MANASSEH WAS TWELVE years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem fifty-five years. 2He did evil in the eyes of the LORD, following the detestable practices of the nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites. 3He rebuilt the high places his father Hezekiah had demolished; he also erected altars to the Baals and made Asherah poles. He bowed down to all the starry hosts and worshiped them. 4He built altars in the temple of the LORD, of which the LORD had said, “My Name will remain in Jerusalem forever.” 5In both courts of the temple of the LORD, he built altars to all the starry hosts. 6He sacrificed his sons in the fire in the Valley of Ben Hinnom, practiced sorcery, divination and witchcraft, and consulted mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the eyes of the LORD, provoking him to anger.
7He took the carved image he had made and put it in God’s temple, of which God had said to David and to his son Solomon, “In this temple and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, I will put my Name forever. 8I will not again make the feet of the Israelites leave the land I assigned to your forefathers, if only they will be careful to do everything I commanded them concerning all the laws, decrees and ordinances given through Moses.” 9But Manasseh led Judah and the people of Jerusalem astray, so that they did more evil than the nations the LORD had destroyed before the Israelites.
10The LORD spoke to Manasseh and his people, but they paid no attention. 11So the LORD brought against them the army commanders of the king of Assyria, who took Manasseh prisoner, put a hook in his nose, bound him with bronze shackles and took him to Babylon. 12In his distress he sought the favor of the LORD his God and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers. 13And when he prayed to him, the LORD was moved by his entreaty and listened to his plea; so he brought him back to Jerusalem and to his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the LORD is God.
14Afterward he rebuilt the outer wall of the City of David, west of the Gihon spring in the valley, as far as the entrance of the Fish Gate and encircling the hill of Ophel; he also made it much higher. He stationed military commanders in all the fortified cities in Judah.
15He got rid of the foreign gods and removed the image from the temple of the LORD, as well as all the altars he had built on the temple hill and in Jerusalem; and he threw them out of the city. 16Then he restored the altar of the LORD and sacrificed fellowship offerings and thank offerings on it, and told Judah to serve the LORD, the God of Israel. 17The people, however, continued to sacrifice at the high places, but only to the LORD their God.
18The other events of Manasseh’s reign, including his prayer to his God and the words the seers spoke to him in the name of the LORD, the God of Israel, are written in the annals of the kings of Israel. 19His prayer and how God was moved by his entreaty, as well as all his sins and unfaithfulness, and the sites where he built high places and set up Asherah poles and idols before he humbled himself—all are written in the records of the seers. 20Manasseh rested with his fathers and was buried in his palace. And Amon his son succeeded him as king.
21Amon was twenty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem two years. 22He did evil in the eyes of the LORD, as his father Manasseh had done. Amon worshiped and offered sacrifices to all the idols Manasseh had made. 23But unlike his father Manasseh, he did not humble himself before the LORD; Amon increased his guilt.
24Amon’s officials conspired against him and assassinated him in his palace. 25Then the people of the land killed all who had plotted against King Amon, and they made Josiah his son king in his place.
34:1Josiah was eight years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem thirty-one years. 2He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD and walked in the ways of his father David, not turning aside to the right or to the left.
3In the eighth year of his reign, while he was still young, he began to seek the God of his father David. In his twelfth year he began to purge Judah and Jerusalem of high places, Asherah poles, carved idols and cast images. 4Under his direction the altars of the Baals were torn down; he cut to pieces the incense altars that were above them, and smashed the Asherah poles, the idols and the images. These he broke to pieces and scattered over the graves of those who had sacrificed to them. 5He burned the bones of the priests on their altars, and so he purged Judah and Jerusalem. 6In the towns of Manasseh, Ephraim and Simeon, as far as Naphtali, and in the ruins around them, 7he tore down the altars and the Asherah poles and crushed the idols to powder and cut to pieces all the incense altars throughout Israel. Then he went back to Jerusalem.
8In the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign, to purify the land and the temple, he sent Shaphan son of Azaliah and Maaseiah the ruler of the city, with Joah son of Joahaz, the recorder, to repair the temple of the LORD his God.
9They went to Hilkiah the high priest and gave him the money that had been brought into the temple of God, which the Levites who were the doorkeepers had collected from the people of Manasseh, Ephraim and the entire remnant of Israel and from all the people of Judah and Benjamin and the inhabitants of Jerusalem. 10Then they entrusted it to the men appointed to supervise the work on the LORD’s temple. These men paid the workers who repaired and restored the temple. 11They also gave money to the carpenters and builders to purchase dressed stone, and timber for joists and beams for the buildings that the kings of Judah had allowed to fall into ruin.
12The men did the work faithfully. Over them to direct them were Jahath and Obadiah, Levites descended from Merari, and Zechariah and Meshullam, descended from Kohath. The Levites—all who were skilled in playing musical instruments—13had charge of the laborers and supervised all the workers from job to job. Some of the Levites were secretaries, scribes and doorkeepers.
14While they were bringing out the money that had been taken into the temple of the LORD, Hilkiah the priest found the Book of the Law of the LORD that had been given through Moses. 15Hilkiah said to Shaphan the secretary, “I have found the Book of the Law in the temple of the LORD.” He gave it to Shaphan.
16Then Shaphan took the book to the king and reported to him: “Your officials are doing everything that has been committed to them. 17They have paid out the money that was in the temple of the LORD and have entrusted it to the supervisors and workers.” 18Then Shaphan the secretary informed the king, “Hilkiah the priest has given me a book.” And Shaphan read from it in the presence of the king.
19When the king heard the words of the Law, he tore his robes. 20He gave these orders to Hilkiah, Ahikam son of Shaphan, Abdon son of Micah, Shaphan the secretary and Asaiah the king’s attendant: 21“Go and inquire of the LORD for me and for the remnant in Israel and Judah about what is written in this book that has been found. Great is the LORD’s anger that is poured out on us because our fathers have not kept the word of the LORD; they have not acted in accordance with all that is written in this book.”
22Hilkiah and those the king had sent with him went to speak to the prophetess Huldah, who was the wife of Shallum son of Tokhath, the son of Hasrah, keeper of the wardrobe. She lived in Jerusalem, in the Second District.
23She said to them, “This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Tell the man who sent you to me, 24‘This is what the LORD says: I am going to bring disaster on this place and its people—all the curses written in the book that has been read in the presence of the king of Judah. 25Because they have forsaken me and burned incense to other gods and provoked me to anger by all that their hands have made, my anger will be poured out on this place and will not be quenched.’ 26Tell the king of Judah, who sent you to inquire of the LORD, ‘This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says concerning the words you heard: 27Because your heart was responsive and you humbled yourself before God when you heard what he spoke against this place and its people, and because you humbled yourself before me and tore your robes and wept in my presence, I have heard you, declares the LORD. 28Now I will gather you to your fathers, and you will be buried in peace. Your eyes will not see all the disaster I am going to bring on this place and on those who live here.’”
So they took her answer back to the king.
29Then the king called together all the elders of Judah and Jerusalem. 30He went up to the temple of the LORD with the men of Judah, the people of Jerusalem, the priests and the Levites—all the people from the least to the greatest. He read in their hearing all the words of the Book of the Covenant, which had been found in the temple of the LORD. 31The king stood by his pillar and renewed the covenant in the presence of the LORD—to follow the LORD and keep his commands, regulations and decrees with all his heart and all his soul, and to obey the words of the covenant written in this book.
32Then he had everyone in Jerusalem and Benjamin pledge themselves to it; the people of Jerusalem did this in accordance with the covenant of God, the God of their fathers.
33Josiah removed all the detestable idols from all the territory belonging to the Israelites, and he had all who were present in Israel serve the LORD their God. As long as he lived, they did not fail to follow the LORD, the God of their fathers.
35:1Josiah celebrated the Passover to the LORD in Jerusalem, and the Passover lamb was slaughtered on the fourteenth day of the first month. 2He appointed the priests to their duties and encouraged them in the service of the LORD’s temple. 3He said to the Levites, who instructed all Israel and who had been consecrated to the LORD: “Put the sacred ark in the temple that Solomon son of David king of Israel built. It is not to be carried about on your shoulders. Now serve the LORD your God and his people Israel. 4Prepare yourselves by families in your divisions, according to the directions written by David king of Israel and by his son Solomon.
5“Stand in the holy place with a group of Levites for each subdivision of the families of your fellow countrymen, the lay people. 6Slaughter the Passover lambs, consecrate yourselves and prepare the lambs for your fellow countrymen, doing what the LORD commanded through Moses.”
7Josiah provided for all the lay people who were there a total of thirty thousand sheep and goats for the Passover offerings, and also three thousand cattle—all from the king’s own possessions.
