalem as well as Samaria. The day of Ahaz in Judah had been like the day of Hoshea in Israel. But Hezekiah, who came after Ahaz, did right in the sight of the Lord. So the Lord contended with His rod, and the Assyrian did not overcome Judah as he had overcome Israel.
The people carried off that year disappeared from view. Commentators do not claim to trace them, but they do not treat them as finished.
When Israel was carried away, they were settled in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes. So far as we know they never returned. No doubt some people found their way back in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, and in the four hundred years that followed before the Lord appeared. But as a whole nation they are still widely called 'the Lost Tribes.' God knows where to find them when His set time of blessing arrives. The twelve tribes do still exist, and remnants of them will come into the land again.
Commentators differ on how that return will come. One writer holds that nothing short of a miracle can undo a scattering this wide:
Now that God has allowed this great scattering of the ten tribes, only a miraculous act of God at the end of the Tribulation will bring His people Israel back to their land.
- Dated — The siege ran from Hezekiah's fourth year to his sixth, Hoshea's ninth. Judah's calendar dates Israel's last day.
- Deserved — The fall was a sweeping judgment of God on His people, not just an Assyrian win.
- Delayed — The Lord raised the same rod over Jerusalem too. Hezekiah did right, and that, not Judah's innocence, is why the city stood.
- Detailed — The older reading "they took it" points past Shalmaneser to Sargon. His own inscription records the capture and 27,280 captives.
- Deferred — Hezekiah's Passover invitation reached them before the fall. They never returned, but God knows where to find them when His time of blessing comes.
And the king of Assyria carried away Israel to Assyria, and settled them in Halah and by the Habor, the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes;
This verse closes the story of Israel, the northern kingdom. It stands inside the account of Hezekiah, a good king of Judah — which raises two questions: why repeat news the book has already given, and what happened to those tribes next?
The verse names several places. One of them lies in a very different direction from the rest.
2 Kings 18:10-11 gives a more definite date for the captivity of the rest of Israel. The Assyrians took Samaria after a three-year siege, in the ninth year of Hoshea, king of Israel, and the sixth year of Hezekiah — so 722 B.C. The captives were carried to Halah and Habor by the river of Gozan. (1 Chr. 5:26 mentions these same names and adds Hara.) These places are thought to lie in the north of Assyria. But the passage in Kings adds the words "and in the cities of the Medes." That region is much farther east. There they would be far away from their own people in Assyria, and from Judah, who were carried later to Babylon.
Shalmaneser began the siege. One writer notices that the wording changes when the city falls, and reads it as a change of ruler mid-siege. (His point rests on the older wording "they took it.")
The king of Israel was now a prisoner. "Then the king of Assyria invaded all the land and came to Samaria, and for three years he besieged it" (2 Kings 17:5; cf. 2 Kings 18:9). But Shalmaneser did not take the city himself, for we are told, "And at the end of three years they took it" (2 Kings 18:10). During this time Sargon (Isa. 20:1) had taken Shalmaneser's place, or at least was leading the army during a short gap between reigns.
The dates set the two kingdoms side by side at the same moment. One writer then names the reason Israel fell.
The king of Assyria began his siege of Samaria in the fourth year of Hezekiah, and took the city captive in Hezekiah's sixth year. So the larger part of the nation of Israel went into captivity, while Judah and Benjamin were kept safe by having the most faithful king reigning over them at the time. Verse 12 repeats the reason for the captivity of the ten tribes. They did not obey the voice of the Lord their God, but broke His covenant given to them through Moses. They not only failed to do what they were commanded: they would not listen.
Judah's safety was not innocence. The same Assyrian power soon came south against Jerusalem.
Whatever the case, we now have Assyria connected not simply with Judah — the conqueror of Israel comes up against Jerusalem. God had allowed Assyria to sweep away the ten tribes. Was there not enough wickedness in Judah for God to deal with now? We shall see how God acts, and how He answers faithfulness of heart and trust in Himself.
God set out the reasons for all this in writing. One writer shows what we are meant to do with them.
As He closes the story of the ten-tribe kingdom, God gives us a detailed list of the charges in 2 Kings 17:7-23, showing why He brought this kingdom to an end. He has placed it in His Word to warn us and teach us. We do well to look at it. Romans 11:20-21 tells us: "Do not become proud, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spare you."
The last king of the northern kingdom was named for deliverance, and delivered nothing.
Hoshea, whose name means deliverance, proved anything but that to his people. One alone will bring deliverance to the ten tribes. The ten tribes have never returned from their captivity, and they will not return until the Lord Himself brings them back in a day to come.
Yet being untraceable to us is not the same as being untraceable to God.
