II Kings 23:27 · Bible study
2 Kings 23:27 Commentary: God Rejects His Chosen City
Hebrew · 7 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why does God reject Judah, Jerusalem, and the temple despite His covenant promises? A study of divine judgment, covenant conditions, and Josiah's reformation.
Research Summary
- Meaning: God announces the coming exile of Judah and the rejection of Jerusalem and the temple because of persistent covenant unfaithfulness, despite Josiah’s reform.
- Key words: “remove” (H5493, sur, to turn aside, cause to depart); “reject/cast off” (H3988, ma’as, to reject, despise); “chosen” (H0977, bachar, to select, elect).
- Main debate: How to reconcile God’s unconditional choice of Jerusalem with the conditional nature of the covenant (e.g., I Kings 9:7).
- Theological theme: Judgment as a consequence of sin even among God’s chosen people; the limits of human reform in the face of accumulated national guilt.
- Best use: A sobering reminder that God’s grace does not cancel His justice, and that covenant privileges carry covenant responsibilities.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
For the LORD had said, “I will remove Judah from My sight, just as I removed Israel. I will reject this city Jerusalem, which I chose, and the temple of which I said, ‘My Name shall be there.’”
WEB World English Bible 2000
Yahweh said, “I will also remove Judah out of my sight, as I have removed Israel; and I will cast off this city which I have chosen, even Jerusalem, and the house of which I said, ‘My name shall be there.’”
KJV King James Version 1769
And the Lord said, I will remove Judah also out of my sight, as I have removed Israel, and will cast off this city Jerusalem which I have chosen, and the house of which I said, My name shall be there.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
And Jehovah said, I will remove Judah also out of my sight, as I have removed Israel, and I will cast off this city which I have chosen, even Jerusalem, and the house of which I said, My name shall be there.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
and Jehovah saith, `Also Judah I turn aside from my presence, as I turned Israel aside, and I have rejected this city that I have chosen--Jerusalem, and the house of which I said, My name is there.'
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And Jehovah said, I will remove Judah also out of my sight, as I have removed Israel, and will reject this city Jerusalem which I have chosen, and the house of which I said, My name shall be there.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
And the Lord said: I will remove Juda also from before my face, as I have removed Israel: and I will cast off this city Jerusalem, which I chose, and the house, of which I said: My name shall be there.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Y dijo Jehová: También he de quitar de mi presencia á Judá, como quité á Israel, y abominaré á esta ciudad que había escogido, á Jerusalem, y á la casa de la cual había yo dicho: Mi nombre será allí.
E disse o SENHOR: Também tirarei de minha presença a Judá, como tirei a Israel, e abominarei a esta cidade que havia escolhido, a Jerusalém, e à casa da qual havia eu dito: Meu nome será ali.
Et l’ Éternel dit: J’ ôterai aussi Juda de devant ma face comme j’ ai ôté Israël, et je rejetterai cette ville de Jérusalem que j’ avais choisie, et la maison de laquelle j’ avais dit: Là sera mon nom.
Und der HERR sprach: Ich will Juda auch von meinem Angesicht tun, wie ich Israel weggetan habe, und will diese Stadt verwerfen, die ich erwählt hatte, Jerusalem, und das Haus, davon ich gesagt habe: Mein Namen soll daselbst sein.
En de HEERE zeide: Ik zal Juda ook van Mijn aangezicht wegdoen, gelijk als Ik Israel weggedaan heb; en Ik zal deze stad Jeruzalem verwerpen, die Ik verkoren heb, en het huis, waarvan Ik gezegd heb: Mijn Naam zal daar wezen.
E l’Eterno disse: “Anche Giuda io torrò d’innanzi al mio cospetto come n’ho tolto Israele; e rigetterò Gerusalemme, la città ch’io m’ero scelta, e la casa della quale avevo detto: Là sarà il mio nome”.
Przetoż rzekł Pan: I Judę odrzucę od obliczności mojej, jakom odrzucił Izraela, i wzgardzę to miasto, którem był obrał, to jest Jeruzalem, i dom ten, o którymem mówił: Będzie tam imię moje.
И сказал Господь: и Иуду отрину от лица Моего, как отринул Я Израиля, и отвергну город сей Иерусалим, который Я избрал, и дом, о котором Я сказал: "будет имя Мое там".
耶和華 說：「我必 將 猶大人 從 我面前 趕出，如同 趕出 以色列人一般；我必棄掉 我從前所 選擇 的這 城─ 耶路撒冷 和 我所 說 立 我名 的殿。」
And the Lord said, I will send Judah away from before my face, as I have sent Israel; I will have nothing more to do with this town, which I had made mine, even Jerusalem, and the holy house of which I said, My name will be there.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · II Kings 23:27
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that this verse announces God’s just and irrevocable judgment on Judah, Jerusalem, and the temple. Barnes notes that Judah’s guilt was compounded by having witnessed Israel’s exile and failing to learn from it. Gill explains that “remove out of my sight” does not mean from God’s omniscience but from His special care and protection, He would allow them to be carried into captivity. Wesley points to the conditional nature of God’s earlier promises: “My name shall be there” was spoken upon conditions the people had broken. Matthew Henry calls this a “great deep” of divine judgment alongside Josiah’s unparalleled faithfulness. The consensus is that God’s choice of Jerusalem and the temple was not unconditional; persistent rebellion, especially the sins of Manasseh, triggered the covenant sanctions threatened in Deuteronomy. Judah would share Israel’s fate.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Conditional covenant view: God’s promises to preserve Jerusalem and the temple were explicitly conditional on obedience (I Kings 9:3-9; Deuteronomy 29:27-28). Judah’s persistent sin triggered the stated sanctions.