8His officials also contributed voluntarily to the people and the priests and Levites. Hilkiah, Zechariah and Jehiel, the administrators of God’s temple, gave the priests twenty-six hundred Passover offerings and three hundred cattle. 9Also Conaniah along with Shemaiah and Nethanel, his brothers, and Hashabiah, Jeiel and Jozabad, the leaders of the Levites, provided five thousand Passover offerings and five hundred head of cattle for the Levites.
10The service was arranged and the priests stood in their places with the Levites in their divisions as the king had ordered. 11The Passover lambs were slaughtered, and the priests sprinkled the blood handed to them, while the Levites skinned the animals. 12They set aside the burnt offerings to give them to the subdivisions of the families of the people to offer to the LORD, as is written in the Book of Moses. They did the same with the cattle. 13They roasted the Passover animals over the fire as prescribed, and boiled the holy offerings in pots, caldrons and pans and served them quickly to all the people. 14After this, they made preparations for themselves and for the priests, because the priests, the descendants of Aaron, were sacrificing the burnt offerings and the fat portions until nightfall. So the Levites made preparations for themselves and for the Aaronic priests.
15The musicians, the descendants of Asaph, were in the places prescribed by David, Asaph, Heman and Jeduthun the king’s seer. The gatekeepers at each gate did not need to leave their posts, because their fellow Levites made the preparations for them.
16So at that time the entire service of the LORD was carried out for the celebration of the Passover and the offering of burnt offerings on the altar of the LORD, as King Josiah had ordered. 17The Israelites who were present celebrated the Passover at that time and observed the Feast of Unleavened Bread for seven days. 18The Passover had not been observed like this in Israel since the days of the prophet Samuel; and none of the kings of Israel had ever celebrated such a Passover as did Josiah, with the priests, the Levites and all Judah and Israel who were there with the people of Jerusalem. 19This Passover was celebrated in the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign.
20After all this, when Josiah had set the temple in order, Neco king of Egypt went up to fight at Carchemish on the Euphrates, and Josiah marched out to meet him in battle. 21But Neco sent messengers to him, saying, “What quarrel is there between you and me, O king of Judah? It is not you I am attacking at this time, but the house with which I am at war. God has told me to hurry; so stop opposing God, who is with me, or he will destroy you.”
22Josiah, however, would not turn away from him, but disguised himself to engage him in battle. He would not listen to what Neco had said at God’s command but went to fight him on the plain of Megiddo.
23Archers shot King Josiah, and he told his officers, “Take me away; I am badly wounded.” 24So they took him out of his chariot, put him in the other chariot he had and brought him to Jerusalem, where he died. He was buried in the tombs of his fathers, and all Judah and Jerusalem mourned for him.
25Jeremiah composed laments for Josiah, and to this day all the men and women singers commemorate Josiah in the laments. These became a tradition in Israel and are written in the Laments.
26The other events of Josiah’s reign and his acts of devotion, according to what is written in the Law of the LORD—27all the events, from beginning to end, are written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah. 36:1And the people of the land took Jehoahaz son of Josiah and made him king in Jerusalem in place of his father.
Original Meaning
THE CHRONICLER’S RETELLING of the reigns of Kings Manasseh, Amon, and Josiah represents a selective appeal to the earlier parallels in 2 Kings 21–23. The broad parallels may be outlined accordingly:
King Manasseh = 2 Kings 21:1–18//2 Chron. 33:1–20
King Amon = 2 Kings 21:19–26//2 Chron. 33:21–25
King Josiah = 2 Kings 22:1–23:30//2 Chron. 34:1–36:1
Specifically, Chronicles expands the record of Kings to include the temporary exile and “deathbed” repentance of King Manasseh (33:11–16). It also expands the report of Josiah’s reforms (34:3–7) and Josiah’s Passover celebration (35:2–17). Finally, it omits the report of Yahweh’s anger against Judah (2 Kings 23:24–27). The Chronicler’s omissions and expansions in appealing to the Kings’ history are striking but certainly in keeping with his theological emphases of repentance and true worship in this section.
The theme of repentance binds the trio of seventh-century Judahite kings into a logical literary unit. Both Manasseh and Josiah “humbled” themselves (Niphal of knʿ ) before God (33:12, 19; 34:27), while tragically Amon refused to humble himself before the Lord (33:23). The report of Amon’s rule thus serves as a foil of sorts to the “bookend” structure of the accounts of Manasseh and Josiah.
Like much of chapters 27–32, this unit is considered “report” (i.e., a brief, self-contained prose narrative that concentrates on a single event or situation).1 Critical scholars have challenged the historicity of the Chronicler’s reporting of Manasseh since the parallel source in Kings does not mention his Assyrian captivity or his “foxhole” conversion at the end of his reign. Thompson has noted, however, that King Manasseh is numbered among those kings listed as vassals of the Assyrians in extrabiblical documents.2 Moreover, numerous rebellions by Assyrian vassals are known to have occurred during the reigns of both Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal.3 So even though the biblical account of Manasseh’s exile is unattested in Kings and the extrabiblical records, the Chronicler’s report is certainly within the realm of plausibility.
King Manasseh (33:1–20)
THE RECORD ON Manasseh’s reign may be divided into four reports: Judah’s relapse into false worship under Manasseh (33:1–10), Manasseh’s exile and repentance (33:11–13), Manasseh’s infrastructural repairs and spiritual reforms (33:14–17), and the concluding regnal résumé (33:18–20). The most significant divergence from 2 Kings 21 is the report of Manasseh’s repentance during his exile in Assyria. No doubt the Prayer of Manasseh in the Apocrypha was inspired by the Chronicler’s cryptic allusion to the king’s pleas for divine mercy.4
Judah’s relapse into false worship (33:1–10). This section repeats 2 Kings 21:1–9 with some minor variations, such as the omission of Manasseh’s mother’s name (Hephzibah). In fact, Chronicles leaves off the queen mother of the Judahite kings after the reign of Hezekiah—perhaps because of a shift in the source material or the deliberate expunging of these women’s names as a result of their Arabian origin.5 The Chronicler also avoids comparing Manasseh to King Ahab of Israel (cf. 2 Kings 21:3).
Manasseh rules longer than any other Israelite king. His fifty-five-year reign probably includes a coregency of several years with his father, Hezekiah. The dates of his reign extend from about 696 to 642 B.C. As an aside, it bears mention that Manasseh was probably born into the royal family during the fifteen-year extension of Hezekiah’s life granted by God in response to his prayer for healing from a fatal disease (cf. 2 Kings 20:1–6). This entire section turns on the juxtaposition of the evil deeds of Manasseh and the identification of God’s “Name” with the Jerusalem temple (33:4–5, 7). The litany of the king’s detestable practices possibly represents the conflation of two independent sources (i.e., 33:3–6 and 33:7–9), given the repetition of the desecration of the temple precincts. The specific catalog of abominations promoted by Manasseh as “alternative religion” for the kingdom of Judah invites comparison with the Mosaic prohibitions against false worship (Deut. 16:21–17:7; 18:9–13). Among the taboos borrowed wholesale from Canaanite culture are idolatry associated with the fertility cult deities Asherah and Baal, astral worship, infanticide, and the occult (2 Chron. 33:3–6).
According to 2 Kings 17:7–13, 16–20, these are the very sins that incited God’s wrath against the northern kingdom of Israel and brought about the Assyrian exile. Note too how centuries earlier the theocratic kingdom of Israel under Joshua’s leadership waged war against the indigenous populations of Canaan as divine judgment for the same list of abominations (Lev. 18:24–28). The narrative in 2 Kings 24:3–4 ascribes blame directly to King Manasseh for the Babylonian exile of the southern kingdom. Like matter reaching an irreversible energy state of critical mass in the science of physics, the course charted by the political and religious policies of Manasseh lead irrevocably to the Exile.
The Chronicler hints at Manasseh’s role in Judah’s exile by referring to the “nations” driven out by the Lord when Israel entered the land of Canaan (33:2). Manasseh’s responsibility for the welfare of Judah is made more clear in the Chronicler’s allusion to the Davidic covenant and Israel’s security in the land of covenant promise (33:7; cf. 2 Sam. 7:10). The king leads the people astray by breaking the first commandment (2 Chron. 33:7; cf. Ex. 20:3–4). The carved image he erects in God’s temple symbolizes his rejection of God’s rule at both the personal and the national level. King Manasseh’s arrogance breeds the evil of idolatry and poisons his subjects with the sin of idolatry (1 Sam. 15:23; cf. Ex. 20:3–4).
Once the Israelites renounce their covenant loyalty to Yahweh and become more evil than the nations he destroyed in the land of Canaan, God has no choice but to invoke the covenant curses on his people (cf. Deut. 28:36–37). The conclusion of the first report (2 Chron. 33:10), however, shifts some of the responsibility for the Babylonian exile to the people of Judah as well. They shoulder blame for the catastrophe because they refuse to heed the word of the Lord through his prophets.
