TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers 2 Kings 17:1–6. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
We have here the reign and ruin of Hoshea, the last of the kings of Israel, concerning whom observe,
I.That, though he forced his way to the crown by treason and murder (as we read Kg2 15:30), yet he gained not the possession of it till seven or eight years after; for it was in the fourth year of Ahaz that he slew Pekah, but did not himself begin to reign till the twelfth year of Ahaz, Kg2 17:1. Whether by the king of Assyria, or by the king of Judah, or by some of his own people, does not appear, but it seems so long he was kept out of the throne he aimed at. Justly were his bad practices thus chastised, and the word of the prophet was thus fulfilled (Hos 10:3), Now they shall say We have no king, because we feared not the Lord.
II.That, though he was bad, yet not so bad as the kings of Israel had been before him (Kg2 17:2), not so devoted to the calves as they had been. One of them (that at Dan), the Jews say, had been, before this, carried away by the king of Assyria in the expedition recorded Kg2 15:29, (to which perhaps the prophet refers, Hos 8:5, Thy calf, O Samaria! has cast thee off), which made him put the less confidence in the other. And some say that this Hoshea took off the embargo which the former kings had put their subjects under, forbidding them to go up to Jerusalem to worship, which he permitted those to do that had a mind to it. But what shall we think of this dispensation of providence, that the destruction of the kingdom of Israel should come in the reign of one of the best of its kings? Thy judgments, O God! are a great deep. God would hereby show that in bringing this ruin upon them he designed to punish,
1.Not only the sins of that generation, but of the foregoing ages, and to reckon for the iniquities of their fathers, who had been long in filing the measure and treasuring up wrath against this day of wrath.
2.Not only the sins of their kings, but the sins of the people. If Hoshea was not so bad as the former kings, yet the people were as bad as those that went before them, and it was an aggravation of their badness, and brought ruin the sooner, that their king did not set them so bad an example as the former kings had done, nor hinder them from reforming; he gave them leave to do better, but they did as bad as ever, which laid the blame of their sin and ruin wholly upon themselves.
III.That the destruction came gradually.
They were for some time made tributaries before they were made captives to the king of Assyria (Kg2 17:3), and, if that less judgment had prevailed to humble and reform them, the greater would have been prevented.
IV.That they brought it upon themselves by the indirect course they took to shake off the yoke of the king of Assyria, Kg2 17:4.
Had the king and people of Israel applied to God, made their peace with him and their prayers to him, they might have recovered their liberty, ease, and honour; but they withheld their tribute, and trusted to the king of Egypt to assist them in their revolt, which, if it had taken effect, would have been but to change their oppressors. But Egypt became to them the staff of a broken reed. This provoked the king of Assyria to proceed against them with the more severity. Men get nothing by struggling with the net, but entangle themselves the more.
V.That it was an utter destruction that came upon them.
1.The king of Israel was made a prisoner; he was shut up and bound, being, it is probable, taken by surprise, before Samaria was besieged.
2.The land of Israel was made a prey. The army of the king of Assyria came up throughout all the land, made themselves master of it (Kg2 17:5), and treated the people as traitors to be punished with the sword of justice rather than as fair enemies.
3.The royal city of Israel was besieged, and at length taken. Three years it held out after the country was conquered, and no doubt a great deal of misery was endured at that time which is not particularly recorded; but the brevity of the story, and the passing of this matter over lightly, methinks, intimate that they were abandoned of God and he did not now regard the affliction of Israel, as sometimes as he had done.
4.The people of Israel were carried captives into Assyria, Kg2 17:6. The generality of the people, those that were of any note, were forced away into the conqueror's country, to be slaves and beggars there.
(1.)Thus he was pleased to exercise a dominion over them, and to show that they were entirely at his disposal.
(2.)By depriving them of their possessions and estates, real and personal, and exposing them to all the hardships and reproaches of a removal to a strange country, under the power of an imperious army, he chastised them for their rebellion and their endeavour to shake off his yoke.
(3.)Thus he effectually prevented all such attempts for the future and secured their country to himself.
(4.)Thus he got the benefit of their service in his own country, as Pharaoh did that of their fathers; and so this unworthy people were lost as they were found, and ended as they began, in servitude and under oppression.
