2 Chronicles Chapter 28

The Evil Reign of Ahaz
A. The sin of Ahaz and the punishment of Ahaz

1. 2 Chronicles 28:1–4, Ahaz rejects God and embraces idols

“Ahaz was twenty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem, but he did not that which was right in the sight of the LORD, like David his father. For he walked in the ways of the kings of Israel, and made also molten images for Baalim. Moreover he burnt incense in the valley of the son of Hinnom, and burnt his children in the fire, after the abominations of the heathen whom the LORD had cast out before the children of Israel. He sacrificed also and burnt incense in the high places, and on the hills, and under every green tree.”

a. He did not that which was right in the sight of the LORD.
This opening assessment is devastating in its simplicity. Scripture does not describe partial obedience, moral inconsistency, or isolated failure. It states plainly that Ahaz did not do what was right in the sight of the LORD. This places him among the most wicked kings Judah ever knew. Unlike previous kings who sinned yet retained some reverence for the LORD, Ahaz’s reign was characterized by wholesale rebellion. His rule represents a decisive moral and spiritual collapse at the highest level of leadership.

b. Like David his father.
The comparison to David heightens Ahaz’s guilt. David was not sinless, yet he was a man after God’s own heart, who loved the LORD, honored His covenant, and repented when confronted with sin. Ahaz stood within that royal lineage and had access to both historical and immediate godly examples. His father Jotham had reigned faithfully, and his ancestor David stood as the ideal king of Judah. Ahaz rejected both. His rebellion was not due to ignorance but willful disregard.

c. He walked in the ways of the kings of Israel.
Ahaz deliberately aligned himself with the apostate practices of the northern kingdom. While Judah had experienced a mixture of faithful and unfaithful kings, Israel had been uniformly corrupt since its founding. To walk in the ways of the kings of Israel was to embrace idolatry, syncretism, and rejection of the covenant. This verse marks a tragic turning point, as Judah begins to imitate the spiritual rebellion of Israel rather than serve as a contrasting witness.

i. This is the first explicit instance where Judah is said to imitate Israel’s apostasy. The distinction between the two kingdoms begins to erode, not politically, but spiritually. Judah no longer merely tolerated corruption among the people, it institutionalized it through the king.

ii. The moral climate of Ahaz’s reign is vividly reflected in Micah 7:2–7, which says, “The good man is perished out of the earth, and there is none upright among men, they all lie in wait for blood, they hunt every man his brother with a net. That they may do evil with both hands earnestly, the prince asketh, and the judge asketh for a reward, and the great man, he uttereth his mischievous desire, so they wrap it up. The best of them is as a brier, the most upright is sharper than a thorn hedge, the day of thy watchmen and thy visitation cometh, now shall be their perplexity be. Trust ye not in a friend, put ye not confidence in a guide, keep the doors of thy mouth from her that lieth in thy bosom. For the son dishonoureth the father, the daughter riseth up against her mother, the daughter in law against her mother in law, a man’s enemies are the men of his own house. Therefore I will look unto the LORD, I will wait for the God of my salvation, my God will hear me.”
This passage captures the depth of corruption and the isolation of the faithful remnant during Ahaz’s reign.

d. And burnt his children in the fire.
This is the most horrifying aspect of Ahaz’s apostasy. He participated in the worship of Molech, a demonically inspired cult that demanded the sacrifice of children. This was not symbolic or metaphorical language. It involved literal human sacrifice. Infants were placed upon a heated metal idol and burned alive while drums were beaten to drown out their cries. Ahaz, a king of Judah and descendant of David, sanctioned and practiced this atrocity.

i. God explicitly condemned this practice in Leviticus 20:3, which says, “And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people, because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.”
This was a capital offense under the Law, provoking direct divine judgment.

ii. Tragically, this sin had appeared before among Israel’s leaders. 1 Kings 11:7 records Solomon’s accommodation of Molech worship, saying, “Then did Solomon build an high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon.” The northern kingdom institutionalized this sin, as 2 Kings 17:17 states, “And they caused their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire.” Manasseh of Judah would later repeat this horror, as recorded in 2 Kings 21:6. The practice persisted until Josiah finally destroyed the site in 2 Kings 23:10, which says, “And he defiled Topheth, which is in the valley of the children of Hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter to pass through the fire to Molech.”

iii. The Valley of the Son of Hinnom lay just south of Jerusalem. It became infamous as the location of Judah’s most grotesque idolatry. Later defiled and turned into a refuse dump, its continual fires gave rise to the term Gehenna, which Jesus used to describe hell, as in Mark 9:43, which says, “And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off, it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched.”

e. According to the abominations of the heathen whom the LORD had cast out before the children of Israel.
Ahaz’s actions deliberately mirrored the sins that had originally brought God’s judgment upon the Canaanites. These practices were the very reason the LORD had driven those nations out of the land. By embracing the same abominations, Judah placed itself under the same covenant curses.

i. This underscores a critical biblical principle. God’s judgment of the Canaanites was not racial but moral. Their destruction came because of persistent, unrepentant wickedness. Israel and Judah were not exempt. If they practiced the same sins, they would receive the same judgment. Ahaz’s reign demonstrates how far Judah had fallen, not merely tolerating paganism, but fully adopting the darkest practices of the nations God had judged.