Manasseh’s exile and repentance (33:11–13). While Manasseh’s exile has no parallel in 2 Kings and is uncorroborated by extant Assyrian sources, it seems likely that he is a coconspirator with the Babylonians in the revolt against Shamash-shum-ukin in Babylon.6 Shamash-shum-ukin was the brother of the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal and the appointed king of Babylon. The nose “hook” and “bronze shackles” (33:11) are typical of the humiliation inflicted on captives in the biblical world (cf. Isa. 37:29; Amos 4:2; Hab. 1:15).
God often brings trouble against his people in the Old Testament to punish and to purify them. The psalmist recognizes that God is a refuge for those in distress (cf. Ps. 20:1; 41:1; 46:1). Unlike King Ahaz, Manasseh turns to God in his distress and finds favor with the Almighty (2 Chron. 33:12; cf. 28:22). The expression “seek the favor” (lit., “soften [ḥlh] the face”) is found in the intercessory prayers of Moses, Hezekiah, and Daniel; it connotes an appeal to the mercy of God (cf. Ex. 32:11; Jer. 26:19; Dan. 9:13).
Manasseh’s plea issues from a contrite heart, for he “humbled himself [knʿ ] greatly” (33:12). This word signifies true repentance, demonstrated by a broken spirit coupled with acts of penance (e.g., tearing of garments and weeping) for personal sin and disobedience to God (cf. 2 Kings 22:19). For this reason, the report of Manasseh’s repentance and prayer of forgiveness is reminiscent of the language of God’s promise to King Solomon to restore those who “humble themselves and pray” (2 Chron. 7:14).
The expression “the LORD was moved” (33:13) is unusual and marks a theological distinctive of the God of the Bible. Unlike the deaf Baals after which the Israelites continually strayed, the God of Israel is not only approachable, but he listens to prayer and is capable of responding with empathy toward those in dire need (Ex. 22:27; 2 Chron. 30:9; cf. 1 Kings 18:26; Isa. 44:18; Hab. 2:18). The stark contrast between God who listens to the plea of Manasseh (2 Chron. 33:13) and the people who pay no attention to God (33:10) would not be lost on the Chronicler’s audience. The episode foreshadows the hallmark attribute of Jesus Christ as the great high priest, who is moved to grant mercy because he sympathizes with human weakness, having experienced it himself (Heb. 4:14–16).
According to Selman, the conversion of King Manasseh ranks second in dramatic impact only to the experience of Saul of Tarsus on the Damascus road (Acts 9:3–6).7 God is always faithful in returning to those who return to him (Jer. 3:22; Zech. 1:3; Mal. 3:7). In fact, this is how Manasseh knows that “the LORD is God”—not only because he is restored to the throne out of exile but because “who is a God like you, who pardons sin and forgives the transgression … of his inheritance?” (Mic. 7:18).
Manasseh’s infrastructural repairs and spiritual reforms (33:14–17). This next report emphasizes Manasseh’s political and religious reforms. Usually this is construed as the “healing of the land,” the natural aftermath of prayer and repentance according to God’s promise in 7:14. The Chronicler sees royal building projects as an indication of divine blessing for obedience.8 Manasseh’s reforms are both political and religious in nature, suggesting God’s acceptance of the king’s prayer of repentance. The rebuilding of the city wall of Jerusalem (33:14) may refer to repairs made necessary when Manasseh was taken captive by the Assyrians or to the continuation of the expansion of Jerusalem begun under Hezekiah (cf. Isa. 22:10–11; 2 Chron. 32:5). Strengthening the military presence in the fortified cities of Judah (33:14) is almost routine for kings ruling in Jerusalem, since these cities form a shield against foreign invaders (cf. 2 Kings 18:13; 2 Chron. 14:6; 17:2; 26:9). Assuming Manasseh’s renewed loyalty as an Assyrian vassal after his release from exile, both initiatives may have been encouraged by the Assyrians as defensive measures aimed at discouraging an Egyptian military campaign into Judah.
Curiously, the religious reforms of Manasseh are unsupported by other biblical passages (33:15–17). This should not discount the historical validity of the Chronicler’s report (as some critics contend). Numerous biblical events receive only single citations. For example, Elijah’s contest with the prophets of Baal lacks parallels as well (1 Kings 18). Specifically, Manasseh orders the direct reversal of previous policies he implemented with respect to temple worship (2 Chron. 33:15; cf. vv. 3, 7).
Yet the depth, extent, and duration of Manasseh’s religious reforms remain an open question. Clearly, the temple is purified and proper worship is restored at least for a short time. We are told, however, that false worship is pervasive during the reigns of the next two kings of Judah (33:22; 34:3–7). The impact of Manasseh’s religious reforms seems restricted to Jerusalem and its immediate environs, given the Chronicler’s reference to ongoing worship in the high places (33:17). The worship associated with the Canaanite high places proves a snare for the Israelites throughout the history of the monarchies (cf. the theological commentary on the reigns of Asa in 15:17 and Jehoshaphat in 20:33).
Of course, the chief architect of the religious syncretism in Israel was King Solomon, who promoted the worship of Yahweh in Canaanite high places (1 Kings 3:3). Unfortunately, as Selman has rightly observed, too often the reform of the ritual of Israelite worship has little impact on the heart of the majority of the people, given the irresistible sensual appeal of Canaanite religious practice (cf. Isa. 29:13; Jer. 3:10).9 As another commentator has noted, “it is easier to lead a people into sin than to lead them back out of it.”10
Concluding regnal résumé (33:18–20). The summaries of both Manasseh’s and Josiah’s reigns contain introductory and concluding regnal résumés (33:1–2, 18–20; 34:1–2; 35:24–36:1). Typically, the introductory résumé includes various formulas announcing the king’s age at accession, the length and location of the king’s reign, the king’s mother, and the theological review. The concluding one usually includes the historical source citation formula, the death and burial formula, and the succession formula. Manasseh’s concluding résumé is significant theologically because of the emphasis on the king’s prayer of entreaty and God’s response to his repentance (33:18–19). Selman reminds us that “the Bible consistently affirms that God’s door remains open to anyone, even after what should have been closing time.”11 Apparently the Chronicler desires to remind his postexilic audience of this timeless truth as well!
King Amon (33:21–25)
THE CHRONICLER OFFERS a condensed version of Amon’s reign as found in 2 Kings 21:19–26. Concluding the report of Amon’s reign by referring to Josiah’s succession, however, provides a natural lead into the account of Josiah (2 Chron. 33:25; cf. 2 Kings 21:24b, 26).
The Chronicler’s theological assessment of Amon expands the Kings parallel on two key points. (1) Amon differs from his father, Manasseh, in that he refuses to humble himself and repent of his sin (33:23a). (2) As a result of this behavior, Amon increases his guilt before God (33:23b). The Old Testament prophets promise restoration to those who turn to God in repentance (cf. Isa. 59:20; Jer. 15:19), while those who spurn God’s mercy and reject his forgiveness experience judgment (Jer. 5:3–6). There is a foreshadowing of later New Testament teaching when we consider the judgment Jesus pronounced on Korazin and Bethsaida for their failure to turn to God in repentance despite the miracles they witnessed (Matt. 11:20–24).
Amon’s rule lasts only two years (642–640 B.C., 33:21). He is judged an evil king because he perpetuates the false worship established in Judah by his father (33:22). The reason behind his assassination is unspecified (33:24). Clearly the general populace is not in sympathy with the coup since they execute those palace officials party to the conspiracy (33:25a). Selman notes that reports of such treachery in Chronicles are interpreted as divine judgment, and such may be the case here (cf. 24:25; 25:27).12 The expression “people of the land” (33:25a) may be an idiom for a coalition of religious and political leadership centered in Jerusalem since they also function as “king makers” in other succession crises (cf. 22:1; 26:1; 36:1).
BOTH THE HISTORIES of Kings and Chronicles review King Josiah’s reign in a positive light by associating him with King David (34:2; cf. 2 Kings 22:2). Josiah’s link to David extends beyond his genealogical pedigree to a similar heart for worship, as Josiah begins to “seek” (drš) the Lord at an early age (2 Chron. 34:3). The Chronicler summarizes Josiah’s rule with four reports: Josiah’s religious reform (34:1–7), the temple repairs and finding of the law scroll (34:8–33), the celebration of the Passover (35:1–19), the battle report of Josiah’s death (35:20–25). It concludes with a regnal résumé (35:26–36:1). De Vries offers a helpful two-point distillation of the Chronicler’s purpose concerning the account of King Josiah: all his good deeds cannot save him from an ignominious death or the nation from exile, and Josiah is memorialized for his promulgation of the law by which the nation will one day live again.13
One of the Chronicler’s characteristic literary techniques reemerges in this section, that of framing the narrative structure by means of sequential chronological notes (e.g., 34:3, 8).14 The theme of humbling oneself before God prominent in chapter 33 persists in this pericope (34:27; cf. 2 Kings 22:19). Also, the theme of “seeking the Lord” is introduced in order to demonstrate Josiah’s single-minded devotion to the things of God (2 Chron. 34:3, 21, 26). Williamson has correctly recognized that the biography of Josiah does not mark a particular turning point in the Chronicler’s narrative, but rather he is the last of a series of key figures in the story of the rise and fall of Davidic kingship in Israel.15
Josiah’s religious reform (34:1–7). The Chronicler begins by essentially repeating the regnal résumé of 2 Kings 22:1–2, minus the reference to Josiah’s mother, Jedidah. The rest of the report is a digest of 2 Kings 23:4–20 about Josiah’s comprehensive cleansing of the temple and purification of temple worship. His reign can be dated with confidence to 640–609 B.C.