(5.)Thus he made room for those of his own country that had little, and little to do, at home, to settle in a good land, a land flowing with milk and honey. In all these several ways he served himself by this captivity of the ten tribes. We are here told in what places of his kingdom he disposed of them - in Halah and Habor, in places, we may suppose, far distant from each other, lest they should keep up a correspondence, incorporate again, and become formidable. There, we have reason to think, after some time they were so mingled with the nations that they were lost, and the name of Israel was no more in remembrance. Those that forgot God were themselves forgotten; those that studied to be like the nations were buried among them; and those that would not serve God in their own land were made to serve their enemies in a strange land. It is probable that they were the men of honour and estates who were carried captive, and that many of the meaner sort of people were left behind, many of every tribe, who either went over to Judah or became subject to the Assyrian colonies, and their posterity were Galileans or Samaritans. But thus ended Israel as a nation; now they became Lo-ammi - not a people, and Lo-ruhamah - unpitied. Now Canaan spued them out. When we read of their entry under Hoshea the son of Nun who would have thought that such as this should be their exit under Hoshea the son of Elah? Thus Rome's glory in Augustus sunk, many ages after, in Augustulus. Providence so ordered the eclipsing of the honour of the ten tribes that the honour of Judah (the royal tribe) and Levi (the holy tribe), which yet remained, might shine the brighter. Yet we find a number sealed of every one of the twelve tribes (Rev. 7) except Dan. James writes to the twelve tribes scattered abroad (Jam 1:1) and Paul speaks of the twelve tribes which instantly served God day and night (Act 26:7); so that though we never read of those that were carried captive, nor have any reason to credit the conjecture of some (that they yet remain a distinct body in some remote corner of the world), yet a remnant of them did escape, to keep up the name of Israel, till it came to be worn by the gospel church, the spiritual Israel, in which it will ever remain, Gal 6:16.
Historical interpretation
Historical Reception
One surviving comment on this verse from the historical church.
At this point it is also appropriate to tell where the Samaritans originated. I say this because the entire region is called Samaria. From what source, then, did they derive this name? The mountain is called Semer from the man who had taken possession of it, as Isaiah also said: “And the head of Samaria, Ephraim.” The inhabitants, however, were called not Samaritans but Israelites. But as time went on, they transgressed against God, and during the reign of Pekah, Tiglath-pileser went up and seized many cities. After attacking and killing Elah, he gave the kingdom over to Hoshea. Later, Shalmaneser came and captured other cities and made them subject and tributary. However, though Hoshea at first yielded, he revolted afterwards from subjection and took refuge in the aid of the Ethiopians. The Assyrian learned this and, having made an expedition and taken them captive, forbade the nation to remain there any longer, because he suspected the possibility of another such revolt. These inhabitants, moreover, he transported to Babylon and Medea and, having brought from various regions the people dwelling in that vicinity, he caused them to dwell in Samaria so that his power might be safeguarded for the future, with loyal inhabitants in possession of the place.When these things had taken place, God, wishing to show his power and that he had given over the Jews not because of any lack of power on his part but because of the sins of those whom he had surrendered to their enemies, sent lions on the barbarians, and these preyed on the entire nation. This was reported to the king, and he sent a certain priest to give to them the laws of God. Nevertheless, not even then were they freed entirely from their impiety, but only partly. However, as time went on they turned away from idols and worshiped God. When things had reached this point, the Jews, finally returning, showed a contentious spirit toward them as foreigners and enemies and named them “Samaritans” after the mountain.
Continue studying 2 Kings 17:3 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Second Kings 17:3 records a critical juncture in the decline of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, depicting the subjugation of its final king, Hoshea, to the formidable Neo-Assyrian Empire under Shalmaneser V. This verse formally establishes Israel's vassalage, marked by Hoshea's transformation into a "servant" and the compulsory payment of "presents" or tribute, thereby setting the stage for the kingdom's ultimate demise and the subsequent exile of its people.
Context
Literary Context
This verse immediately follows the introduction of Hoshea, the last king of Israel, whose reign is summarily judged as "evil in the sight of the LORD, but not as the kings of Israel that were before him" 2 Kings 17:2. The narrative framework of 2 Kings consistently links the spiritual fidelity (or infidelity) of Israel's monarchs to the nation's political fortunes and divine judgment. Verse 3 serves as the direct, immediate consequence of Israel's prolonged apostasy and Hoshea's own wickedness, illustrating the beginning of the end for the Northern Kingdom. It functions as the crucial prelude to Hoshea's subsequent rebellion and the final Assyrian siege and exile, which are detailed later in the chapter, particularly in 2 Kings 17:4-6.
Historical & Cultural Context
The late 8th century BC was characterized by the aggressive and relentless expansion of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Assyrian kings, including Tiglath-Pileser III, Shalmaneser V, and Sargon II, systematically conquered and absorbed smaller kingdoms across the Levant, employing brutal tactics such as mass deportations to prevent resistance and consolidate control. Shalmaneser V (reigned 727-722 BC) continued this aggressive imperial policy. Israel, severely weakened by internal strife, regicide, and deep-seated spiritual apostasy, found itself precariously positioned between the burgeoning Assyrian power to the north and the declining, yet still influential, Egyptian empire to the south. The practice of a conquered or weaker nation becoming a "servant" (vassal) and paying "presents" (tribute) was a standard feature of ancient Near Eastern international relations, signifying a profound loss of sovereignty and often formalized by a vassal treaty. This imposed tribute was a crushing economic burden, meticulously designed to extract wealth and maintain rigid control over subjugated territories.
