II Kings 21:17-18 · Bible study
2 Kings 21:17-18 Commentary: The Sin and Burial of Manasseh
Hebrew · 9 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why does Kings omit Manasseh's repentance? This study explores his sin, unusual burial, and the message of divine judgment.
Research Summary
- Meaning: The writer of Kings closes Manasseh's account by emphasizing his sin and burial outside the royal tombs, omitting his repentance to highlight divine judgment.
- Key words: "sin that he sinned" (חַטָּאָת), deliberate repetition; "garden of Uzza", an unusual burial site, likely a family plot.
- Main debate: Why does Kings omit Manasseh's repentance recorded in Chronicles? Is it a theological judgment, a different source, or a focus on national consequences?
- Theological theme: Sin has lasting consequences even after personal forgiveness; divine judgment operates on a national scale.
- Best use: Preaching on the weight of sin, the danger of incomplete repentance, or the sovereignty of God in using flawed leaders.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
17As for the rest of the acts of Manasseh, along with all his accomplishments and the sin that he committed, are they not written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah?
18And Manasseh rested with his fathers and was buried in his palace garden, the garden of Uzza. And his son Amon reigned in his place.
WEB World English Bible 2000
17Now the rest of the acts of Manasseh, and all that he did, and his sin that he sinned, aren’t they written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
18Manasseh slept with his fathers, and was buried in the garden of his own house, in the garden of Uzza; and Amon his son reigned in his place.
KJV King James Version 1769
17Now the rest of the acts of Manasseh, and all that he did, and his sin that he sinned, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
18And Manasseh slept with his fathers, and was buried in the garden of his own house, in the garden of Uzza: and Amon his son reigned in his stead.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
17Now the rest of the acts of Manasseh, and all that he did, and his sin that he sinned, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
18And Manasseh slept with his fathers, and was buried in the garden of his own house, in the garden of Uzza: and Amon his son reigned in his stead.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
17And the rest of the matters of Manasseh, and all that he did, and his sin that he sinned, are they not written on the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah?
18And Manasseh lieth with his fathers, and is buried in the garden of his house, in the garden of Uzza, and reign doth Amon his son in his stead.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
17And the rest of the acts of Manasseh, and all that he did, and his sin which he sinned, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
18And Manasseh slept with his fathers, and was buried in the garden of his own house, in the garden of Uzza; and Amon his son reigned in his stead.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
17Now the rest of the acts of Manasses, and all that he did, and his sin, which he sinned, are they not written in the book of the words of the days of the kings of Juda?
18And Manasses slept with his fathers, and was buried in the garden of his own house, in the garden of Oza: and Amon, his son, reigned in his stead.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · II Kings 21:17
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
The writer of Kings deliberately omits Manasseh's repentance and restoration recorded in 2 Chronicles 33. Barnes notes that the repentance may have been seen as "a half-repentance" that left the root of evil untouched. The Cambridge Bible suggests the historian focused on political and national judgment rather than personal reform. Adam Clarke recognizes that Manasseh repented and died in peace, yet Kings records only his sin and its consequences. Gill specifies that both good and bad acts occurred later, but only the sin is highlighted here. All agree that the burial in his own garden, not the royal tombs, signals judgment or shame. Wesley adds that Manasseh may have chosen this as a testimony of his repentance and self-abasement. The passage functions as a theological verdict: Manasseh's reign brought irreparable damage to Judah, and the historian prioritizes that outcome over any personal turn.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Deliberate theological omission: Kings focuses on national judgment; repentance would have undercut the message of inevitable punishment (21:10-15).
- Half-repentance view: Barnes argues Manasseh's repentance was incomplete, leaving the root of evil untouched, so Kings omits it as insubstantial.
- Source selection: Cambridge Bible suggests the writer used political sources rather than prophetic ones; Chronicles used prophetic records (Hozai).