According to 34:3, Josiah begins his reform initiatives at age twenty, while 2 Kings 22:3 indicates the reform coincides with the finding of the law scroll when he is twenty-six years old. The age of twenty was the age of majority in Hebrew culture and, more than coincidentally for the Chronicler, the age when the Levite began his service to Yahweh (cf. Num. 1:3; 1 Chron. 23:24). The decline of Assyrian empire after the death of Ashurbanipal in 627 B.C. affords Judah an opportunity to reassert its own political and religious agenda after languishing as a vassal state since the time of King Ahaz. There is a growing consensus among scholars that Josiah’s reform movement predates the finding of the law book by Hilkiah the priest.16 It seems we can speak of Josiah’s early reforms prior to the discovery of the law scroll in 622 B.C. and his later reforms associated with the temple renovation and eradication of false worship centers.
Temple repair and finding of the law scroll (34:8–33). The account of Josiah’s campaign to refurbish the temple and the subsequent finding of the “Book of the Law” has it parallel in 2 Kings 22:3–23:3. The Chronicler adds material promoting the participation of the Levites in the temple restoration (2 Chron. 34:12–13). Otherwise, this report represents an essentially faithful citation of the parallel text in 2 Kings.
The narrative neatly divides into four literary units: the restoration of the temple (34:8–13), the discovery and then the interpretation of the law scroll (34:14–28), and the covenant renewal ceremony (34:29–33). Curiously, the religious reforms prompted by the finding of the law scroll are treated almost incidentally (see comments above on 34:1–7). For the Chronicler, the important story is the discovery of the scroll and its interpretation, whereas in Kings the finding of the law scroll is merely a prerequisite for the religious reforms of King Josiah. The genre of the section is identified as report, with the exception of Huldah’s prophetic speech (34:23–28a). The repetition of the date formula (“the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign,” 34:8; 35:19) forms an inclusio or envelope construction, indicating the religious reforms associated with the finding of the law scroll and the Passover celebration are to be understood as a chain of related events.
The eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign is 622 B.C., and the king is twenty-six years old (34:8). The ministries of Jeremiah and Zephaniah are concurrent with the religious reforms and temple repair initiative of Josiah (Jer. 1:2; Zeph. 1:1). Josiah’s campaign to restore the dilapidated temple in Jerusalem is one of a series of royal renovation projects aimed at repairing the sanctuary of Yahweh. More than a century prior (ca. 812 B.C.), King Joash undertook a similar enterprise (cf. 2 Kings 12:1–21; 2 Chron. 24:1–14). As recently as King Hezekiah, the doors of the temple were repaired and made serviceable again (2 Chron. 29:3).
Josiah’s temple renovation (34:8–13). The report of Josiah’s restoration of the temple is based on 2 Kings 22:3–7. Josiah’s plans to repair the temple serve as the setting in that Kings narrative for the discovery of the law scroll and the subsequent sweeping religious reforms in Judah. The report of Josiah’s renovation of the temple in Chronicles is linked to the early reforms of the king by the insertion of the clause “to purify the land and the temple” (2 Chron. 34:8; cf. v. 3). Thus the Chronicler understands the report of the temple repair as one episode in a series of related events in Josiah’s comprehensive reform movement.
Shaphan the scribe (probably a state scribe who also serves as a royal messenger) is the only character the two accounts have in common. The Chronicler adds the name of “the ruler of the city,” Maaseiah, along with the name of the court recorder Joah. The office of ruler or governor of Jerusalem is mentioned in 2 Kings 23:8 and attested by archaeological discovery.17 The office of recorder or secretary to the king (2 Kings 22:8) was a cabinet post established by David (cf. 2 Sam. 8:16). The reference to the people from the northern kingdom as the “remnant of Israel” may suggest that the Chronicler understands the reunification of “all Israel” as already having begun during the reign of Josiah (2 Chron. 34:9).
The need for skilled craftsmen such as carpenters and masons indicates the temple is in a serious state of disrepair (34:10–11). Unlike 2 Kings 22:5–6, Chronicles places blame for the “ruin” of the temple on the kings of Judah. No doubt the negligent kings the writer has in mind included Manasseh and Amon, perhaps going as far back as Ahaz. The Chronicler connects the success of the temple repairs to the faithfulness of the workers and effective supervision by the Levites (2 Chron. 34:12–13). Though not mentioned in the parallel text, the several roles filled by the Levites in the renovation project (e.g., temple-tax collectors, doorkeepers [i.e., security], accompanying musicians pacing the workers [?], treasurers, crew foreman, site supervisors, etc.) are in keeping with the wide-ranging duties David assigned to the Levites (1 Chron. 25–26).
Discovery of the law scroll (34:14–18). The Chronicler’s account of the discovery of the law scroll faithfully follows 2 Kings 22:8–20 except for certain details added to Hilkiah’s finding of the document (2 Chron. 34:14, 17). This portion of Josiah’s reign divides into two units—the discovery of the scroll and then its interpretation—and combines the genres of report (34:14–22, 29b) and prophetic speech (34:23–28a). Huldah’s speech contains a prophecy of punishment (34:24–25) and a prophecy of salvation (34:26–28a), introduced by the messenger formula (“this is what the LORD says,” 34:24, 26) and confirmed by the emphatic prophetic utterance formula (“declares the LORD,” 34:27b).
The reference to the money collected by the Levites for renovating the temple links the previous section with this segment of the story (cf. 34:9, 14). Surprisingly, while the discovery of the law scroll is the key event of the chapter and the turning point of Josiah’s reign, its actual uncovering is mentioned only briefly (34:14b–15a). The Chronicler’s expansion of Hilkiah’s role in the discovery of the law scroll (34:14, 17) accents the find as the by-product of the initiative to repair the temple. In this way, its discovery becomes a reward of sorts for Josiah’s faithfulness in attending to God’s sanctuary.
The scroll is given two titles in the narrative: “the Book of the Law” (34:15) and “the Book of the Covenant” (34:30). The puzzling question for biblical scholars has been the identity of this book. The general consensus favors the book of Deuteronomy or an earlier version of that book.18 We can only speculate as to why the law scroll disappeared from the collection of Hebrew religious documents. Was it suppressed, or lost, or hidden? Presumably the scroll fell out of circulation because of the need to hide it for the sake of preservation at the threat of military invasion (e.g., the Assyrian campaign against Hezekiah); or else it was censored by rulers and/or concealed by the priests during one of the lapses of Israel into religious apostasy (e.g., the reigns of Athaliah, Ahaz, Amon, Manasseh).
Interpretation of the scroll (34:19–28). Josiah’s twofold response to Shaphan’s reading of the scroll is immediate and decisive. Recognizing the message of the scroll as the very word of God, Josiah tears his clothes (34:19)—a tangible expression of grief in response to personal or national crises (cf. 1 Kings 21:27; 2 Kings 19:1; Ezra 9:3). The prophetess Huldah clearly understands the action as symbolic of repentance, since the expression “humble oneself” (34:27) is applied to Josiah’s self-abasement and weeping.
The king perceives that the message of the law scroll has profound implications for both him and his subjects (“the remnant in Israel and Judah” [34:21] is another instance of the Chronicler’s emphasis on the unity of Israel). This explains Josiah’s decision to appoint envoys to seek an interpretation of the scroll and to ask for counsel in addressing the disturbing news about God’s anger revealed in the law scroll. The theme of God’s anger incited by the disloyalty of the people of Israel is prominent in 2 Chronicles (e.g., 28:9; 29:8; 32:25). The king’s reference to the sins of the “fathers” (34:21) implies some knowledge of the potential impact of the retribution principle across successive generations (cf. Ex. 20:5).
Hilkiah’s visit to Huldah seems to be based on his relationship with Shallum, her husband. Shallum is “keeper of the wardrobe” (34:22) for the priests and the Levites, which means he has oversight of the production and maintenance of the vestments and robes of Levites. Thus, Hilkiah is in regular contact with Shallum. Huldah is not mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament, although she is among a handful of Hebrew women titled as a prophetess (e.g., Miriam, Ex. 15:20; Deborah, Judg. 4:4). She is respected as a servant of Yahweh because she is consulted and her interpretation of the law scroll is received as a word from God. The exact location of the “Second District” in preexilic Jerusalem is unknown (cf. Zeph. 1:10).
