2 Kings 17:40 Commentary: The Stubborn Persistence of Old Customs

After the Assyrian conquest of the northern kingdom (722 B.C.), the empire resettled Samaria with foreign populations, from Babylon, Cuthah, Ava, Hamath and Sepharvaim (v24). This was a standard imperial tactic: transplant peoples to break national identity and prevent rebellion. The new colonists arrived without knowledge of ‘the God of the land’ (v26), so when lions attacked, they interpreted the disaster as divine displeasure. At their request, the king sent back a priest, probably one of the idolatrous ministers of the golden calves, to teach them ‘the manner of the God of the land’ (v28).

That priest taught from Bethel, the very shrine where Jeroboam had set up a calf for worship (1 Kings 12:28, 30). So the ‘instruction’ the people received was itself compromised, it pointed them to Yahweh, yes, but through the lens of a corrupted cult. Small wonder that v29 says they ‘made gods of their own, and put them in the houses of the high places.’ The teaching was heard, but it did not uproot their existing religious habits. Verse 40 is the verdict: they did not listen (obey), but continued doing exactly what they had always done. This sets the stage for the lasting syncretism that would later mark the Samaritan people, a mixed religion that Jews of the Second Temple period viewed with deep suspicion (cf. John 4:20, 22).

The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for 2 Kings 17:40. The Hebrew text is stable across manuscripts. The WEB, KJV, ASV, BSB, YLT, Darby, and Douay all convey the same sense: they did not listen but continued in their former practice.

This verse has been a focal text for understanding the origins of Samaritan religion. Early Jewish tradition (Josephus, Antiquities 9.288, 291) viewed the Samaritans as the outcome of this syncretism, a people who claimed to worship God but whose worship was fundamentally corrupt. The church fathers, especially Justin Martyr and Tertullian, used the passage to argue that knowledge of God without a corresponding change of heart produces only counterfeit religion. Augustine cited it in his sermons on idolatry, warning that the heart remains a workshop of idols unless God alone is feared. In Reformation exegesis, Matthew Henry and John Gill saw in v40 a mirror of the human tendency to 'do after our former manner' even under the threat of judgment. The verse has been read in every era as a caution against the gravitational pull of ingrained habits, both personal and cultural.

Three-point outline

1. The instruction was given. The Assyrian colonists were taught the worship of Yahweh (vv27, 28). Knowledge alone does not produce change.
2. The response was resistance. They ‘did not hearken’ but clung to former customs (v40). The Hebrew verb shama implies obedience refused.
3. The result was syncretism. They feared Yahweh and served their own gods (v41). Half-hearted devotion is still idolatry.

Five-point outline

1. Context: The fallen kingdom, resettled land, and a priest sent to teach the true God.
2. The content of teaching: A call to fear Yahweh alone and keep His covenant (vv36, 39).
3. The core complaint: ‘They didn’t listen’, a deliberate refusal to obey.
4. The continuing custom: They persisted in mishpat ha·rishon, their former way of life as their ultimate pattern.
5. The long shadow: The mixed religion of the Samaritans as a cautionary tale for any church that blends the gospel with cultural habits.

Illustration hooks

• A church plant that holds worship services in a rented school gym. The congregation loves the format, so when they finally get a building, they refuse to change anything, even though the new space could allow more reverent liturgy. They cling to the ‘former custom’ of informality.
• A new believer who stops going out drinking but still listens to the same angry music, scrolls the same social media feeds, and justifies it as ‘not that bad.’ Instruction was received; old habits were not surrendered.

Questions your congregation is asking

• ‘I know I should trust God fully, but why do I keep falling back into the same anxious patterns?’
• ‘Is it enough to add God to my life, or does He demand to be the center?’
• ‘How can I tell if I’m truly obeying or just going through religious motions?’

This verse confronts us with a subtle danger: we can acknowledge God without dethroning our old ways. The Samaritans heard the priest, learned about Yahweh, and even ‘feared the Lord’ (v33), but they never abandoned their inherited customs. Their religion became a blend, not a conversion. In small groups, let this verse press the question of what we hold onto as ‘non-negotiable’ even as we claim to follow Christ.

Discussion questions

1. Read 2 Kings 17:34, 41. What does the repetition of ‘fear the Lord’ and ‘not forget the covenant’ tell you about God’s expectation?
2. The Hebrew word shama means both ‘hear’ and ‘obey.’ How does that double meaning affect your understanding of ‘they didn’t listen’?
3. Why do you think the colonists were so quick to fear Yahweh but so slow to stop worshipping their own gods? What does that reveal about the human heart?
4. What are some ‘former customs’ (habits, attitudes, loyalties) that Christians today often keep while also attending church and reading the Bible?
5. How can we tell the difference between ‘adding Jesus to my life’ and ‘making Jesus my life’?
6. What would it look like for your group to ‘listen’ in the full sense of shama this week?