Belgian writer Émile Cammaerts, in a study on G. K. Chesterton,¹³ made an observation: “The first effect of not believing in God is to believe in anything.”

After the relatively faithful Uzziah and Jotham comes Ahaz, a king who is apparently willing to put his trust almost anywhere other than in the Lord. He acts more like a king of Israel than a descendant of David (2 Chronicles 28:1–4): he worships images of Baal; sacrifices at shrines all over Judah; and even offers up his own sons, like a Canaanite. The phrase, “the Lord his God” (v. 5) is thus ironic: it seems to refer not to “the Lord he trusted in”, but “the Lord who now judged him for his unfaithfulness”.

The Arameans attack and take many captives; Israel inflicts yet worse defeats and takes even more captives (vv. 5–8). But, in an ironic twist, the people of Israel now show an unexpected responsiveness to God and compassion towards their “fellow Israelites” after a prophet tells them to let the Judean captives go (vv. 9–11). Yes, “the Lord, the God of your ancestors” (v. 9) is angry with Judah; that is why Israel could defeat them. But Israel is also guilty before God; therefore they should not add to their sins. The latter’s leaders listen to the prophet: they let the captives go and even treat them kindly (vv. 12–15). Israel apparently walks closer to God than Judah does!

But Ahaz’s problems are not over. Edomites raid from the south and Philistines attack from the west. All Uzziah’s gains are lost as God brings further judgment on Ahaz’s unfaithfulness (vv. 17–19). Ahaz responds by turning, not to God, but to the king of Assyria. Tiglath- Pileser takes his gifts—items removed from the Lord’s temple—but Ahaz’s situation becomes even worse (vv. 20–21).

Ahaz doubles down on his unfaithfulness (vv. 22–23): reasoning that the gods of Damascus have caused his defeat, he starts worshipping them. This is a more logical form of idolatry than Amaziah’s (25:14–15), but no good comes of it. Ahaz even plunders the Lord’s temple and shuts its doors, while encouraging worship of other gods.

If Ahaz has so far permitted his people to worship the Lord, he now actively prevents them from seeking Him. Truly, he “aroused the anger of the Lord, the God of his ancestors” (28:25). No wonder that when Ahaz dies, he is not buried with his fathers (v. 27). He has brought disgrace on David’s line.

Note how the second half of today’s text refers to Ahaz as “king of Israel” (v. 19), Judah as “all Israel” (v. 23), and Ahaz’s ancestors as “the kings of Israel” (v. 27). This reflects the fact that by the end of Ahaz’s reign, Assyria had overrun the Northern Kingdom of Israel (2 Kings 17). Only Judah, the Southern Kingdom, remains of the united Israel of David and Solomon, hence Judah and its kings now inherit the name “Israel”.

See also 2 Kings 16.

¹³ Émile Cammaerts, The Laughing Prophet: The Seven Virtues and G.K. Chesterton. (London: Methuen, 1937), 230.