That interpretation is delivered to Hilkiah, Shaphan, and the others in a two-part message. (1) An oracle of punishment (34:24–25) assumes the curses of Deuteronomy 28. They will be inflicted on Jerusalem and the people of Judah as divine judgment for sins associated with idolatry (a veiled reference to the apostasy of Manasseh?). Though not specifically mentioned by the prophetess, the repetition of the verb “pour out” (ntk, 2 Chron. 34:21, 25) and the allusion to the curses of Deuteronomy strongly hint at the impending Babylonian invasion and exile.
(2) An oracle of salvation (34:26–28a) is prompted by Josiah’s repentance as demonstrated in his acts of humility and contrition. The idea of repentance in the form of “humbling oneself” before the Lord is the dominant theological theme of this section of Chronicles (33:12, 19, 23; 34:27; cf. 29:10; 30:8). According to Williamson, the repetition of the king’s “humbling himself” in repentance (34:27) is the Chronicler’s way of offering Josiah’s actions as an example to be emulated by his own audience.19 The postscript recounting how Josiah pressures his subjects to serve the Lord (34:33) seems to confirm Williamson’s contention that the Chronicler desires the experience of Josiah’s repentance for his own audience.
There is some question as to Huldah’s pronouncement of a peaceful burial for Josiah (34:28a), given his violent death in battle against the Egyptians. We should note, however, that Josiah is promised a peaceful burial, not death, and this honor is accorded to him (35:24). Beyond this, the assurance that Josiah will not see the disaster of the Babylonian exile is another way in which the king ends his life peacefully, comparatively speaking.
Covenant-renewal ceremony (34:29–33). The report of Josiah’s covenant renewal ceremony closely follows 2 Kings 23:1–3. Certain significant changes are commonly noted. For example, the phrase “the priests and the Levites” (2 Chron. 34:30) is substituted for “the priests and the prophets” (2 Kings 23:2). For the Chronicler, the Levites now stand in the tradition of the prophets as preachers and teachers of the law of Moses. Also the king stands “in his place” (NRSV) (2 Chron. 34:31) rather than “by the pillar” (2 Kings 23:3), which perhaps suggests the absence of the pillars Jakin and Boaz in the second temple (cf. 2 Chron. 3:17).20
Finally, Chronicles 34:32 paraphrases the response of the people in pledging their loyalty to the covenant agreement (cf. 2 Kings 23:3b). The Chronicler’s version stresses that Josiah imposes the pledge of obedience on the assembly, suggesting that the people do not fully share the king’s faith or convictions about the covenant relationship with Yahweh. Or, as McConville comments, King Josiah “determined that the people shall be worthy of the mercy received.”21 This is borne out by the fact that Josiah’s religious reforms died with him at Megiddo (cf. 2 Chron. 36:8, 14; Jer. 3:10).22
The expression “the Book of the Covenant” is a rarely used technical term for the entire Pentateuch in later Judaism (34:30; cf. Sir. 24:23). Thus, this book title likely refers to the core of the Sinai covenant code, Exodus 19–24 (cf. Ex. 24:7), or perhaps the book of Deuteronomy. More important is the theological significance of the term covenant, which denotes an agreement that creates new relationships in accordance with stipulations outlined in advance. The Old Testament recognizes two types of covenants. The treaty or obligatory covenant creates a relationship between unequal parties (i.e., God and Israel) and obligates the servant or vassal to serve the master or suzerain by means of specific regulations (e.g., Mosaic law). The grant or promissory covenant obligates the master to the vassal, who is rewarded for past loyalty (e.g., God’s promise of a dynasty for David). Divine punishment in the form of curses may be invoked for violation of the agreement in both cases.
The key issue for our study is the creation of relationships by means of a covenant ritual, and this through the voluntary act of the individual (or community). Hence Joshua’s challenge, “choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve” (Josh. 24:15). Covenant renewal for ancient Israel was repairing or restoring a relationship with God broken because of their willful violation of the stipulations regulating the relationship. Repentance or humbling oneself is the first step in renewing a covenant relationship with God, as King David well knew (cf. Ps. 51:17).
Josiah’s covenant-renewal ceremony combines elements of the Mosaic covenant (esp. seen in the terms “commands, regulations and decrees,” 34:31; cf. Deut. 4:40; 6:1) and of the Davidic covenant (esp. seen in the leadership of the king and the temple site, 2 Chron. 34:29, 31; cf. 7:13–14, 17–18). Beyond treaty definition and form, the idea of covenant combines both judgment and hope for Israel: judgment in the form of divine curse for disloyalty to the treaty demands and hope in the form of divine blessing for loyalty to the treaty demands (cf. Lev. 26; Deut. 28). By God’s design, almost frighteningly so, Israel’s destiny lies in the decision of the people to choose “life and prosperity” or “death and destruction” (Deut. 30:15). Thankfully in this instance, because of the strong leadership of Josiah, the people chose life—for a time.
In keeping with the prescription of the Mosaic law, all the people gather for the reading of the law scroll and the covenant-ratification ceremony (34:29–30; cf. Deut. 31:11). The precedent for involving the entire community in covenant renewal was already established by Asa (2 Chron. 15:1–15) and Hezekiah (29:10; 30:1). Theologically, the idea of God’s grace extended to the disobedient people of God is not lost on the Chronicler. What God did in Israel by way of religious reform and spiritual renewal through the covenant-renewal ceremonies of Asa, Hezekiah, and Josiah is “repeatable” history for the Jews living in postexilic Judah—if they too humble themselves and pray and pledge covenant loyalty to Yahweh.
Thompson’s reminder that the “Book of the Covenant” does not in and of itself create the change in the corporate religious life of Israel is timely.23 Then, as now, spiritual renewal and true transformation must begin at the individual level, and it only comes by the power of the Holy Spirit—as the postexilic prophets Haggai and Zechariah well understand (Hag. 2:5; Zech. 4:6; 12:10).
The final verse of this section (34:33) summarizes the impact of the discovery of the law scroll and the covenant-renewal ceremony on Josiah’s reign by means of allusion to the extensive religious reforms carried out in Judah (cf. 2 Kings 23:4–20). The Chronicler emphasizes how Josiah purges false religion “from all the territory belonging to the Israelites.” The conclusion also echoes the expurgation of the early reforms of Josiah outlined in 2 Chronicles 34:6–7, thus forming an envelope construction thematically linking 34:1–7 with 34:8–33. Dillard has even suggested that the lengthy summary statement is a literary signal that the writer has turned to another source for the next episode of the narrative.24
Josiah’s Passover (35:1–19). The Chronicler frames the report of Josiah’s Passover with the brief version of the event from 2 Kings 23:21–23. The source for the expanded account of the festival is unknown but presumably is a priestly or temple record since the text gives primacy to the role of the Levites. The attention given to their service in leading worship and the detail spent on sacrificial ritual are in keeping with priestly motifs important to the Chronicler.
The Passover is the preeminent religious festival for postexilic Judah and the apex of temple worship for the Chronicler. The reason for the prominence of this feast in the Jewish restoration community stems from the Passover observed after the completion of the second temple in 516 B.C. and the understanding that the return from Babylonian captivity is a “second exodus” for God’s people (cf. Ezra 6:19–22). The Passover, more than any other Hebrew religious festival, drew the nation of Israel back to her roots since it was at Mount Sinai that the former Hebrew slaves were constituted as the people of God.
The version of Josiah’s Passover in 2 Kings 23:19–20, 24–25 is set in the context of religious reform. By contrast, the Chronicler’s purpose in relating the Passover observance is to encourage “the right use of the temple, its service, and its offerings.”25 The account of Josiah’s Passover may be outlined in four sections: the preparations for the festival (2 Chron. 35:1–6), the provision of sacrificial animals (35:7–10), the ritual service of the offerings (35:11–15), and the epilogue affirming the fulfillment of Josiah’s orders (35:16–19). Interestingly, the first two sections begin with a focus on the role of Josiah as the organizer of the feast (35:1, 7), while in the last two sections the service of the Passover ritual itself is highlighted (35:10, 16).
The preparations for the festival (35:1–6). The Chronicler specifies the precise date for the observance of the Passover (35:1) in order to demonstrate that Josiah is in compliance with Mosaic law (cf. Lev. 23:5; Num. 28:16), perhaps in contrast to the delayed Passover celebration of Hezekiah (2 Chron. 30:2–3). Like Hezekiah, Josiah is also an “encourager” (35:2; cf. 30:22; 32:6). In each case his encouragement takes the form of a series of imperative verbs designed to guide behavior. The ethical aspects of this speech form (i.e., the imperative verb) connect the Hebrew wisdom and prophetic traditions to the moral codes of Hebrew law and extend throughout biblical literature to the teachings of Jesus and Paul (e.g., Matt. 5–7; Rom. 12:9–21).26 The importance of religious instruction by the Levites is no doubt heightened during reform movements of the righteous kings of Judah (e.g., 2 Chron. 17:7–8; cf. Neh. 8:7–9).