What is clear: Manasseh was a wicked king who reigned fifty-five years, sinned greatly, and was buried in his own garden, not the royal tombs.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Omission of Manasseh's repentance | Both Kings and Chronicles agree Manasseh sinned greatly and died after a long reign. | Christians vary on why Kings omits the repentance: some say it reflects a half-repentance (Barnes), others say the writer focused on political consequences (Cambridge Bible), or that it was a deliberate theological emphasis on judgment. |
| Burial location significance | Manasseh was buried in his own house's garden, not the royal tombs. | Some see this as shame or judgment (Matthew Henry), others as a choice by Manasseh to show repentance (Wesley). Still others see it as a practical matter because David's tombs were full (Barnes). |
| Manasseh's ultimate fate | He died in peace after a long reign; his son Amon succeeded him. | Some traditions, especially those using the Prayer of Manasseh, emphasize his restoration and salvation. Others, reading Kings alone, see him as one whose evil defined his legacy despite any late turn. |
| Meaning of "garden of Uzza" | Uzza likely refers to a person or place name, but the exact identity is uncertain. | Gill mentions Uzzah (who touched the ark) or King Uzziah as possibilities; others suggest it is simply a place name for a section of the palace garden. |
Historical & Cultural Context
Manasseh reigned fifty-five years (2 Chronicles 33:1), one of the longest in Judah's history, yet Kings covers it in just eighteen verses (21:1-18). His father Hezekiah had reformed worship, but Manasseh reversed it. He rebuilt the high places, erected altars for Baal, and even placed an Asherah pole in the temple (21:3-7). Verse 16 says he shed so much innocent blood that he filled Jerusalem from one end to another. Early Jewish tradition held that Isaiah was martyred under Manasseh.
The burial location is striking. Kings records that Manasseh "slept with his fathers" (a standard phrase for death) but was buried not in the royal tombs but "in the garden of his own house, in the garden of Uzza." Barnes notes that David's catacomb was probably full, and from Ahaz onward kings found burial elsewhere. Ahaz was buried in Jerusalem but not in the kings' sepulchres (2 Chronicles 28:27). Hezekiah was buried on the way up to David's tomb (2 Chronicles 32:33). "The garden of Uzza" may refer to Uzzah, who died for touching the ark (2 Samuel 6), or to King Uzziah. Gill mentions that Jews sometimes buried in gardens, citing John 19:41. Cyrus of Persia was also buried in a garden. The phrase suggests a family plot attached to the palace, distinct from the Davidic tombs.
Manasseh's name means "causing to forget," and his son Amon, whose name resembles the Egyptian god Amun, continued the idolatry. The Assyrian context looms: Manasseh was a vassal of Assyria, and his captivity to Babylon (recorded in Chronicles) fits that political reality. Kings chooses not to tell that story, keeping the focus on Judah's covenant unfaithfulness and the divine judgment already pronounced in 21:10-15.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for II Kings 21:17-18. The standard Hebrew text is stable across manuscripts. Minor differences in English translations (e.g., "slept with his fathers" vs. "rested with his fathers") reflect translation choices rather than textual variation. The phrase "his sin that he sinned" is emphatic in the Hebrew and is consistently rendered.
Reception History
Early Jewish tradition (reflected in 2 Chronicles 33 and the apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh) developed the narrative of Manasseh's repentance. By the first century AD, the Prayer of Manasseh was included in some Septuagint manuscripts and later used in Eastern Orthodox liturgy as a model of penitence. In the Western church, the omission in Kings was often read as a warning against trusting late conversions to undo a life of evil. Reformers like Calvin and Luther commented on the selective historiography, seeing God's sovereignty in recording sin without mitigation. Modern readers wrestle with the tension between judgment and mercy displayed in the two accounts. The passage has been used in pastoral care to address guilt and hope, with some traditions emphasizing restoration and others emphasizing the ongoing consequences of sin.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- Sin cannot be glossed over. The writer emphasizes "his sin that he sinned" even after referencing other acts. Manasseh's idolatry and bloodshed are the lasting memory, no matter how many years he reigned.
- Death is the great equalizer. Hezekiah slept with his fathers and was buried honorably; Manasseh also slept with his fathers, but in a garden, apart from the kings. Burial locations speak volumes about how a life is remembered.
- Legacy is shaped by more than a late turn. Even genuine repentance, if it comes late and fails to undo the harm done, may not change the public verdict. Kings shows that national consequences of sin can outlast personal reform.
Five-point outline
- Formula as judgment. The closing formula for a king normally lists accomplishments. Here, it singles out sin.
- Selective memory. The writer knows of Manasseh's restoration (from Chronicles) but chooses to omit it. This is a theological choice.
- Burial as symbol. "The garden of his own house" contrasts with the royal tombs. It is not a dishonorable burial, but it is separate.
- Father and son. Amon walks in Manasseh's ways, showing that the father's sin infected the next generation. The evil continues.
- Hope delayed. Judgment is certain, but it is not the final word. Josiah, Manasseh's grandson, will bring reform. The line of David continues.
Illustration hooks
- A longtime CEO builds a company on unethical practices, then near retirement makes amends and donates to charity. The company's reputation is still damaged, and the harm cannot be undone.
- A parent who was absent or harsh in their children's early years later apologizes and tries to make up for it. The children may forgive, but the effects on their upbringing remain.
