When Good Kings Make Hard Choices
What’s 2 Kings 12 about?
King Joash starts strong, repairing the temple and following God’s ways under Jehoiada’s guidance. But when the old priest dies, everything falls apart—Joash murders Jehoiada’s son and gets assassinated by his own officials. It’s a sobering reminder that even good starts don’t guarantee good endings.
The Full Context
2 Kings 12 captures one of the most complex royal stories in Judah’s history. Written during or after the Babylonian exile (likely 6th century BC), this account serves as part of the Deuteronomistic History—a theological reflection on why the kingdoms fell. The author isn’t just recording events; he’s answering the burning question: “How did we end up here?” Joash’s reign (835-796 BC) represents both hope and heartbreak for a nation that desperately needed faithful leadership.
The passage sits strategically within the broader narrative of Israel and Judah’s decline. Coming after Jehu’s brutal but necessary purge of Baal worship in Israel, Joash’s story shows us what godly reform looks like in Judah—and how quickly it can unravel. The temple renovation project dominates the first half of the chapter, highlighting the central role of proper worship in national health. But the real drama lies in what’s unsaid: the gradual shift from a king who “did right in the eyes of the Lord” to one who would ultimately betray everything he once stood for.
What the Ancient Words Tell Us
The Hebrew in 2 Kings 12:2 gives us our first clue about Joash’s character. When it says he “did right in the eyes of the Lord all his days,” the phrase kol-yemei (all his days) seems absolute. But there’s a crucial qualifier: asher horah oto Yehoyada – “which Jehoiada taught him.”
Grammar Geeks
The Hebrew verb yarah (taught/instructed) literally means “to point the way” or “to shoot an arrow toward a target.” Jehoiada wasn’t just giving Joash information—he was actively directing his moral trajectory, like an archer guiding an arrow to its mark.
The word for “repair” (chazaq) throughout the temple renovation passages is fascinating. It doesn’t just mean “fix what’s broken”—it means “to strengthen, to make firm, to restore to original purpose.” The priests weren’t just patching holes; they were restoring the temple to its intended function as the dwelling place of God’s presence.
But here’s where things get interesting. When the text describes the money collection system, it uses keseph (silver) repeatedly, but the emphasis isn’t on the metal itself—it’s on the neder (vows) and nedabah (freewill offerings) of the people. This wasn’t a tax; it was a heart response to God’s goodness.
What Would the Original Audience Have Heard?
For readers in exile, this chapter would have hit like a gut punch. Here was their temple—the one Solomon built, the one Joash lovingly restored—reduced to rubble in Babylon. They would have heard the tragic irony: a king who cared so much about God’s house that he revolutionized temple funding, yet whose reign ended in spiritual compromise and political assassination.
Did You Know?
The money-changing system Joash implemented—with its careful accountability measures and direct payment to workers—became the model for temple administration for centuries. Even Jesus would have been familiar with systems that traced back to Joash’s reforms.
The original audience would have caught something we easily miss: Joash’s age. He was only seven when crowned, which means he ruled for forty years under Jehoiada’s influence, then potentially another decade after the priest’s death. They would have understood that this wasn’t just about a king going bad—it was about what happens when godly mentorship ends without proper succession.
The detail about not accounting for the money given to workers would have resonated deeply. In a culture where corruption was assumed, the fact that these craftsmen could be trusted ki be-emunah hem osim (“because in faithfulness they work”) represented something revolutionary: a society where integrity was so established that oversight wasn’t necessary.
Wrestling with the Text
Here’s what keeps me up at night about this passage: How does a king who revolutionizes temple worship end up murdering the son of his greatest mentor? The text in 2 Chronicles 24 gives us the fuller picture—after Jehoiada’s death, Joash listens to officials who lead him back into idolatry, then kills Zechariah when he prophesies against it.
Wait, That’s Strange…
The Hebrew text of Joash’s assassination is deliberately ironic. His servants kill him “on the bed” (al-mittato), the same place where he should have found rest and safety. The very people meant to protect him become his destroyers—a perfect metaphor for how his reign devolved.
But there’s something deeper here. The phrase lo hishtachaveh appears in the context of the high places not being removed (2 Kings 12:3). While Joash reformed temple worship, he allowed local worship sites to continue. Was this political compromise? Incomplete conviction? Or did he simply lack the authority that would come with spiritual maturity?
The timing is crucial too. Hazael of Damascus attacks near the end of Joash’s reign, and Joash buys him off with temple treasures—the very gold and silver that had been dedicated to God’s house. It’s like watching someone tear down what they spent decades building.
How This Changes Everything
What strikes me most about Joash’s story is how it reframes our understanding of spiritual leadership and legacy. We often think in terms of dramatic conversion moments or spectacular failures, but Joash shows us something different: the slow drift that happens when external guidance replaces internal conviction.
“The tragedy isn’t that Joash started bad and stayed bad—it’s that he started well but never developed his own deep roots.”
This passage forces us to ask uncomfortable questions about mentorship and spiritual dependence. Jehoiada was clearly a godly influence, but did his long tenure actually prevent Joash from developing his own mature faith? When the old priest died at 130 years old, Joash was in his forties—plenty old enough to have internalized godly wisdom, yet he immediately fell prey to ungodly counselors.
The temple restoration project itself becomes a metaphor. Joash could organize workers, manage finances, and complete magnificent building projects. But he couldn’t build character that lasted beyond his mentor’s death. He could repair stone and cedar, but not his own heart.
For us, this raises the question: What happens when our spiritual “training wheels” come off? Are we following God because someone else taught us to, or because we’ve encountered Him ourselves?
Key Takeaway
The most dangerous spiritual condition isn’t dramatic rebellion—it’s depending on someone else’s faith instead of developing your own deep roots with God.
Further Reading
Internal Links:
External Scholarly Resources:
