The King Who Actually Did Things Right
What’s 2 Chronicles 27 about?
This is the story of Jotham, one of Judah’s rare “good kings” who built stuff, won battles, and actually listened to God – yet somehow the people still didn’t get it. It’s a fascinating glimpse into what happens when leadership does right but the culture stays stubborn.
The Full Context
In the political rollercoaster of ancient Judah, 2 Chronicles 27 introduces us to King Jotham, who ruled around 750-735 BC during a time when the Assyrian Empire was flexing its muscles across the ancient Near East. The Chronicler is writing this account centuries later for a post-exilic audience, people who had returned from Babylon and were trying to rebuild not just their temple and city walls, but their understanding of what it meant to be God’s people. Jotham’s reign comes right after his father Uzziah’s dramatic downfall – a king who started strong but ended up struck with leprosy for overstepping his bounds in the temple.
What makes Jotham’s story particularly compelling is how the Chronicler presents him as a study in contrasts. Here’s a king who “did what was right in the eyes of the LORD” and enjoyed military success and building projects, yet the text notes that “the people continued acting corruptly.” This tension between righteous leadership and stubborn populace would have resonated deeply with the Chronicler’s audience, who were grappling with their own questions about leadership, faithfulness, and why bad things happen to God’s people. The passage serves as both historical record and theological reflection on the complex relationship between individual righteousness and communal faithfulness.
What the Ancient Words Tell Us
The Hebrew text gives us some fascinating insights into Jotham’s character. When 2 Chronicles 27:2 says he “did what was right in the eyes of the LORD,” the word for “right” is yashar, which literally means “straight” or “upright.” It’s the same word used to describe a path that goes directly to its destination without veering off course. The Chronicler is painting a picture of a king who stayed on track.
But here’s where it gets interesting – the text says Jotham lo ba el-hekal YHWH – “he did not enter the temple of the LORD.” This isn’t criticism; it’s actually praise! After what happened to his father Uzziah, who was struck with leprosy for burning incense in the temple (2 Chronicles 26:16-21), Jotham learned to respect boundaries. The Hebrew construction suggests intentional restraint, wisdom gained from painful family experience.
Grammar Geeks
The phrase “he became mighty” in verse 6 uses the Hebrew verb chazaq, which means to grow strong or prevail. But it’s in the Hithpael form, suggesting reflexive action – Jotham made himself strong through his own choices and discipline. It wasn’t just natural talent; it was intentional character development.
What Would the Original Audience Have Heard?
For the post-exilic community hearing this account, Jotham represented something they desperately needed to understand: you can do everything right and still face challenges. Here was a king who built fortifications, won battles against the Ammonites, and walked faithfully with God – yet “the people continued acting corruptly.”
The mention of Jotham’s building projects would have hit home hard. 2 Chronicles 27:3-4 describes how he “built the upper gate of the temple of the LORD and did extensive building on the wall at the hill of Ophel. He built towns in the hill country of Judah and forts and towers in the wooded areas.” For people who had returned from exile to find Jerusalem in ruins, this wasn’t just ancient history – it was a blueprint for restoration.
The Chronicler is essentially telling his audience: “Look, even when you have godly leadership and successful building projects, the heart issue remains. Don’t expect that external reform will automatically change people’s hearts.”
Did You Know?
Archaeological excavations in Jerusalem have actually uncovered massive stonework that likely dates to Jotham’s reign, including parts of the Ophel fortifications mentioned in this chapter. The stones are huge – some weighing several tons – showing that Jotham’s building program was no small undertaking.
But Wait… Why Did They…?
Here’s something that puzzles me about this passage: if Jotham was such a good king, why does his reign get only nine verses while his wicked son Ahaz gets an entire chapter? The Chronicler spends more time on failures than successes, and that seems backwards.
But maybe that’s the point. Success stories are often shorter than failure stories because there’s less to explain. When someone does what they’re supposed to do, follows God’s ways, and experiences blessing, the narrative is straightforward. It’s the train wrecks that require lengthy explanations.
Think about it – when you hear about someone who studied hard, graduated, got a good job, and lived happily ever after, that’s a nice story but it’s not very long. It’s the cautionary tales, the “what went wrong” stories, that fill pages and pages. The Chronicler may be suggesting that righteousness has a beautiful simplicity to it.
Wrestling with the Text
The most challenging aspect of Jotham’s story is found in 2 Chronicles 27:2: “The people, however, continued their corrupt practices.” Here’s a king doing everything right, and yet the moral condition of the nation doesn’t improve. What’s going on?
This tension reveals something crucial about leadership and change. Individual righteousness, even at the highest levels, doesn’t automatically transform culture. Jotham could build all the fortifications he wanted, win every military campaign, and walk perfectly with God, but he couldn’t force heart change in his people.
Wait, That’s Strange…
Jotham reigned for sixteen years and the text mentions virtually no religious reforms – no tearing down high places, no cleansing the temple, no calling the people back to covenant faithfulness. Unlike kings like Hezekiah or Josiah, Jotham seems to have focused on infrastructure and defense rather than spiritual renewal. Was this wisdom or missed opportunity?
For the post-exilic audience, this would have been both sobering and encouraging. Sobering because it meant that even with good leadership, the community could still struggle with faithfulness. Encouraging because it meant that individual faithfulness still matters, even when the crowd goes a different direction.
How This Changes Everything
Jotham’s story reframes how we think about success and faithfulness. In a world that often measures effectiveness by immediate, visible results, Jotham shows us a different metric: faithfulness to your calling, regardless of outcomes.
The tribute from the Ammonites mentioned in 2 Chronicles 27:5 – “a hundred talents of silver, ten thousand cors of wheat and ten thousand cors of barley” – wasn’t just economic prosperity. In ancient Near Eastern terms, this represented recognition of Judah’s strength and God’s blessing. Other nations were acknowledging that something was different about this kingdom.
But perhaps the most profound change Jotham represents is the idea that you can honor God through boundaries rather than just bold actions. His father Uzziah fell because he crossed a line he shouldn’t have crossed. Jotham’s greatness partly came from understanding what lines not to cross.
“Sometimes the most powerful thing a leader can do is know where they don’t belong.”
Key Takeaway
Jotham shows us that faithfulness isn’t measured by how much you can change others, but by how consistently you can walk with God regardless of the crowd around you. Sometimes the most important victories happen in the choices we don’t make.
Further Reading
Internal Links:
External Scholarly Resources:
