2 Kings 14 3

2 Kings 14:3 kjv

And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, yet not like David his father: he did according to all things as Joash his father did.

2 Kings 14:3 nkjv

And he did what was right in the sight of the LORD, yet not like his father David; he did everything as his father Joash had done.

2 Kings 14:3 niv

He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, but not as his father David had done. In everything he followed the example of his father Joash.

2 Kings 14:3 esv

And he did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, yet not like David his father. He did in all things as Joash his father had done.

2 Kings 14:3 nlt

Amaziah did what was pleasing in the LORD's sight, but not like his ancestor David. Instead, he followed the example of his father, Joash.

2 Kings 14 verses

2 Kings 14 3 Meaning

2 Kings 14:3 describes the reign of King Amaziah of Judah, evaluating his spiritual and moral conduct before God. It states that while he generally followed the Law of the LORD and acted uprightly, his righteousness was qualified. His reign was not marked by the complete and fervent devotion characteristic of his ancestor King David, instead, it mirrored the partial obedience and limitations of his own father, King Joash. This highlights a persistent struggle among many Judahite kings to fully eradicate idolatrous practices and to achieve wholehearted devotion to God.

2 Kings 14 3 Context

2 Kings chapter 14 details the reign of Amaziah, son of Joash, as king of Judah. He began his 29-year reign in Jerusalem after his father's assassination. The broader historical context is the divided monarchy period, where the southern kingdom of Judah, though retaining the Davidic dynasty, faced internal struggles and external conflicts, often mirroring the idolatrous trends of the northern kingdom of Israel or struggling with their own adherence to the covenant. This verse sets the stage for Amaziah's reign by providing an initial assessment of his character, which immediately identifies his shortcomings despite generally positive inclinations. His actions, especially his later war with Israel (2 Kgs 14:8-14), demonstrate these underlying issues, particularly his pride and lack of full reliance on God. The book of Kings, often reflecting the Deuteronomistic history, consistently evaluates kings based on their fidelity to the Mosaic Law and their adherence to the covenant God made with David.

2 Kings 14 3 Word analysis

• And he did: This common narrative opening immediately introduces the subject (Amaziah) and his actions, setting the tone for the evaluation of his kingship. It signifies his conduct and policies throughout his reign.
• what was right: (Hebrew: hayashar, הַיָּשָׁר) Derived from a root meaning "straight" or "upright." This signifies conduct that conformed to the Law of the LORD, aligning with divine standards of morality and justice, rather than what was "good in his own eyes" (Judg 17:6). It implies adherence to outward legal and religious requirements. This is a common phrase used to describe kings in Judah who, generally, did not promote idolatry of foreign gods but served YHWH.
• in the eyes of the LORD: (Hebrew: b'einei YHWH, בְּעֵינֵי יְהוָה) This phrase emphasizes God as the ultimate judge and standard. The evaluation of Amaziah's reign is not based on human perception or political success, but on how his actions appeared to the omniscient and righteous God. This standard implies accountability to a divine authority that observes and assesses all conduct.
• yet not like David his father: (Hebrew: lo' k'David 'aviv, לֹא כְּדָוִד אָבִיו) This crucial qualification highlights a significant spiritual deficit. King David is consistently presented in Scripture as the ideal king—a "man after God's own heart" (1 Sam 13:14). While not perfect, David exhibited a wholehearted devotion, a willingness to repent, and an unwavering commitment to God's covenant that set a benchmark. Amaziah's "not like David" suggests a lack of total zeal, inner integrity, or comprehensive removal of all things offensive to God, particularly the enduring presence of "high places." This phrase establishes David as the measure of true obedience for all subsequent kings of Judah. It implicitly critiques any half-hearted or compromised commitment to YHWH.
• he did according to all that Joash his father had done: (Hebrew: ka'asher asah Yo'ash 'aviv, כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה יוֹאָשׁ אָבִיו) This further clarifies and reinforces the limitations implied by the "not like David" clause. Joash was also described as doing what was right in the eyes of the LORD, but with the same significant caveat: "the high places were not taken away" (2 Kgs 12:3). This indicates a generational pattern of partial obedience or a failure to eradicate syncretistic worship sites that posed an ongoing threat to the purity of YHWH worship. It suggests a form of nominal, inherited religion without the true heart commitment seen in David.

