Scripture Daily

Context No. 2949 of 4322 · 2 Chronicles

Context · Reflection

2 Chronicles 33:18-25: in context

18Now the rest of the acts of Manasseh, and his prayer to his God, and the words of the seers who spoke to him in the name of the LORD, the God of Israel, behold, they are written among the acts of the kings of Israel. 19His prayer also, and how God listened to his request, and all his sin and his trespass, and the places in which he built high places and set up the Asherah poles and the engraved images before he humbled himself: behold, they are written in the history of Hozai. 20So Manasseh slept with his fathers, and they buried him in his own house; and Amon his son reigned in his place. 21Amon was twenty-two years old when he began to reign; and he reigned two years in Jerusalem. 22He did that which was evil in the LORD’s sight, as did Manasseh his father; and Amon sacrificed to all the engraved images which Manasseh his father had made, and served them. 23He didn’t humble himself before the LORD, as Manasseh his father had humbled himself; but this same Amon trespassed more and more. 24His servants conspired against him, and put him to death in his own house. 25But the people of the land killed all those who had conspired against King Amon; and the people of the land made Josiah his son king in his place.

This closes the story of Manasseh. His prayer, and how God heard him, are recorded, along with all his sin, for he had humbled himself before God. He dies, and his son Amon becomes king, doing the same evil his father had done, sacrificing to the idols Manasseh made. But of Amon the text says something pointed: he did not humble himself before the LORD, as Manasseh his father had humbled himself; he only trespassed more and more.

The contrast between father and son is the whole point. Manasseh had been a deeply wicked king, yet in his distress he humbled himself, and God heard him and restored him. Amon committed the same evil, but, crucially, he did not humble himself. The difference between the two men is not the sin, both were deep in it, but repentance. The guiltier father was restored because he bowed; the son, given the same example, refused to bow and perished in his sin. It is not finally the depth of the sin that condemns, but the refusal to humble oneself and turn.

Faced with the same sin, one man humbled himself and one would not; which am I, when God calls me to turn?

Sources