The Steady Hand of a Godly, Second-Rate King
Introduction: The Antithesis Runs Through the Middle
We have a tendency to think of history in terms of blockbuster events and marquee names. We remember the Davids, the Solomons, the Hezekiahs, and the Josiahs. We remember the great triumphs and the catastrophic failures. But the ordinary providence of God most often works through the steady, the faithful, and the largely unspectacular. The kingdom of God is not built only by the giants; it is built brick by brick, day by day, by men who simply determine to do the next right thing.
Jotham, king of Judah, is one of these men. His reign is not marked by a stunning, nation-sweeping revival like Josiah's, nor by a dramatic deliverance like Hezekiah's. It is a short, sixteen-year reign sandwiched between the prideful fall of his father, Uzziah, and the catastrophic apostasy of his son, Ahaz. Jotham is a godly island in a sea of encroaching compromise and outright rebellion. He is what we might call a second-rate good king. He is not David, but he is certainly not Ahaz. And in his story, the Chronicler gives us a crucial lesson about personal faithfulness in a time of popular corruption. He shows us that a leader's piety matters, that obedience brings strength, but that one man's righteousness cannot, by itself, turn the tide of a nation that is determined to drift.
The story of Jotham is a story of the antithesis, the great divide between the righteous and the wicked, but it is an antithesis that runs right down the middle of the kingdom. We have a righteous king on the throne, and a corrupt populace in the high places. We have a man who orders his ways before Yahweh, and a people who are still bent on mischief. This is not an abstract theological point; it is the reality of our world. It is the reality of our churches, our communities, and often, our own hearts. Jotham's reign forces us to ask a hard question: what does faithfulness look like when the people you lead are still acting corruptly? What is the responsibility of a godly man when the culture is sliding in the wrong direction?
The Text
Jotham was twenty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Jerushah the daughter of Zadok. And he did what was right in the sight of Yahweh, according to all that his father Uzziah had done; however he did not enter the temple of Yahweh. But the people continued acting corruptly. He built the upper gate of the house of Yahweh, and he built extensively the wall of Ophel. Moreover, he built cities in the hill country of Judah, and he built fortresses and towers on the wooded hills. He fought also with the king of the sons of Ammon and prevailed over them. So the sons of Ammon gave him during that year 100 talents of silver, 10,000 kors of wheat, and 10,000 of barley. The sons of Ammon also brought back to him this amount in the second and in the third year. So Jotham became strong because he established his ways before Yahweh his God. Now the rest of the acts of Jotham, even all his wars and his ways, behold, they are written in the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah. He was twenty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem. And Jotham slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David; and Ahaz his son became king in his place.
(2 Chronicles 27:1-9 LSB)
A Righteous Man in a Corrupt Time (v. 1-2)
The Chronicler begins with the standard biographical data, but quickly gets to the heart of the matter: the king's spiritual evaluation.
"Jotham was twenty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Jerushah the daughter of Zadok. And he did what was right in the sight of Yahweh, according to all that his father Uzziah had done; however he did not enter the temple of Yahweh. But the people continued acting corruptly." (2 Chronicles 27:1-2)
Jotham "did what was right in the sight of Yahweh." This is the foundational standard for any king, any leader, any man. The question is not whether his policies were popular, or whether his ways seemed right in his own eyes. The only evaluation that matters is God's. The standard is divine, objective, and absolute. Jotham's righteousness is compared to his father, Uzziah, who had a long and prosperous reign for the most part, before it was ruined by pride.
But the Chronicler adds two crucial qualifications. First, "however he did not enter the temple of Yahweh." This is a significant detail. His father Uzziah, in a moment of hubris, had trespassed into the holy place to offer incense, a duty reserved for the priests alone. For this sin, God struck him with leprosy. Jotham learned from his father's catastrophic mistake. He respected the boundaries God had established between the office of the king and the office of the priest. He understood the Creator/creature distinction and the holiness of God's house. This was not a small thing. It showed a commendable humility and a fear of God that his father had lost. Jotham knew where his authority ended and where God's sacred order began.
The second qualification is a grim one: "But the people continued acting corruptly." The parallel account in 2 Kings 15:35 tells us exactly what this means: "the high places were not removed; the people still sacrificed and burned incense on the high places." Jotham was personally pious, but he did not, or could not, lead the nation into a full-scale reformation. The people's hearts were still set on their syncretistic, disobedient worship. This is a picture of a divided kingdom, not geographically, but spiritually. The head is pointed in the right direction, but the body is still wandering off into the weeds.
This reveals a critical truth about leadership and national character. A godly leader is a great blessing from God, but he is not a savior. He cannot force a people to be righteous against their will. Piety at the top does not automatically translate to piety at the bottom. The people have their own responsibility before God, and here, they were failing. Jotham's failure to remove the high places is a black mark, to be sure, but it is presented here more as a statement of fact about the people's intractability. The corruption was popular, it was widespread, and it was stubborn.