Words-group analysis:

• "And he did what was right in the eyes of the LORD": This establishes a baseline of general adherence to the worship of YHWH and conformity to his Law. It differentiates Amaziah from outright wicked kings who promoted idolatry. This is an initial positive assessment.
• "yet not like David his father; he did according to all that Joash his father had done": This composite phrase functions as a profound qualification. The positive evaluation of "doing what was right" is immediately undercut by comparison to two preceding kings. "Not like David" indicates a qualitative spiritual difference, pointing to a lack of genuine wholeheartedness and full conformity to God's will. This is immediately reinforced by the comparison to Joash, whose piety was explicitly tied to his mentor (Jehoiada) and did not extend to removing the illicit high places, revealing a superficial or conditional obedience rather than zealous reformation. This phrase highlights a central polemic within the book of Kings: the ongoing struggle against the "high places" and the elusive nature of complete devotion to YHWH among the Davidic kings. It implies a contrast between outward performance and inner spiritual state, which was a core emphasis for the Deuteronomistic historians.

2 Kings 14 3 Bonus section

The recurring evaluation pattern in Kings for Judahite kings often contrasts them with David. This reflects a consistent theological standard by which God's people, and especially their leaders, are judged: wholehearted and undivided devotion to the one true God, epitomized by David. The frequent phrase "yet not like David" and the specific mention of "the high places were not removed" (as seen in the following verse, 2 Kgs 14:4, and implicitly understood from the comparison to Joash) underscores a critical polemic against syncretism and decentralized worship prevalent in ancient Israel. Despite clear commands for singular worship at one designated place, many kings tolerated these alternate sites, often reflecting popular piety more than pure covenantal adherence. This subtle compromise was a recurring spiritual leak in Judah, consistently noted by the Deuteronomistic historian as a deviation from the perfect standard represented by the Davidic ideal and pointing towards the necessity of a future king (Messiah) who would embody perfect, unwavering righteousness and commitment.

2 Kings 14 3 Commentary

2 Kings 14:3 delivers a nuanced assessment of King Amaziah's reign, a recurring theme in the Deuteronomistic history of Judahite kings. He receives a qualified "good" report, beginning with the positive declaration that he "did what was right in the eyes of the LORD." This indicates a fundamental adherence to the Mosaic Law and the worship of Yahweh, distancing him from the explicitly idolatrous kings of Israel and even some in Judah. However, the immediately following qualifications, "yet not like David his father; he did according to all that Joash his father had done," are critical. David represents the biblical ideal for a king—a leader of deep devotion, even amidst personal failings, who continually sought God's heart and zealously acted for the purity of Israel's worship. Amaziah fell short of this zealous, comprehensive commitment. The comparison to Joash clarifies this shortcoming: Joash's early righteousness waned after the death of Jehoiada (2 Chr 24), and he, like many other "good" kings, failed to remove the "high places." These local worship sites, though sometimes dedicated to YHWH, fostered syncretism and undermined the central worship prescribed at Jerusalem (Deut 12). Thus, Amaziah's reign, while generally acceptable in a broad sense, lacked the transformative and uncompromising piety that marked truly exceptional kings like Hezekiah or Josiah, who were said to have done "like David." The verse encapsulates the struggle of Judahite kings to achieve full, pure, and consistent devotion to God, often settling for partial obedience that tolerated remaining elements of unfaithfulness.

• Examples:
  • A church member who regularly attends services and volunteers but struggles with forgiveness towards a family member, reflecting partial obedience.
  • A leader who implements good policies but lacks personal integrity in private life.
  • Someone who adheres to outward religious rituals but whose heart remains far from God's full standard, akin to the Pharisees rebuked by Jesus.