Key Themes
This verse profoundly contributes to several overarching themes evident throughout 2 Kings and the broader Deuteronomistic History. The most immediate theme is Political Subjugation, as Hoshea's status shifts dramatically from an independent monarch to a mere "servant" or vassal, vividly illustrating Israel's complete loss of national autonomy. This subjugation is directly linked to the theme of Tribute and Appeasement, where the "presents" represent a desperate, yet ultimately futile, attempt by Hoshea to buy peace and avert further Assyrian military intervention, a strategy that ultimately fails, as seen in his later rebellion 2 Kings 17:4. Most significantly, this event is a crucial component of the larger theme of the Consequences of Disobedience. While not explicitly elaborated within this single verse, the overarching narrative of 2 Kings 17 makes it unequivocally clear that Israel's political decline and eventual destruction were direct divine judgments for their persistent idolatry, egregious covenant breaking, and stubborn rejection of God's prophetic warnings, thereby fulfilling the solemn curses outlined in the Mosaic covenant Deuteronomy 28:47-48.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This refers specifically to Shalmaneser V, the formidable king of Assyria. His name here symbolizes the overwhelming military and political might of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, which served as God's chosen instrument of judgment against a disobedient Israel. His "coming up" against Israel signifies a decisive military campaign aimed at asserting Assyrian dominance and extracting tribute, a common and brutal practice for this imperial power.
The term ʻebed in this context denotes a vassal or subordinate ruler rather than a personal attendant. Hoshea, who once reigned as an independent king, is here reduced to the humiliating status of a bondservant to Shalmaneser, signifying a complete and irreversible loss of national sovereignty and political independence. This dramatic shift underscores the profound humiliation and subjugation of the Northern Kingdom, highlighting their diminished status within the geopolitical landscape of the ancient Near East.
While minchâh can indeed refer to a grain offering in a religious context (e.g., Genesis 4:3), in this specific political and historical context, it unequivocally means "tribute" or "levy." These were not voluntary gifts offered out of goodwill but mandatory payments of wealth, goods, or resources extracted by a dominant imperial power from a subordinate one. The act of giving minchâh was a concrete and public sign of submission and a desperate attempt to appease the Assyrian king, albeit one that proved temporary and ultimately unsuccessful in securing Israel's future.
Verse Breakdown
"Against him came up Shalmaneser king of Assyria"
This clause vividly describes the aggressive military action initiated by the Assyrian monarch, Shalmaneser V, directly against Hoshea, the reigning king of Israel. The phrase "came up" implies a significant military expedition from Assyria's heartland into the Levant, clearly demonstrating Assyria's superior power and its unyielding intent to enforce its will upon Israel. This was not a diplomatic visit or a friendly overture, but a decisive show of military force designed to compel submission.
"and Hoshea became his servant"
This critically important clause signifies the immediate and profound outcome of Shalmaneser's military campaign: Hoshea's complete submission and his formal acceptance of vassal status. It marks the definitive end of Israel's independent monarchy and its forced integration into the vast and oppressive Assyrian imperial system. As a "servant," Hoshea was now bound by stringent treaty obligations, including unwavering loyalty to Assyria and the regular payment of heavy tribute.
"and gave him presents"
This final clause details the tangible and concrete manifestation of Hoshea's newly imposed vassal status. The "presents" were not voluntary gifts of goodwill or diplomacy, but compulsory tribute payments, representing an immense economic burden imposed by Assyria. This act was a desperate attempt by Hoshea to placate the Assyrian king and prevent further military devastation, but it ultimately failed to secure Israel's long-term peace, prosperity, or independence.
Literary Devices
The verse employs several potent literary devices to convey its profound and somber significance. Foreshadowing is prominently featured, as this initial subjugation of Hoshea and the imposition of tribute directly foreshadow the complete and catastrophic collapse of the Northern Kingdom and the subsequent exile of its people, events that unfold with tragic inevitability in the subsequent verses of 2 Kings 17. There is also a strong element of Irony in Hoshea's actions; his desperate attempt to secure peace and maintain his throne through appeasement and political maneuvering ultimately leads directly to his downfall, highlighting the futility and ultimate failure of human strategies when they operate apart from divine guidance and faithfulness. Furthermore, the "presents" themselves function as powerful Symbolism, representing not generosity or alliance, but rather the stark reality of lost sovereignty, severe economic exploitation, and the humiliating submission of a once-proud nation to a foreign, conquering power.