As far as we know they never returned. No doubt some people found their way back in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, and in the four hundred years that followed before the Lord appeared. Jews from those districts were there on the day of Pentecost. But as a body they are still called 'the Lost Tribes.' God knows where to find them when His set time of blessing comes. The twelve tribes do exist, and a remnant of them will come into the land again.
- Cause. Assyria's strength did not end Israel. Israel would not obey God's voice, and broke the covenant He gave through Moses.
- Carried. Samaria fell after a three-year siege, about 722 B.C., in Hezekiah's sixth year. Writers differ on whether Shalmaneser or Sargon took the city.
- Cut off. Assyria settled the captives in Halah, by the Habor, and in the cities of the Medes — a far eastern region, away from their own people.
- Contrast. Judah stayed safe under its most faithful king in the very years Israel fell — mercy, not merit, for the same enemy soon marched on Jerusalem.
- Coming back. The ten tribes never returned, and people still call them "lost." Yet God knows where they are, and He will bring them back into the land Himself.
because they hearkened not to the voice of Jehovah their God, but transgressed his covenant, all that Moses the servant of Jehovah commanded; and they would not hear nor do it.
Here, in the middle of the record of a godly king's reign, God says why the northern kingdom fell: the ten tribes would not listen to Him. Why spell out the reasons at all, and what are His people meant to do with them?
God does not owe anyone an account of His actions. Yet He often gives one, and He gave one for the fall of the ten tribes.
While God has no obligation to explain to us why He does what He does, in His Word He often does. As He concludes the story of the ten-tribe kingdom, God gives us a detailed list of particulars in 2 Kings 17:7-23 as to why He brought this kingdom to an end. God has placed it in His Word for our warning and instruction. We do well to examine it. Romans 11:20-21 tells us: "Do not become proud, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spare you."
The same explanation already stood at the end of chapter 17. It comes back here because of the timing: Israel fell while Judah's most faithful king was on the throne.
In the fourth year of Hezekiah the king of Assyria began his siege of Samaria. He took the city captive in Hezekiah's sixth year. So the larger part of the nation Israel went into captivity. Judah and Benjamin were kept safe, because the most faithful king was reigning over them at the time. Verse 12 repeats the reason for the captivity of the ten tribes. They did not obey the voice of the Lord their God, but transgressed His covenant conveyed to them through Moses. They not only failed to do what was commanded; they would not even listen.
"His covenant" was the law God gave through Moses. It was a deal Israel bound themselves to, not a gift handed down.
It is the covenant of law, not the ways of grace. By this Israel had bound themselves. But they forgot it, broke it and despised it — dishonouring Him, and hurting themselves just as much. They hardly felt how serious it was when they promised to obey. They took no account at all of their own self-will and rebellion. The sad and sure result was their ruin... Israel showed their fatal error from the start. They offered to take their stand, and to rest their hope of blessing, not on the promises made to the fathers, but on their own keeping of the law.
The verse ends with the heaviest charge: they would not even hear. They were not short of warning.
God had warned His people over and over again through prophets and seers to turn from their evil ways and keep His commandments and statutes. But the people refused to hear. They had rejected His statutes and covenant and testimonies. They had followed the ways of the nations round about them and had sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke Him to anger.
A few verses earlier, the same commandments of Moses appear again — this time kept. Hezekiah trusted God, and that trust showed in what he did.
This trust is inseparable from obedience: "he held fast to the LORD. He did not depart from following him, but kept the commandments that the LORD commanded Moses" (v. 6). Let us beware of so-called trust in God which links itself to disobedience of His Word. If I trust in Him, I will hold fast to Him; if I hold fast to Him, I will keep His Word... Yes, trust, holding fast to the Lord, and obedience always go together. The result of Hezekiah's faith is soon apparent: "the LORD was with him; wherever he went out, he prospered" (v. 7).
God's judgment fell on Israel as a whole nation. What happened to them as individuals is another matter.
Finally He removed Israel out of His sight as a nation. Yet His full knowledge and His love know exactly where each individual is. Nor will He be frustrated in His purposes, which are secure in Christ.
- Heard. God spoke through Moses, and then through prophets for generations. Israel's fall began with a refusal to listen, not a shortage of warning.
- Bound. Israel bound themselves to the law. They rested their hope on their own obedience instead of on God's promises, and that choice ruined them.
- Broken. They did not just fail to obey. They would not even hear, and they lost the land.
- Held. In the same chapter, Hezekiah holds fast to those same commandments and prospers. Trust and obedience always go together.
- Written. God wrote the reasons down to warn us: do not become proud, but fear. No captivity defeats His purposes, which are secure in Christ.