What is the meaning of 2 Kings 23:35? So Jehoiakim paid the silver and gold to Pharaoh Neco • The verse opens with straight-forward tribute: Jehoiakim, newly installed by Egypt (2 Kings 23:34; 2 Chron 36:3-4), hands over large sums of precious metal. • Earlier kings had done the same before foreign powers—compare Menahem’s bribe to Assyria (2 Kings 15:19-20) and Hezekiah’s payment to Sennacherib (2 Kings 18:14-16). • The exile warnings in Deuteronomy 28 foretold that sin would make Israel “serve your enemies… in hunger, thirst, nakedness, and lacking everything” (v. 48). That prediction is now visibly playing out. • The detail reminds us that when God’s people reject His covenant, political bondage and economic loss follow. Jehoiakim’s throne is only as secure as Egypt’s favor, not the Lord’s. but to meet Pharaoh’s demand he taxed the land • Pharaoh’s “demand” signals dominance; Judah is no longer free to decide its own finances. • The phrase shows that foreign oppression inevitably trickles down to ordinary life. See Proverbs 22:7: “The borrower is slave to the lender.” Egypt owns Judah’s purse strings because Egypt owns its king. • The warning issued to Samuel when Israel asked for a human king—that rulers would take “a tenth of your grain and vintage” (1 Samuel 8:15)—is now realized on a national scale. and exacted the silver and the gold from the people • Jehoiakim passes the cost to his citizens rather than bearing it personally. His leadership style is later condemned by Jeremiah: “Woe to him who builds his palace by unrighteousness…who makes his neighbor serve without wages” (Jeremiah 22:13-17). • The contrast with godly rulers is stark. David refused to offer the Lord sacrifices that cost him nothing (2 Samuel 24:24). Jehoiakim, by contrast, refuses to shoulder any burden himself. • Oppressive taxation had already fractured the kingdom under Rehoboam (1 Kings 12:4). Jehoiakim repeats that mistake and further alienates his people. each according to his wealth • The wording shows a sliding scale: the wealthy paid more. While the concept appears fair, it still represents forced extraction for a pagan power. • Israel’s own law expected freewill offerings proportionate to prosperity (Deuteronomy 16:17), but those gifts were to the Lord, not to Egypt. Under tyranny, what should have been worship becomes tribute. • The verse subtly contrasts two kingdoms: God’s kingdom, where giving is worshipful and voluntary, and the world’s kingdom, where giving is coerced to prop up earthly empires. summary 2 Kings 23:35 records the sad chain of compromise: a king enthroned by Egypt must pay Egypt; he finances that payment by levying heavy taxes; the people, already weary, are squeezed yet again. The verse illustrates covenant breakdown—when God is sidelined, foreign masters and financial burdens rush in. Jehoiakim’s choice to trust Egypt over the Lord leads directly to oppression for every household in Judah, proving once more that obedience brings freedom, and disobedience always exacts a cost. |
    |