Theological and Thematic Connections
2 Kings 17:3, while meticulously detailing a historical event of political subjugation, carries immense theological weight. It serves as a stark and undeniable illustration of God's absolute sovereignty over the nations, demonstrating His capacity to use even pagan empires like Assyria as instruments of His divine judgment against His disobedient people. Israel's persistent idolatry, egregious covenant breaking, and moral decay, which are meticulously detailed elsewhere in 2 Kings 17, directly led to their vulnerability and eventual subjugation, thereby fulfilling the solemn curses outlined in the Mosaic covenant. This verse powerfully underscores the profound principle that true security, national prosperity, and lasting peace are found not in precarious political alliances or desperate material appeasement, but exclusively in faithful and unwavering allegiance to the Lord. The loss of independence and the imposition of tribute are direct and inevitable consequences of a nation abandoning its divine covenant and turning away from its God.
Reflection and Application
The historical account of 2 Kings 17:3 offers profound and timeless lessons that resonate deeply for individuals and communities today. Just as Israel's spiritual decline inexorably led to political vulnerability and subjugation, so too can our personal or collective compromises with sin expose us to various forms of spiritual, emotional, or even relational bondage. The perennial temptation to seek peace, security, or acceptance through "presents" – whether it be compromising our core values, relying solely on worldly systems and strategies, or appeasing cultural pressures that contradict God's Word – remains a significant challenge. This verse serves as a powerful call to examine our ultimate allegiance: are we truly "servants" of the Lord, committed to His will and ways, or have we, like Hoshea, inadvertently become vassals to other powers, whether they manifest as financial idols, social anxieties, or prevailing secular ideologies? It serves as a sobering reminder that true freedom, lasting peace, and genuine security are found exclusively in unwavering faithfulness to God, rather than in desperate and ultimately futile attempts to appease the shifting demands and fleeting promises of the world.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Who was Shalmaneser and what was his significance for Israel?
Shalmaneser V was the king of Assyria who reigned from 727 to 722 BC. He was a formidable and aggressive monarch who continued Assyria's relentless imperial expansion across the ancient Near East. For Israel, his significance is paramount as he served as the direct instrument of their subjugation. He initiated the decisive military campaign that reduced Hoshea, the last king of the Northern Kingdom, to a vassal, compelling him to pay heavy tribute. Ultimately, it was Shalmaneser who began the final siege of Samaria, the capital of Israel, though the city's fall and the subsequent exile of its people were completed by his successor, Sargon II 2 Kings 17:5-6.
What does "gave him presents" truly mean in this context?
In the specific historical and political context of 2 Kings 17:3, the phrase "gave him presents" does not refer to a voluntary gift offered out of goodwill or friendship. Instead, it unequivocally signifies the payment of tribute. This was a mandatory, often economically devastating, levy of goods, wealth, or resources that a subordinate nation (like Israel) was compelled to pay to a dominant imperial power (like Assyria). It served as a clear and public sign of vassalage, acknowledging the suzerainty of the Assyrian king and representing a desperate attempt to avert further military action or more severe penalties. This act represented a significant economic burden for Israel and a profound loss of national dignity and sovereignty.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
The subjugation of Israel under King Hoshea to the Assyrian Empire, marked by forced tribute and a devastating loss of national sovereignty, powerfully foreshadows the ultimate human condition apart from Christ. Humanity, in its rebellion against God, became enslaved to the dominion of sin and the inevitability of death, paying a heavy "tribute" of futility, despair, and spiritual bondage. Earthly kings and human strategies, much like Hoshea's desperate attempts at appeasement, proved utterly incapable of securing true freedom or lasting peace. This profound brokenness of the human condition points to the desperate and urgent need for a fundamentally different kind of King and a different kind of "servant." Jesus Christ, the true King of Kings and Lord of Lords, did not come to demand tribute or impose His will through force, but rather to offer Himself as the ultimate and perfect sacrifice. He is the Suffering Servant prophesied in Isaiah, who bore the full judgment for our disobedience, paying the ultimate price to redeem us from the bondage of sin and deliver us from the dominion of darkness Colossians 1:13-14. Unlike Hoshea, who became a servant to an earthly conqueror, Christ, though Lord of all creation, came not to be served but to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many Mark 10:45. His kingdom is not of this world, established by military might or political maneuvering, but by sacrificial love, divine power, and the transformative work of the Holy Spirit, offering true liberation and eternal peace to all who willingly become His "servants" John 18:36.