The reference to transferring the ark of the covenant back to the temple is obscure (35:3), since there is no record that it was moved from the sanctuary.27 McConville’s suggestion that Josiah deliberately reenacts the installation of the ark of the covenant as a symbolic gesture has merit.28 The authority behind the specific instructions for the change in the ritual duties of the Levites is based on the decrees of Kings David and Solomon in recognition of the shift from portable sanctuary to permanent temple (35:4).
The appeal to the authority of Moses (35:6) refers more generally to Passover legislation in the Pentateuch (e.g., Ex. 12–13; Deut. 16:1–8). According to law, the Passover animal was to be slaughtered and offered for sacrifice by the suppliant, not the Levitical priesthood (cf. Ex. 12:3–6; Deut. 16:5–6). The procedural change in the ritual of sacrifice to the priesthood was first implemented as an emergency of circumstance by Hezekiah, because of ritual impurity among the people (2 Chron. 30:17). By the time of Josiah, this practice has become standard, perhaps as a pragmatic response to the size of the population at this time (note “all the people” in 35:13, 18).
Quite apart from the technicalities of sacrificial worship, we cannot overlook the essential calling of the Levitical priesthood as mediators (note the repeated phrases “serve … his people,” 35:3, and “your fellow countrymen,” 35:5–6). The Levitical priests are to mediate the holy presence of God in Israel by making atonement first for their own sins and then for the sins of the people (Lev. 9:7). Hence the Levites must first prepare themselves (2 Chron. 35:4) before they can serve the people in the ministry of sacrificial worship (35:5–6).
The provision of sacrificial animals (35:7–10). The key piece of information in this section is the report of the generosity of the king in providing the sacrificial animals for the Passover. In addition to the sheep and goats from Josiah’s personal flocks (35:7), his royal officials and the administrators of the temple also contribute animals for the Passover offerings (35:8–9). The royal “officials” are probably members of Josiah’s “cabinet,” including princes and appointees to posts such as the recorder, secretary, chief of staff over the army, and advisers (cf. the list of David’s officials, 2 Sam. 8:15–18). The temple administrators are senior priests in charge of the Levitical divisions and the musical and service guilds.
The Chronicler notes that the civil and religious leaders of Judah are not only generous but also willing (35:8). This precedent was set by David (1 Chron. 29:2–5) and later by Hezekiah, who provided one thousand bulls and seven thousand sheep and goats for his Passover feast (2 Chron. 30:24). Such benevolence was not always the case during the history of the monarchies in Israel and Judah. The story of Ahab’s annexation of Naboth’s vineyard (1 Kings 21) and the indictments of the prophets against royal policies that trampled the poor and oppressed the righteous (e.g., Mic. 3:1–7) are sad testimony to the darker side of Israel’s kingship.
No doubt the Chronicler seeks to impress the importance of the virtue of generosity on his audience as well. In terms of the sheer numbers of animals to be sacrificed, Josiah’s celebration doubles the size of Hezekiah’s Passover (2,000 bulls and 17,000 sheep and goats were offered for Hezekiah’s Passover [30:24]; 3,800 bulls and 37,600 sheep and goats are offered for this Passover [35:7–9]).
The ritual service of the offerings (35:11–15). This third unit describes the actual Passover ceremony. The ritual consists of two segments: offering the animal sacrifices (35:11–12) and eating the Passover meal (35:13–15). The shift in the locus of the Passover from the home to the temple as the central shrine radically alters the ritual character of the Passover. The priests are now responsible for slaughtering the Passover lambs (35:6, 11), sprinkling the blood of the slain animal on the altar of burnt offering (35:11; cf. 29:22; 30:16), and then skinning the animal for cooking (35:11; cf. 29:34). Moreover, the priests and attending Levites supervise the roasting of the sacrificial animals and serve the Passover meal to the assembly (35:13).
The term “roasted” (bšl, 35:13a) is a general word for cooking food either by boiling or by roasting. The original Passover meal was cooked by roasting (Ex. 12:8; Deut. 16:7). Certain other types of offerings included in fellowship meals were boiled in clay pots (e.g., Ex. 29:31; Lev. 6:28). It seems the Passover celebration combined both types of cooked food offerings.
The presentation of burnt offerings along with the Passover offering has puzzled biblical scholars (2 Chron. 35:12, 14). One approach assumes these burnt offerings are merely portions of the Passover sacrifices burnt on the altar.29 Another explanation identifies these burnt offerings as separate holocaust sacrifices complementing the Passover offerings (cf. Lev. 1:3–9).30 The reference to “fat portions” (2 Chron. 35:14) clearly indicates that some assimilation of the peace offering with the Passover offering has taken place by the time of Hezekiah and Josiah (a logical association, since both offerings included a fellowship meal, cf. Lev. 3:9–17).
The Chronicler emphasizes how the priests and Levites fulfill all the requirements of the ceremony demanded by the king and the law of Moses (note “the service was arranged” [kun + ʿabodah], 35:10; “the entire service … was carried out,” 35:16). In fact, the eager ministry of the Levites supersedes the requirements of the ceremony. They not only serve the people “quickly” as a reminder of the hasty meal eaten at the first Passover (35:13), but they also are a model of servanthood at the communal meal by making additional preparations for their fellow priests, musicians, and gatekeepers, who remain on duty at their posts for the entire day (35:14–15).
The epilogue (35:16–19). The Chronicler reiterates the detailed diligence of the priests and Levites in carrying out the instructions of the king and the law of Moses. The declaration that Josiah’s Passover is unrivaled as a religious festival in Israel anticipates a comparison with Hezekiah’s Passover celebration (cf. 30:26). The Chronicler’s statement may be one of kind more than totality, since he is probably referring to the centralized celebration of the Passover linked to the Jerusalem temple. Chronicles inserts “the days of the prophet Samuel” (35:18) for “the days of the judges” in 2 Kings 23:22, presumably because Samuel is the prototypical “priest-seer” for postexilic Judaism.
In keeping with his thematic emphasis on “all Israel,” the Chronicler uses the name “Israel” to refer to the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah as recorded in 2 Kings 23:22. For him, the Passover is a unifying festival in the life of Israel since it brings the king, the priests, the Levites, and all the people together in fellowship over a ritual meal (2 Chron. 35:18). The repetition of the date formula (“the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign,” 35:19) is part of an inclusio or envelope construction linking the events of the religious reforms associated with finding the law scroll and the Passover celebration (see comments on 34:8).
Battle report of Josiah’s death (35:20–25). The expression “after all this” (35:20) cues the reader that some time has elapsed since Josiah’s celebration of the Passover. Specifically, the narrative leaps chronologically from the Passover festival in Jerusalem in 622 B.C. to Josiah’s death in battle at Megiddo in 609 B.C. The Chronicler expands the report of Josiah’s death found in 2 Kings 23:29–30 in order to offer a theological commentary on the tragic event. Given the dominant theme of the retribution principle in Chronicles, Josiah’s death poses a narrative problem for the writer, namely, how to explain the untimely end of a righteous king.
According to Begg, the battle report of Josiah’s death broadly fits the pattern of previous death reports for other kings such as Asa and Jehoshaphat.31 The Chronicler uses a four-part structure in order to censure Josiah and to demonstrate that the untimely death of a righteous king is not incongruous with the retribution principle. (1) Josiah’s death is construed as an example of immediate judgment for sin (35:22). (2) Josiah is portrayed after the manner of earlier kings who started well but later stumbled into sin (e.g., Joash and Uzziah). (3) As with predecessors like Rehoboam (11:1–4) and Ahab (18:16–22), Josiah hears a “warning speech” through a spokesman for God prior to his fatal military misstep. (4) Finally, as with Asa, Jehoshaphat, and Hezekiah, the Chronicler contrasts successful religious reform with an impending external military threat forcing the king into a life-and-death decision.
By way of historical background, we must remember that the military might of the ancient superpower of Assyria is now on the wane, while the greatness of the Babylonian Empire is swiftly and brutally on the rise.32 Only a year prior to Josiah’s ill-advised campaign against Pharaoh Neco (610 B.C.), the Babylonians forced the last Assyrian king, Ashur-uballit, to flee the capital city of Haran and set up a provisional government in Carchemish. Pharaoh Neco apparently seeks passage through Palestine to bring his large army to reinforce the beleaguered Assyrian army for a final stand against the Babylonians at Carchemish (35:20).
