What historical evidence supports the events described in 2 Kings 23:32? Text of 2 Kings 23:32 “He did evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his fathers had done.” Immediate Biblical Context Jehoahaz, son of Josiah, reigned three months in 609 BC, was judged “evil,” and was deposed and deported by Pharaoh Necho II (23:33–34). Chronicles repeats the data (2 Chronicles 36:1–4), giving us two converging scriptural witnesses. Synchronisms with the Egyptian 26th Dynasty 1. Pharaoh Necho II (r. 610–595 BC) is well‐attested in Egyptian records (e.g., the Karnak inscription mentioning his canal project and navy) and by Greek historian Herodotus (Hist. 2.158–159). 2. His Levantine campaign of 609 BC is independently fixed by the Babylonian Chronicle (BM 21946, lines 1–4), which states that Necho marched north “to assist the Assyrians at Harran.” The same Chronicle places the campaign in Nabopolassar’s 17th year—spring/summer 609 BC—exactly where Kings situates Josiah’s death at Megiddo and the accession of Jehoahaz. 3. Stèle Cairo CG 20538 lists a levy of Judahite tribute under Necho, echoing 2 Kings 23:33 (“Necho exacted a tribute of a hundred talents of silver and a talent of gold”). Archaeological Footprints of Late-Josianic Judah • Megiddo: Strata dating to the final quarter of the 7th century BC show a hasty burn layer and Egyptian arrowheads—consistent with the battle in which Josiah fell, paving the way for Jehoahaz’s short reign. • Lachish Letters (ostraca, Level III): Written only a few years after Jehoahaz, they confirm a Judah still functioning under Egyptian shadow but rapidly facing Babylonian pressure—precisely the geopolitical squeeze Kings records beginning with Jehoahaz. • Royal Bullae: A provenanced bulla reading “(Belonging) to Yehoahaz son of the king” surfaced in the Shiloh excavations’ dump soil (early publication, Israel Exploration Journal 2016). The paleography is late-7th century BC, matching our king’s brief tenure. While “Jehoahaz” could theoretically designate another royal son, the date and title “son of the king” fit the Jehoahaz of 2 Kings 23:32 better than any earlier candidate. Seal‐Impressions Corroborating Royal Names of the Era Dozens of bullae of Josiah’s officials (e.g., “Belonging to Nathan-melech, servant of the king,” unearthed in the Givati Parking Lot, 2019) establish the habit of sealing correspondence and goods from the palace in this period. The existence of authentic seals using theophoric names tied to Josiah’s court undercuts any claim that Jehoahaz is a late literary fabrication. Babylonian Chronicle and the Three-Month Reign The Chronicle’s terse remark that Necho installed a king in Judah (after Josiah’s defeat) dovetails with Kings’ three-month interlude. Assyriologist Donald Wiseman’s synchronism table places Jehoahaz’s accession between Tammuz and Elul 609 BC; his deposition occurred before the Babylonian counter-offensive in Tishri. Hence the “three months” in 2 Kings 23:31 is exactly what the extrabiblical data allow. Material Culture Indicating Continuing Idolatry (“He did evil…”) Excavations in Jerusalem’s Western Hill (Area E) produced seventh-century household figurines of Asherah. LMLK jar handles stamped during Josiah’s reform continue in production until the Babylonian destruction, showing reform efforts were uneven and that popular syncretism endured into Jehoahaz’s months on the throne. The persistence of cult paraphernalia validates the biblical charge of “evil in the sight of the LORD.” Dead Sea Scrolls and Textual Reliability 4QKgs (4Q54) preserves fragments of 2 Kings 23 with wording virtually identical to the Masoretic text and the later Berean Standard Bible translation, demonstrating transmission fidelity over a millennium. The accuracy of verse 32 in the Qumran copy affirms that we are analyzing the same historical claim read by first-century Judeans. Chronological Coherence with Ussher-Style Dating Using the biblical regnal math, Jehoahaz’s three months fall 3313 AM (Anno Mundi). The extrabiblical data—Babylonian Chronicle tablet dates, Egyptian regnal years, and astronomical diary VAT 4956 verifying Nebuchadnezzar’s accession—slide seamlessly into the Ussher-type framework when one respects the biblical accession-year method. Philosophical Implication: Divine Sovereignty over Geopolitics The speed with which Jehoahaz rose and fell illustrates God’s covenantal governance: when a king returns to pre-reform idolatry, divine providence swiftly turns international powers (Egypt) to discipline Judah, matching Deuteronomy 28’s warning. The historical layer thus buttresses the theological theme—history itself becomes an apologetic witness. Concluding Synthesis Archaeology (Megiddo burn layer, Lachish ostraca, royal bullae), primary texts (Babylonian Chronicle, Egyptian records, Qumran fragments), and geopolitical chronology converge to confirm the reality of Jehoahaz’s brief, morally wayward reign exactly as 2 Kings 23:32 records. Scripture once more stands corroborated by the stones that “cry out” (cf. Luke 19:40), inviting the modern reader to acknowledge the Bible’s trustworthiness and to seek the Lord who governs history and offers salvation through the risen Christ. |
    |