2. 2 Chronicles 28:5–8, A great slaughter and captivity of many from Judah

“Wherefore the LORD his God delivered him into the hand of the king of Syria, and they smote him, and carried away a great multitude of them captives, and brought them to Damascus. And he was also delivered into the hand of the king of Israel, who smote him with a great slaughter. For Pekah the son of Remaliah slew in Judah an hundred and twenty thousand in one day, which were all valiant men, because they had forsaken the LORD God of their fathers. And Zichri, a mighty man of Ephraim, slew Maaseiah the king’s son, and Azrikam the governor of the house, and Elkanah that was next to the king. And the children of Israel carried away captive of their brethren two hundred thousand, women, sons, and daughters, and took also away much spoil from them, and brought the spoil to Samaria.”

a. Wherefore the LORD his God delivered him into the hand of the king of Syria.
This judgment is explicitly attributed to the LORD. The defeat of Ahaz and Judah was not merely the result of superior military strategy by Syria and Israel, but the direct consequence of divine discipline. Covenant unfaithfulness produced covenant consequences. God withdrew His protection and handed Judah over to its enemies. The phrase the LORD his God emphasizes divine sovereignty. Though Ahaz rejected the LORD in covenant loyalty, God remained his God by right of creation and rule.

i. 2 Kings 16:5–6 provides additional background, stating, “Then Rezin king of Syria and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to war, and they besieged Ahaz, but could not overcome him. At that time Rezin king of Syria recovered Elath to Syria, and drave the Jews from Elath, and the Syrians came to Elath, and dwelt there unto this day.” This alliance between Syria and Israel was driven by Pekah’s resistance to Assyria. Judah was viewed as a strategic obstacle to that resistance.

ii. Isaiah 7:6 reveals the deeper political objective behind this invasion, saying, “Let us go up against Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal.” The plan was not merely to defeat Ahaz but to overthrow the Davidic line itself. Humanly speaking, the messianic promise appeared to be in grave danger.

iii. Though Ahaz had abandoned covenant faithfulness, God had not forfeited His sovereign claim over him. The LORD disciplined Judah not as an absent deity, but as a governing King who enforces His moral order even upon rebels.

b. Who smote him with a great slaughter.
The scale of the judgment is staggering. One hundred and twenty thousand valiant men were killed in a single day. These were trained soldiers, defenders of the kingdom, wiped out rapidly and decisively. Scripture gives the theological explanation plainly, “because they had forsaken the LORD God of their fathers.” Military collapse followed spiritual abandonment.

i. The killing of Maaseiah the king’s son, Azrikam the governor of the house, and Elkanah who was next to the king further destabilized the kingdom. This was not only a military defeat but a leadership decapitation. Judah’s royal household and administrative structure were shattered in a single campaign.

ii. The capture of two hundred thousand civilians magnified the disaster. Women, sons, and daughters were carried away as captives by their own brethren from the northern kingdom. This fratricidal cruelty echoed the worst sins of Israel’s history and threatened to extinguish Judah socially and economically.

iii. At this moment, Judah’s future appeared bleak. The Davidic dynasty seemed on the verge of collapse, mirroring the repeated dynastic failures of the northern kingdom. Only divine intervention could prevent total ruin.

3. 2 Chronicles 28:9–15, The prophet’s rebuke to Israel is heeded

“But a prophet of the LORD was there, whose name was Oded, and he went out before the host that came to Samaria, and said unto them, Behold, because the LORD God of your fathers was wroth with Judah, he hath delivered them into your hand, and ye have slain them in a rage that reacheth up unto heaven. And now ye purpose to keep under the children of Judah and Jerusalem for bondmen and bondwomen unto you, but are there not with you, even with you, sins against the LORD your God? Now hear me therefore, and deliver the captives again, which ye have taken captive of your brethren, for the fierce wrath of the LORD is upon you. Then certain of the heads of the children of Ephraim, Azariah the son of Johanan, Berechiah the son of Meshillemoth, and Jehizkiah the son of Shallum, and Amasa the son of Hadlai, stood up against them that came from the war, and said unto them, Ye shall not bring in the captives hither, for whereas we have offended against the LORD already, ye intend to add more to our sins and to our trespass, for our trespass is great, and there is fierce wrath against Israel. So the armed men left the captives and the spoil before the princes and all the congregation. And the men which were expressed by name rose up, and took the captives, and with the spoil clothed all that were naked among them, and arrayed them, and shod them, and gave them to eat and to drink, and anointed them, and carried all the feeble of them upon asses, and brought them to Jericho, the city of palm trees, to their brethren, then they returned to Samaria.”

a. A prophet of the LORD was there, whose name was Oded.
In the midst of national cruelty and triumphal violence, God raised up a lone prophet. Oded confronted the victorious northern army as it returned to Samaria with captives and spoil. His courage is remarkable. He did not deny Judah’s guilt, but he condemned Israel’s excess. Victory had become bloodlust. Judgment had turned into atrocity.

i. Oded acknowledged God’s role in Judah’s defeat, but he rebuked Israel for exceeding divine permission. Their rage had reached heaven. They mistook temporary judgment for moral superiority and forgot that they themselves stood guilty before God.

b. Are there not with you, even with you, sins against the LORD your God?
This is the heart of Oded’s rebuke. Israel was in no position to enslave Judah. Their history was saturated with idolatry, rebellion, and covenant violation. To enslave their brethren would compound their guilt and invite immediate judgment.

i. Oded’s warning was clear and urgent. Continued captivity would bring fierce wrath upon Israel. Judgment delayed would become judgment intensified.

c. Then certain of the heads of the children of Ephraim stood up.
A remarkable thing occurred. The leaders of Israel listened. Unlike many moments in Israel’s history, the prophetic word was received. Four leaders publicly opposed the returning army and sided with the prophet. They recognized the spiritual danger and intervened.

i. They confessed guilt, acknowledged existing sin, and refused to add to it. This moment stands as a rare example of repentance in the northern kingdom.

d. So the armed men left the captives and the spoil.
Obedience followed conviction. The captives were released, not ignored or abused further, but treated with mercy. They were clothed, fed, anointed, and transported gently back to Judah.

i. The compassion shown is striking. These former enemies became neighbors again. The weakest were given donkeys. The wounded were cared for. The captives were escorted safely to Jericho, the city of palm trees.

ii. This act of mercy stands as one of the most humane episodes recorded in Israel’s divided kingdom period. It demonstrates that even in an apostate nation, God preserves a remnant capable of repentance and compassion.

B. The decline and fall of King Ahaz

1. 2 Chronicles 28:16–21, Ahaz puts his trust in the kings of Assyria instead of the LORD

“At that time did king Ahaz send unto the kings of Assyria to help him. For again the Edomites had come and smitten Judah, and carried away captives. The Philistines also had invaded the cities of the low country, and of the south of Judah, and had taken Bethshemesh, and Aijalon, and Gederoth, and Shocho with the villages thereof, and Timnah with the villages thereof, Gimzo also and the villages thereof, and they dwelt there. For the LORD brought Judah low because of Ahaz king of Israel, for he made Judah naked, and transgressed sore against the LORD. And Tilgathpilneser king of Assyria came unto him, and distressed him, but strengthened him not. For Ahaz took away a portion out of the house of the LORD, and out of the house of the king, and of the princes, and gave it unto the king of Assyria, but he helped him not.”

a. At that time did king Ahaz send unto the kings of Assyria to help him.
This marks a decisive and shameful shift in Ahaz’s policy and faith. Facing pressure from Syria and Israel, compounded by attacks from Edomites and Philistines, Ahaz turned not to the LORD but to Assyria. According to 2 Kings 16:5, “Then Rezin king of Syria and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to war, and they besieged Ahaz, but could not overcome him.” Instead of repentance and prayer, Ahaz sought salvation through foreign power.

i. Prior to this appeal, the LORD had graciously offered Ahaz assurance through the prophet Isaiah. Isaiah 7:1–12 records that God invited Ahaz to ask for a sign, a remarkable act of mercy toward a deeply corrupt king. Yet Ahaz refused, cloaking unbelief with false humility. His refusal was not reverence but rebellion, for his heart was already committed to trusting Assyria.

ii. The prophecy of Isaiah 7, including the promise of Immanuel, was given in this exact crisis. God guaranteed the preservation of the Davidic line despite the conspiracy of Syria and Israel. Isaiah 7:4 records the LORD’s words, “Take heed, and be quiet, fear not, neither be fainthearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands.” What Ahaz feared most was already declared powerless by God.

iii. Behind this invasion stood a satanic attempt to destroy the Messianic line. If the son of David could be removed, the covenant promise would appear broken. Yet God protected His redemptive plan despite Ahaz’s unbelief, not because of him but in faithfulness to David.

b. For the LORD brought Judah low because of Ahaz king of Israel.
The chronicler emphasizes divine causation. Judah’s humiliation was not accidental. It was God’s response to leadership that encouraged moral collapse. Ahaz’s influence stripped Judah of spiritual restraint, exposing the nation to judgment.

i. 2 Kings 16:7 records Ahaz’s humiliating confession to Assyria, “I am thy servant and thy son, come up, and save me.” He submitted himself as a vassal to a pagan empire, rejecting the LORD as King in favor of political survival.

ii. This submission violated God’s command in Exodus 23:22, which warned against serving foreign powers. Ahaz exchanged sonship under God for servitude under Assyria.

c. But he helped him not.
Ahaz plundered the temple, the palace, and the princes to buy Assyrian favor. He stripped the house of the LORD to secure protection from man. Yet the outcome was utter futility. Assyria took his wealth and gave him distress instead of deliverance.

i. Ahaz sacrificed everything sacred and gained nothing. His policy illustrates the emptiness of trusting human power over divine protection.

ii. The contrast with David is striking. Psalm 18:6 records David’s response to distress, “In my distress I called upon the LORD, and cried unto my God.” Even Manasseh, far more wicked than Ahaz, humbled himself in affliction. Ahaz alone hardened his heart.

2. 2 Chronicles 28:22–27, The apostasy and end of King Ahaz

“And in the time of his distress did he trespass yet more against the LORD, this is that king Ahaz. For he sacrificed unto the gods of Damascus, which smote him, and he said, Because the gods of the kings of Syria help them, therefore will I sacrifice to them, that they may help me. But they were the ruin of him, and of all Israel. And Ahaz gathered together the vessels of the house of God, and cut in pieces the vessels of the house of God, and shut up the doors of the house of the LORD, and he made him altars in every corner of Jerusalem. And in every several city of Judah he made high places to burn incense unto other gods, and provoked to anger the LORD God of his fathers. Now the rest of his acts and of all his ways, first and last, behold they are written in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel. And Ahaz slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city, even in Jerusalem, but they brought him not into the sepulchres of the kings of Israel, and Hezekiah his son reigned in his stead.”

a. In the time of his distress did he trespass yet more against the LORD.
Affliction does not always soften the heart. In Ahaz it produced deeper rebellion. The chronicler pauses to emphasize his character with a rare phrase, “This is that king Ahaz.” His name becomes synonymous with defiance. Judgment intensified his apostasy rather than curing it.

i. Trials reveal the heart. In Ahaz they revealed hardened unbelief. The chastening hand of God became the occasion for further provocation.

ii. Scripture records no repentance, no prayer, no turning. Only escalation.

b. For he sacrificed unto the gods of Damascus which smote him.
This is spiritual insanity. Ahaz reasoned that Syria’s gods had prevailed, therefore they must be stronger. Instead of recognizing the LORD’s discipline, he attributed defeat to divine weakness and sought power from false gods.

i. 2 Kings 16 explains that Ahaz visited Damascus, admired pagan worship, and ordered a replica altar to be constructed in Jerusalem. Urijah the priest complied, revealing how corrupted Judah’s leadership had become.

ii. Unlike Uzziah, who presumptuously worshipped the true God, Ahaz worshipped false gods of his own choosing. Uzziah was struck with leprosy. Ahaz was struck with incurable hardness of heart.

c. Cut in pieces the vessels of the house of God, and shut up the doors of the house of the LORD.
Ahaz dismantled true worship in order to establish false worship. He could not promote idolatry without silencing the temple. By closing the doors of the house of the LORD, he attempted to extinguish covenant faith entirely.

i. Divine worship ceased completely until the reign of Hezekiah. The temple built by Solomon became a silent monument rather than a place of prayer.

ii. Sacred objects were desecrated and repurposed, not for Assyria alone, but to minimize their role in worship. These same objects would later be carried away to Babylon.

iii. The presence of a holy building does not guarantee holy worship. Idolatry can flourish even in a place once dedicated to God.

d. In every several city of Judah he made high places.
Ahaz replaced centralized worship with decentralized paganism. Every city received an altar. False worship became normalized, accessible, and enforced. The nation was saturated with idolatry.

i. Yet God did not leave Himself without witness. Isaiah and Micah continued to prophesy faithfully during these dark years, preserving truth amid apostasy.

e. They buried him in the city, but not in the sepulchres of the kings.
Ahaz died without honor. Though a son of David, he was denied burial among Judah’s kings. His legacy was disgrace. He reigned sixteen years and left the kingdom spiritually devastated.

i. Micah 7:3 describes men who do evil with both hands earnestly, a description that fits Ahaz precisely.

ii. Judgment did not fall immediately in death, but God often reserves final reckoning for eternity. Ahaz escaped early judgment but not divine accounting.

iii. His reign ended in darkness, yet hope followed. “And Hezekiah his son reigned in his stead.” From the worst king of Judah came one of its greatest reformers. God’s covenant purposes continued despite human rebellion.