Pharaoh Neco indicates he has no quarrel with Josiah or Judah; he simply wants a right of way through Judah so he can show loyalty to his Assyrian ally (35:21). The Megiddo pass lies on the international coastal highway, an ancient trade route connecting Egypt with Syria, northern Mesopotamia, and Anatolia. The site of Megiddo guards this bottleneck on the route through the Mount Carmel foothills. To meet up with the Assyrians at Carchemish, Neco must move his army through the Megiddo pass. It is at this strategic location that Josiah (foolishly) chooses to intercept Pharaoh Neco and the Egyptian army.
The key statement in the Chronicler’s rendition of Josiah’s death is the clause “he would not listen to what Neco had said” (35:22). Previously, Josiah was commended by Huldah the prophetess for his responsiveness to God (34:27). Now he actually stands in opposition to God’s word spoken through Pharaoh Neco—to his own destruction (35:21b). But how is King Josiah to discern that the Egyptian king is delivering a message from God? The text provides no answer, but we must assume that somehow through the ministry of God’s Spirit, Josiah could recognize the divine origin of the truth and the authority of Neco’s speech.
Ironically, Josiah goes into battle disguised much like the ploy of King Ahab of Israel (35:22a; cf. 18:28–34). Like Ahab, Josiah is pierced by an arrow and severely injured during the heat of the battle (35:23). According to 2 Kings 23:29, he dies in battle at Megiddo. The expanded report in Chronicles has Josiah dying in Jerusalem (2 Chron. 35:24b). The logical harmonization of the two reports suggests that Josiah is mortally wounded in battle at Megiddo and probably dies in transit to Jerusalem from loss of blood, so that he is declared “dead on arrival” in his capital city.
The Chronicler is careful to note that Josiah receives a proper burial in the “tombs of his fathers” (i.e., the equivalent of a “state funeral,” 35:24). In this regard, the words of Huldah’s prophecy over Josiah are fulfilled: He is buried in the tombs of his fathers in peace (i.e., Judah’s unilateral engagement of the Egyptians in battle ends when Josiah dies; cf. 34:28).
Josiah has been a popular king, for “all Judah and Jerusalem” mourn his death (35:24). In fact, the prophet Jeremiah (a contemporary of Josiah) composes laments for the slain king that continue to memorialize his legacy to the time of the Chronicler. We should not confuse these laments with the book of Lamentations, also written by Jeremiah, according to Jewish tradition, during or after the destruction of Jerusalem. The shock wave of Josiah’s death sends tremors through Judah from which the nation never recovers. Not only do his religious reforms die with him in battle, but also the kingdom of Judah itself will soon “die” in the Babylonian onslaught.
Concluding regnal résumé (35:26–36:1). This concluding résumé contains two formulas: the historical source citation formula (35:26–27) and the succession formula (36:1). The Chronicler repeats 2 Kings 23:28, 30b, with two exceptions. (1) He expands the clause “all he did” into “acts of devotion, according to what is written in the Law of the LORD” (2 Chron. 35:26; cf. 34:2). The expression “acts of devotion” is better rendered “covenant loyalty” (ḥesed), commemorating the covenant-renewal ceremony convened by Josiah and ratified by all Judah (34:29–31). (2) The Chronicler also adds the phrase “in Jerusalem” to the succession formula (36:1), presumably to remind his audience that God made good on his promise to restore his people and his name in that city. On the phrase “the people of the land,” see comments on 33:25.
Bridging Contexts
THE PREACHING OF THE CHRONICLER. We have already noted that the peculiar literary genius of the Chronicler lies in his ability to retell Israelite history as a sermon. According to Rex Mason, the essential features of the sermon include an appeal to some recognized source of authority, a proclamation of some theological teaching about the person and works of God, an appeal for some kind of response on the part of the audience, and the use of rhetorical devices designed to arouse the interest of the audience and engage them in the message topic.33
(1) The Chronicler cites two authoritative historical sources in his review of the reigns of the Kings Manasseh, Amon, and Josiah. The “annals of the kings of Israel” (33:18) and the “book of the kings of Israel and Judah” (35:27) are documents belonging to the royal archives and portions of which are now a part of the Old Testament books of 1 and 2 Kings. A third resource, the “records of the seers” (33:19) proves more difficult to identify. Clearly it is widely recognized as a reliable historical document compiled by the school of the prophets.
(2) This section of Chronicles highlights certain character traits of God, especially his compassion and mercy in responding to those who humble themselves and offer prayer seeking God’s forgiveness (i.e., Manasseh, 33:12–19; Josiah, 34:27). God is portrayed as one who listens and is moved to benevolent action on behalf of the penitent (33:13). Conversely, God’s righteousness in not acquitting the guilty is demonstrated in his response to Amon, who “increased his guilt” before God by refusing to humble himself (33:23).
(3) The repeated theme of this literary unit is repentance, or more specifically, “humbling oneself” before God (33:12, 19, 23; 34:27). The biblical term used (knʿ ) denotes a change of heart and attitude from a posture of defiance to submission toward God and principles of righteousness. The idea of repentance in the Old Testament, then, is basically that of turning around or returning to a point of departure. The “turn” of repentance and conversion consists of turning from something and turning toward something.34 Theologically, repentance is turning away from self and sin to God in utter humility and dependence.
Of special interest to the Chronicler are the immediate moral consequences of human behavior. Manasseh’s sin leads to his exile and imprisonment in Assyria (33:10–11). Later, Manasseh’s repentance leads to his restoration as king of Judah (33:12–13). Seemingly, all this would have been a great encouragement to the Chronicler’s audience. Yet, curiously, Chronicles is a sermon without an application since the books contain no direct reference to the writer’s own time period. The writer preaches from the examples of repentance in the lives of the Judahite kings of Manasseh, Amon, and Josiah but makes no direct appeal to the citizens of postexilic Jerusalem to respond in like manner.
(4) Finally, the Chronicler employs the literary or rhetorical approach of “storytelling” as the means of capturing and maintaining audience interest in his message. By storytelling we mean the use of the genre of biblical narrative as the primary vehicle for preaching the sermon. Biblical narrative may be separated (somewhat artificially) into two categories: heroic narrative and epic narrative.35 Chronicles is primarily epic narrative in that it is national rather than familial or tribal history, tends to emphasize cause-and-effect sequences more than plot development, contains commentary offered by the narrator, and often notes how God acts through human agents (e.g., prophet, king).36
Biblical narrative “presents a theology—that is, a proclamation about God—told by means of narrative.”37 For Mathews, this means that “historical narrative is narrative theology” because the biblical writers assume the role of God’s prophet and present a theological interpretation of Hebrew history.38 The audience’s intuited understanding of the Chronicler’s application is a key ingredient in the art of preaching through the medium of biblical narrative. Narrative theology is a subtle but most powerful literary technique for penetrating the heart and mind of the hearer (or reader) with the truth claims of the preacher’s message.
Two characteristics of biblical narrative are especially important to the subliminal approach in evoking the desired response from the writer’s audience. (1) The first is related to the idea of plot development, a central feature of storytelling. The plot of a story is a coherent sequence of related events moving toward closure. The essence of a story plot is conflict moving toward resolution.39 By his careful selection, arrangement, and reshaping of the narrative events associated with Manasseh, Amon, and Josiah, the Chronicler encourages his audience to consider the history of Judah during this time as a type of theological commentary on the divine response to human repentance. For the Chronicler, the resolution of the conflict (i.e., the seeming failure of the divine promise concerning the Davidic covenant after the return from exile) is found in the continuity of repentance and blessing as exhibited in the lives of certain kings of Judah.
(2) The second characteristic is linked to the role of the Chronicler as “narrator” (whether overt or covert) of the events in his retelling of Israel’s history. Typically, the narrator speaks in the third-person in biblical narrative, leaving personal judgment and moral commentary to the subtle influences of literary structure and the dialogue of the main characters. According to Bar Efrat, the narrator tends to “hint at things—in delicate and indirect ways—rather than stating them explicitly. The method of the biblical narrator requires a constant mental effort on the part of the reader, involving careful thought and attention to every detail of the narrator.”40
The same holds true for the Chronicler’s readers (or hearers). As narrator, the Chronicler persuades the audience to understand the history of Israel from his theological viewpoint, a viewpoint (sometimes) different from those of the participants in the story. Point of view is crucial for the interpretation of the narrative because it is the ideological and theological lens through which the audience comprehends the events of the plot of the story. By recounting the stories of repentance and subsequent divine blessing associated with Kings Manasseh and Josiah, as well as the divine judgment resulting from Amon’s failure to heed the word of God and repent, the Chronicler delicately and indirectly persuades his audience that humbling themselves before God in repentance would be in their best interests too!
