Commentary - 2 Kings 15:32-38

Bird's-eye view

In this brief and formulaic account of Jotham's reign, the Chronicler gives us a portrait of a good king who was, nevertheless, not good enough. Jotham stands as a classic example of second-generation faithfulness that, while commendable, lacks the reforming zeal of the first. He does what is right, following the pattern of his father Uzziah, but he stops short of tackling the systemic, popular idolatry represented by the high places. His piety is genuine but contained; he builds up the house of Yahweh but does not tear down the houses of the idols. This spiritual compromise, this toleration of a divided heart in the nation, creates a vacuum. And as the account concludes, we see that God begins to fill that vacuum with judgment. The external threats from Aram and Israel are not random geopolitical events; they are the hand of a sovereign God beginning to move against a people whose righteousness is partial. Jotham's reign is a picture of respectable, decent, yet incomplete obedience, and serves as a sober reminder that a failure to press on in full-orbed reformation will inevitably lead to decline and judgment.

The passage is structured in the typical way the book of Kings summarizes a monarch's rule: the chronological anchor, the king's age and length of reign, his maternal lineage, a spiritual evaluation, a notable accomplishment, the standard reference to the official chronicles, the announcement of God's stirring of enemies, and the notice of his death and succession. It is a tidy summary, but beneath the surface, it reveals the tragic trajectory of a nation coasting on past glories. Jotham maintains the status quo of his father's piety, but he also maintains the status quo of the nation's idolatry. This is the story of a good man presiding over the beginnings of a great unraveling.

Outline

Context In 2 Kings

This section on Jotham comes in the middle of a chaotic and bloody period for the northern kingdom of Israel. The surrounding verses detail a rapid succession of assassinations and coups in the north: Zechariah, Shallum, Menahem, Pekahiah, and Pekah. The stability of the Davidic line in Judah stands in stark contrast to the violent political turmoil of Israel. Jotham's father, Uzziah (also called Azariah), had a long and prosperous reign, but it ended in tragedy when he was struck with leprosy for arrogantly entering the temple to burn incense (2 Chron. 26:16-21). Jotham had served as coregent for some time during his father's illness. His reign, therefore, represents a continuation of a period of relative strength for Judah, but it is also the calm before the storm. The external threats mentioned at the end of this passage, Rezin and Pekah, will become the central crisis of the reign of Jotham's son, the wicked king Ahaz, as detailed in the next chapter and in Isaiah 7.

Key Issues

A Good King, But...

The Bible is a relentlessly honest book. It does not give us airbrushed portraits of its heroes. David was a man after God's own heart, but also an adulterer and murderer. Solomon was the wisest man who ever lived, but he was a fool when it came to women and idolatry. The book of Kings applies this same unvarnished realism to its evaluation of the monarchs. Jotham is a case in point. The verdict on his reign is positive: "he did what was right in the sight of Yahweh." This is a significant commendation. He was not a wicked king. He was a believer. He followed the good example of his father.

But then comes the great "however," the recurring refrain of compromise that plagues the story of Judah: "Only the high places were not taken away." This was the fly in the ointment, the asterisk on his record. The high places were local shrines, often on hilltops, where the people would offer sacrifices. While some of these may have been intended for Yahweh, they represented a syncretistic and unauthorized form of worship, directly contrary to the command to worship God only at the place He would choose, which was the Temple in Jerusalem (Deut. 12). Jotham's failure to remove them was not a minor oversight. It was a failure of leadership, a toleration of disobedience at the heart of the nation's life. He was a good king, but his goodness did not extend to the difficult and unpopular work of thoroughgoing reformation. This kind of partial obedience is always a precursor to decay.

Verse by Verse Commentary

32 In the second year of Pekah the son of Remaliah king of Israel, Jotham the son of Uzziah king of Judah became king.

The historian anchors us in time, synchronizing the reigns of the southern and northern kingdoms. This is not just a bookkeeping entry. It reminds us that these two kingdoms, though divided and often at odds, are part of one interconnected story under the sovereign hand of one God. While Israel is churning through kings in a series of violent coups, the line of David in Judah continues, a testimony to God's covenant faithfulness. Jotham's accession is orderly and legitimate, a stark contrast to the chaos up north.

33 He was twenty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Jerusha the daughter of Zadok.

We are given the standard biographical data. He begins his reign as a young man and has a respectable tenure of sixteen years. The mention of his mother is a regular feature in the chronicles of the kings of Judah. It highlights the importance of the royal household and, often, the influence of the queen mother. That her father's name was Zadok is significant. Zadok was the great high priest during the time of David and Solomon, and the name carried great weight. It suggests that Jotham came from a godly heritage on both sides, a lineage steeped in both the royal and priestly traditions of Israel's glory days.

34 And he did what was right in the sight of Yahweh; he did according to all that his father Uzziah had done.

Here is the divine assessment, the only evaluation that ultimately matters. Jotham was a righteous king. He walked in the ways of the Lord. The standard for his righteousness is his own father, Uzziah. This is both a commendation and a subtle limitation. Uzziah had a long and largely successful reign, but he too had failed to remove the high places and had ended his reign in a cloud of pride and divine judgment. To do "according to all that his father Uzziah had done" means that Jotham replicated both his father's strengths and his father's crucial weakness.

35 Only the high places were not taken away; the people still sacrificed and burned incense on the high places. He built the upper gate of the house of Yahweh.

This verse presents the great contradiction of his reign. The word "only" or "howbeit" signals the problem. The persistent cancer of the high places remained. The people's hearts were still divided. Their worship was convenient and customized, not centralized and commanded. Notice the text says "the people" still sacrificed there, indicating the popular, grassroots nature of this idolatry. It would have been a politically difficult thing to stamp out, and Jotham, for all his personal piety, did not have the will to do it. Instead, he focuses his energy on a positive construction project: building the upper gate of the temple. This was a good and pious work. But it is a classic example of trying to build up true worship without being willing to tear down false worship. It is an attempt to add holiness without subtracting sin. Such a project is doomed to fail.

36 Now the rest of the acts of Jotham and all that he did, are they not written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah?

This is the standard concluding formula, pointing the reader to the official state records for more details. It is the ancient equivalent of a footnote. The inspired historian is not trying to give an exhaustive political history; he is giving a theological interpretation of that history. He has selected the details that are crucial for understanding God's covenant dealings with His people.

37 In those days Yahweh began to send Rezin king of Aram and Pekah the son of Remaliah against Judah.

This verse is the theological key to the whole passage. The political and military pressure on Judah's borders was not a coincidence. It was not simply the result of ambitious foreign kings. The text is explicit: Yahweh began to send them. God is the one stirring the pot. The toleration of idolatry in verse 35 is directly connected to the stirring of enemies in verse 37. When God's people will not deal with the sin in their midst, God will send external pressure to get their attention. This is the beginning of a covenant lawsuit, a divine chastisement intended to call the nation to repentance. These are the first tremors of an earthquake that will fully strike in the next generation.

38 And Jotham slept with his fathers, and he was buried with his fathers in the city of David his father; and Ahaz his son became king in his place.

Jotham's end is peaceful. He dies of natural causes and is given an honorable burial with the kings of his line. He is gathered to his people. But he leaves behind a nation with a compromised faith and gathering enemies on the horizon. And the son who takes his place, Ahaz, will not be a righteous man who tolerates some evil, but a profoundly wicked man who will abandon the Lord's covenant entirely and drag Judah into the depths of apostasy. Jotham's failure to reform paved the way for his son's rebellion.

Application

The story of Jotham is a potent warning against the dangers of a "good enough" Christianity. Jotham was a decent, respectable, God-fearing man. By the standards of his day, and ours, he would be considered a fine leader. But the standard of God is not decency; it is holiness. The call of God is not to manage sin, but to mortify it. Jotham's failure was not that he was actively wicked, but that he was passively tolerant of wickedness.

We must apply this lesson to our own lives, our families, and our churches. Where are our "high places?" What are the acceptable sins, the popular compromises, the areas of disobedience that we refuse to touch because it would be too difficult, too unpopular, too disruptive? We may be busy building "upper gates," doing good things for the church, engaging in ministry, and maintaining a righteous personal life. But if we are not at the same time taking a sledgehammer to the idols in our own hearts and in our midst, our piety is hollow.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is not a call to home improvement; it is a call to demolition and resurrection. Christ did not die to whitewash our old lives, but to put our old man to death and raise us to a new one. The grace of God that saves us is also the grace that sanctifies us, and that sanctification is a war. It requires us to tear down every high place that exalts itself against the knowledge of God (2 Cor. 10:5). Jotham's story reminds us that a failure in this war, a truce with any sin, will inevitably invite the disciplinary hand of our loving, but holy, Father.