- In sports, an athlete known for a single unsportsmanlike moment is remembered for that more than for a whole career of good plays.
Questions your congregation is asking
- If Manasseh truly repented, why does the Bible not make it part of the main story? Does his repentance matter?
- Does this mean God will use us despite our worst sins, even if the consequences last?
- Why was Manasseh given 55 years as king when he did so much evil?
Leading a Discussion
This passage presents one of the most striking silences in Scripture. The writer of Kings covers fifty-five years of Manasseh's reign in a few verses and makes no mention of his captivity, repentance, and return. Yet these events are recorded in 2 Chronicles 33:11-19. How do we account for the difference? Is Kings withholding something, or is it telling a different story? As you discuss, consider how the biblical writers shaped history to teach theology.
Discussion questions
- What stands out to you about the language in verse 17? Why does the writer include "his sin that he sinned" when he could have simply said "all that he did"?
- Read 2 Chronicles 33:10-19. What details does it add that are missing from Kings? Why might those details matter for Chronicles' purpose?
- What does Manasseh's burial location tell you about how he was regarded at the end of his life compared to other Judahite kings?
- Barnes suggests Manasseh's repentance was a "half-repentance." Is that fair? What do you think the writer of Kings wants us to conclude?
- How do you reconcile the picture in Kings (a thoroughly evil king) with the picture in Chronicles (a repentant king restored by God)?
- What does this passage teach about the consequences of sin, even after forgiveness?
- How can this story bring hope to someone who has done great harm and fears that their sin defines them?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| II Kings 20:20 | Now the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and all his might, and how he made the pool, and the conduit, and brought water into the city, aren’t they written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? |
| II Kings 20:21 | Hezekiah slept with his fathers, and Manasseh his son reigned in his place. |
| II Chronicles 33:1 | Manasseh was twelve years old when he began to reign, and he reigned fifty-five years in Jerusalem. |
| II Chronicles 33:20 | So Manasseh slept with his fathers, and they buried him in his own house; and Amon his son reigned in his place. |
| II Kings 21:26 | He was buried in his tomb in the garden of Uzza, and Josiah his son reigned in his place. |
| II Chronicles 21:20 | He was thirty-two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem eight years. He departed with no one’s regret. They buried him in David’s city, but not in the tombs of the kings. |
| II Chronicles 24:16 | They buried him in David’s city among the kings, because he had done good in Israel, and toward God and his house. |
| II Chronicles 24:25 | When they had departed from him (for they left him seriously wounded), his own servants conspired against him for the blood of the sons of Jehoiada the priest, and killed him on his bed, and he died. They buried him in David’s city, but they didn’t bury him in the tombs of the kings. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
9 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke notes that Manasseh's prayer, preserved in the Apocrypha, is of doubtful authenticity and was never accepted as Scripture even by the Roman Catholic Church. He also points out that the original chronicles and books of the seers, which contained further details about Manasseh's reign, are no longer extant.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes argues that the writer of Kings deliberately omitted Manasseh's repentance and restoration, recorded only in Chronicles, because he considered it a half-repentance that left the root of the evil untouched. The burial note and son's Egyptian-derived name further suggest the writer saw only a superficial reform.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The Cambridge Bible commentary notes that the writer of Kings completely omits Manasseh’s repentance and his captivity in Babylon, events that are central in Chronicles. The likely reason is that the Kings account focuses on political succession rather than religious biography, and Manasseh’s experience in Babylon did not alter the royal line.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva Note observes that the writer of Kings deliberately directs readers elsewhere for the full record of Manasseh's reign and sins. The reference to the book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah signals that only a summary is given here, with the complete account preserved in that separate history.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill notes the unusual detail that Manasseh was buried in his own garden rather than the royal tombs, suggesting either his own choice from shame over his sins or the judgment of others. He also explores possible origins for the garden's name, connecting it to Uzzah or King Uzziah.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB identifies the specific prophets the passage refers to: Hosea, Joel, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Isaiah. Their messages were recorded in the national chronicles of Judah and now form part of the biblical canon, showing God spoke through named individuals whose words were preserved.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange sees Manasseh's idolatry
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry highlights the twofold purpose of prophecy in this passage: prophets first teach the knowledge of God and direct people in their duty. Only when this instruction fails do they move to reprove sin, with the goal of prompting repentance and return to God.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley notes that Manasseh was buried in a garden, not in the royal tombs, likely by his own command. This choice served as a lasting testimony of his sincere repentance and deep abhorrence of himself for his earlier sins.