Contemporary Significance
PREACHING REPENTANCE. According to John Stott, the preacher is called to both comfort and disturb people.41 Admittedly, the latter task is an unpopular one. Nevertheless, it is necessary at times for the servant of God to confront his audience. The tradition of the prophet as “conscience” for God’s people has its roots in the ministry of the Old Testament prophets, who were called both to “uproot and tear down” and to “build and to plant” (Jer. 1:10).
The preacher both comforts and disturbs the audience through the act of preaching, the proclamation of the Word of God. The messenger must deliver the message of the One who sends the servant—not an invented message (cf. Amos 3:8; 2 Peter 1:21). For Stott, contemporary preaching builds bridges between two worlds: the Word or Holy Scripture and the world of everyday life.42 The preacher “earths” the Word in the world by communicating God’s truth with relevance and pertinence to our ever-changing society.
The “preaching” of Chronicles informs contemporary preaching at two levels. (1) In terms of content, the disturbing message of preaching is the call to repentance. (2) In terms of style, the narrative approach permits the preacher to locate the disturbing message in a larger story that also includes the message of comfort.
We have defined repentance as an “about face,” a turning away from sin, self, and death to righteousness, God, and life (Jer. 31:18–20; Luke 3:8–14). The effects of the Fall are still manifest in the world, as both the psalmist and the apostle Paul observe that “all have turned aside … there is no one who does good” (Ps. 14:3; Rom. 3:12). One need only pick up a daily newspaper or turn on a local television news broadcast to verify the biblical assessment of the human condition. The real question, then, is not one of why anyone should repent of sin and turn to God. Rather, the crucial questions are twofold: Who can truly forgive sin and restore human dignity and purpose? When is it too late to repent and turn to God?
There is a sense in which the story of Manasseh’s repentance foreshadows that of the believing thief in the Gospel (33:12–13; cf. Luke 23:40–43). Both stories answer the crucial questions by illustrating the point that the God of the Bible can truly forgive sin and that his door of salvation and restoration is always open. The old and new covenants alike portray God as one who is gracious, merciful, compassionate, and slow to anger—not desiring that anyone should perish but that all should repent and live (Ezek. 18:32; cf. Ex. 34:6–7; John 3:16; 2 Peter 3:9). The lyrics of an old nineteenth-century Christian hymn capture the truth of this biblical teaching: “There is a wideness in God’s mercy like the wideness of the sea; there’s a kindness in His justice which is more than liberty.”
Scott has aptly reminded us that the preacher’s call to repentance, in any age, must be both personal and corporate. That is, corporate or community repentance “for social sin and the defects of accepted morality” goes hand in hand with personal repentance for sin and rebellion against God and his holy law.43 Beyond this, the call to repentance is necessarily coupled with the summons to believe and live in God’s way—the way that leads to life and “fruitful” living (cf. Matt. 7:13–20). The enduring reality that encourages the prophets in their ministry and saves them from despair as heralds of God’s “disturbing” word—the idea of humanity’s capacity for repentance—should sustain today’s preacher in like manner.44
Barclay furthers the discussion by developing the idea that today’s preacher should also be sustained by what he calls “the great challenge and privilege of the Christian.”45 That great challenge and privilege are partnering with God in the ministry of the conversion of individuals to Christianity, and this partnership is necessary because the primary means of conversion in the early church was the preaching of the gospel.
Repentance does not necessarily suspend the consequences of personal or corporate sin. The kingdom of Judah was destroyed and the Hebrews were exiled in Babylonia despite Josiah’s national revival (36:15–19). As Heschel has warned, God’s forgiveness must not be mistaken for indulgence or complacency.46 Nor are we to be seduced by the preaching of “cheap grace” decried by Bonhoeffer.47 Lest we tame God and fashion him after our own image, it is important to remember he is loving and faithful, but he is also terrible and dangerous. We would do well to recall Lucy’s conversation with Mr. and Mrs. Beaver about the great lion Aslan of Narnia fame:
“Then he isn’t safe?” said Lucy.
“Safe?” said Mrs. Beaver. “Who said anything about safe? Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King.”48
Indeed, the God of the Bible is holy and just; but he is also “gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love. The LORD is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made” (Ps. 145:8–9). The glorious message of the Bible, unique among all the holy books of the world’s religions, is that God’s anger, though provoked by human sin, may be revoked by human repentance. Happily, assuredly God returns to those who return to him (Zech. 1:3; Mal. 3:7).
The Chronicler also provides instruction on preaching style. A. W. Tozer wrote about those who preach the “old cross” and those who preach the “new cross.”49 The old cross is the symbol of death, representing the abrupt and violent end of a human being. It “slays the sinner” and makes no compromise, modifies nothing, and spares nothing. It strikes the “victim” cruel and hard—and completely. The new cross does not slay the sinner but attempts to redirect him or her into a cleaner and happier way of living. It saves one’s self-respect and offers the individual a new and improved “old life.”
The message of the Christian church today must be the “old cross” of Tozer. Indeed, “the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18). Again, Paul says that those in Christ have died to sin because we have been buried with him through baptism in his death (Rom. 6:1–4). True repentance slays the sinner and creates a new person in Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 5:17).
Much like the Old Testament prophets, the preacher today is called to “slay the sinner” with the words of God’s righteous judgment (e.g., Hos. 6:5). There is still a place for the fiery and confrontational ministry of a John the Baptist-like evangelist. A dark world will always need the uncompromising witness to the “true light” (John 1:7–9). Yet contemporary North American society has experienced a shift in communication paradigms. The multiple forms of electronic media utilized to both entertain and inform our technological society have profoundly influenced the “language” of communication. For example, today’s audio-visual communication especially appeals to the hearts and feelings of the audience. This contrasts starkly with the notational form of communication that appeals chiefly to the intellect and reason.50
The emergence of what is now called “symbolic language” is directly related to this cultural shift in communication paradigms. According to Babin, symbolic language is a language of stories, images, suggestions, and inferences.51 This is also the language of biblical narrative, a language that hints at things “in delicate and indirect ways.”52 The Chronicler reminds us that at times the preacher can “slay the sinner” indirectly with stories and personal examples of repentance couched in biblical narrative. There is an important place for the use of symbolic language in the church today as people reconnect with the idea of story and imagination as a result of the electronic media.
Naturally, the indirect communication of story and image is never a substitute for the direct communication of the prophetic call to repentance. Rather, it is complementary. This is why indirect communication is usually interpreted for the audience (e.g., Jesus’ interpretation of the parable of the sower; cf. Matt. 13:18). The Chronicler’s audience knows the history of Israel from the Kings’ parallels and the books of the major and minor prophets. His indirect call to repentance through the story of Hebrew history is contextualized for his audience by the shared national experience culminating in the Babylonian exile and the restoration of Judah. Like the parables of Jesus, however, the indirect communication of story as found in biblical narrative has much to commend it for the ministry of Christ’s gospel in our postmodern society. The indirect communication of the Bible was often prompted by historical or theological crises. The shift in the historical paradigm from the modern world to a postmodern world seems such a historical crisis, with considerable “theological fallout” for the Christian church.
(1) It places the onus on the audience (whether reader or hearer) to enter the story and search for personal meaning and application. Thus, indirect communication becomes both clue and snare because it simultaneously informs and conceals. For those with “ears to hear,” indirect communication of biblical narrative incites curiosity and excites the imagination. It becomes an invitation to the “seeker” to enter the mystery of the kingdom of God (cf. Col. 1:26–27).
(2) Indirect communication dulls the ears and pronounces judgment on the “outsider,” those who have willfully chosen not to “see” and “hear” God’s truth (cf. Ezek. 24:3–14). In quoting Isaiah the prophet, Jesus indicated that some have already “closed their eyes” and “hardly hear with their ears” and thus have hearts that have become “calloused” (Matt. 13:15; cf. Isa. 6:9–10). The implicit answer to the question posed to Jesus by his disciples as to why he spoke in parables is really that of winnowing the faithful from the unfaithful by means of indirect communication (Matt. 13:10–13). This is no doubt a hard teaching, but it serves to further our understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ as a “stumbling block” and a “rock” that makes people fall (1 Cor. 1:23; 1 Peter 2:8).
(3) This approach gives a preeminent place to the work of the Holy Spirit in drawing people into a conversation with God. One aspect of the genius of indirect communication is its ability to break down “defense mechanisms” in the audience as the reader or hearer gets caught up in the story. This means the “punch line” often has far greater impact for the “insider” or the person of faith than truth expressed by more direct means of communication.
Perhaps the best example of this is Nathan’s explanation to King David of the parable about a poor man who had but one ewe lamb (2 Sam. 12:1–6). What else could David say but “I have sinned against the LORD” (2 Sam. 12:13)? What else could have prompted David to write about the experience of his own repentance with such depth of feeling and force of spiritual conviction as in Psalm 51? In a way, the Chronicler anticipates the later ministry of Jesus, who “did not say anything to them without using a parable” (Mark 4:34).