Productive Piety (v. 3-6)
Jotham's personal righteousness was not an inert, private affair. It overflowed into public, practical, and productive action. His faithfulness resulted in national strength.
"He built the upper gate of the house of Yahweh, and he built extensively the wall of Ophel. Moreover, he built cities in the hill country of Judah, and he built fortresses and towers on the wooded hills. He fought also with the king of the sons of Ammon and prevailed over them... So Jotham became strong because he established his ways before Yahweh his God." (2 Chronicles 27:3-6)
Notice the connection between piety and pragmatism. Because Jotham feared God, he honored God's house, building up its gate. Because he was a faithful steward of the kingdom God had given him, he fortified its defenses and expanded its infrastructure. This is what righteousness looks like in the public square. It is not just about avoiding gross sin; it is about constructive, diligent, and wise governance. He builds up the sacred space (the temple gate) and the secular space (the city wall, the fortresses).
This constructive piety leads directly to military and economic strength. He fights the Ammonites and wins. They are forced to pay a massive tribute of silver, wheat, and barley for three years. The text is explicit about the cause-and-effect relationship here. Verse 6 is the interpretive key to the whole chapter: "So Jotham became strong because he established his ways before Yahweh his God."
His strength was not ultimately in his construction projects or his military strategy. Those were the fruits. The root was his established walk with God. The Hebrew for "established" or "ordered" his ways means to make them firm, prepared, and steadfast. He was not haphazard in his obedience. He was deliberate. He was intentional. And God honored that intentional obedience with tangible, public blessing. This is the covenant at work. Obedience brings blessing; disobedience brings cursing. When the king walks in God's ways, the nation prospers, the walls are secure, and the enemies are subdued. God makes it clear that He is the source of national strength. It is not a matter of geopolitics or economic theory; it is a matter of covenant faithfulness.
The Inevitable End (v. 7-9)
The account concludes, as it began, with the standard formula for a king's reign.
"Now the rest of the acts of Jotham, even all his wars and his ways, behold, they are written in the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah... And Jotham slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David; and Ahaz his son became king in his place." (2 Chronicles 27:7-9)
Jotham's life, for all its strength and righteousness, ends. He sleeps with his fathers. He was a good king, a faithful man, but he was just a man. He could build walls and win wars, but he could not conquer death. And he could not guarantee the faithfulness of his successor. The final phrase is ominous: "and Ahaz his son became king in his place."
Anyone reading the Chronicler's history would know what that meant. Ahaz would be one of the most wicked, idolatrous, and disastrous kings in Judah's history. He would reverse all the good his father did, shut the doors of the temple his father built up, and lead the nation into full-blown apostasy. This is the tragedy of the old covenant. Righteousness was not hereditary. One man's faithfulness, no matter how steadfast, could be undone in a generation. The son of the godly Jotham was the wicked Ahaz, just as the son of the godly Hezekiah would be the monstrous Manasseh.
This points to the ultimate inadequacy of all earthly kings. Jotham was good, but he was not good enough. He could secure the borders for a time, but he could not secure the people's hearts. He could establish his own ways before the Lord, but he could not establish the ways of his own son. The nation needed a better king, a permanent king, one whose righteousness would not just be a temporary dam against corruption, but a fountain of life that would cleanse the people from the inside out.
Jotham and the True King
The story of Jotham is a quiet but persistent signpost pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ. Jotham did what was right, but his people did what was corrupt. Jesus is the truly righteous king, and He creates a new people who are righteous in Him. He doesn't just rule over a corrupt populace; He purchases a holy nation by His blood (1 Peter 2:9).
Jotham learned from his father's sin and did not presume to enter the temple. But Jesus is our great High Priest who is also the King. He did not sinfully enter the temple; He is the temple. He has passed through the heavens and entered the true holy of holies, not with the blood of bulls and goats, but with His own blood, having obtained eternal redemption for us (Hebrews 9:12).
Jotham built up the defenses of Judah, but they would eventually fall. Jesus is building His church, and He has declared that the gates of Hell will not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). Jotham's strength came because he ordered his ways before the Lord. Jesus' strength is inherent. He is the power of God. He does not simply order His ways before God; He is the Way.
And finally, Jotham died and was replaced by a wicked son who dismantled his legacy. But our King, Jesus, died and rose again, conquering death. He has no successor because He reigns forever. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and His righteousness will never be undone. The story of Jotham is the story of the best a man can do under the old covenant. And it shows us, in its quiet, steady, and ultimately insufficient faithfulness, why we so desperately needed a new and better covenant, sealed in the blood of a new and better King.