- Cumulative guilt view: The judgment is the result of long-accumulated sin, especially under Manasseh (v.26), which passed a point of no return. Even Josiah’s reform could not reverse the national debt.
What is clear: God’s rejection of Judah, Jerusalem, and the temple is a direct and just response to Judah’s persistent rebellion and idolatry, in accordance with the covenantal warnings given through Moses.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| The nature of God's rejection | God is not rejecting His people finally or eternally, but allowing them to experience the covenantal sanction of exile (Deuteronomy 29:28). | Some traditions see this as a temporary withdrawal of God's presence to discipline and eventually restore; others emphasize that God's rejection is just and deserved, without speculating on restoration here. |
| The role of Manasseh's sins | Manasseh's long reign of idolatry and violence provoked God's anger and contributed decisively to the judgment. | The degree to which one king's sin can condemn a nation is debated. Some stress individual responsibility (Ezekiel 18), while others see collective guilt passed down through covenant headship. |
| The conditionality of God's promises | God's choice of Jerusalem and the temple was not unconditional; I Kings 9:3-9 clearly links blessing with obedience. | Catholic and Orthodox traditions may emphasize that God's gifts are irrevocable in their ultimate purpose (Romans 11:29), but that Israel's disobedience brought temporal judgment; Reformed traditions often stress that election is not negated by judgment, but judgment reveals the distinction between outward and inward covenant membership. |
| Josiah's reform and its effectiveness | Josiah's reform was genuine and honored by God, but it could not avert the judgment destined for the nation. | Some argue that the reform postponed judgment (as in Hezekiah's case, II Kings 20), while others see it as providentially timed but insufficient to change the irreversible national trajectory. |
Historical & Cultural Context
II Kings 23:27 stands at the climax of Josiah’s story, a king praised as without equal for his wholehearted reform (v.25). Yet the verse immediately follows a sobering refrain: God’s anger still burned because of Manasseh (v.26). Manasseh, Josiah’s grandfather, had reigned fifty-five years and reversed Hezekiah’s reforms, rebuilding high places, installing altars to Baal in the temple, and practicing child sacrifice (II Kings 21:1-16). The text says he shed so much innocent blood that it filled Jerusalem from end to end.
Josiah’s reforms were genuine and extensive: he tore down idolatrous altars, purged the land of mediums and teraphim, and reinstituted the Passover (vv.4-24). But the cumulative weight of Judah’s idolatry, especially under Manasseh, had passed a point of no return. The northern kingdom of Israel had already been removed from God’s sight in 722 BC. The cross-reference in II Kings 17:18 and 20 makes clear that Israel’s exile was a direct consequence of their persistent sin. Now Judah, despite the warning, followed the same path.
The temple, where God said His name would dwell (I Kings 8:29, 9:3), was not a talisman guaranteeing safety. Jeremiah would later warn the people not to trust in “the temple of the LORD” (Jeremiah 7:4). History had already shown that divine election brought responsibility, not immunity.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for II Kings 23:27. The verse is stable across the Hebrew manuscripts and ancient versions. Some English translations differ in whether they read “cast off” (KJV, ASV) or “reject” (BSB, YLT), but these correspond to the same Hebrew verb ma’as (H3988).
Reception History
Christian readers have often returned to this verse when wrestling with the question of how God can reject what He once chose. Early church fathers like Chrysostom used it to warn against presuming on grace, no privilege, even temple worship, guarantees safety if the heart is far from God. Reformation-era commentators such as Matthew Henry and John Wesley emphasized the conditional nature of God’s promises, reading this verse as a direct application of Deuteronomy 28. In Jewish tradition, this verse sits within the narrative of the kings and underscores the justice of the exile: the temple was not destroyed because God was weak, but because His people had violated the covenant to its breaking point. The verse is also cited in later theological discussions about the relationship between divine sovereignty and human responsibility in judgment, especially in debates over whether God’s covenant with Israel is irrevocable.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- Judgment does not cancel grace. Josiah’s reform was real and honored, but it could not erase the nation’s accumulated debt. God’s love for the king did not nullify His justice toward the people.
- Election carries conditions. God chose Jerusalem and the temple, but that choice was covenantal, it required obedience. When the covenant was broken, the sanctions came into force, as Deuteronomy 29:27-28 spells out.
- Warning is wasted without response. Judah had seen Israel fall. They had prophets like Jeremiah. Yet they did not turn. This verse asks: are we any different when we see God’s discipline around us?
Five-point outline
- The context: Josiah’s reform (vv.24-25).
- The problem: Manasseh’s sins and God’s unresolved wrath (v.26).
- The announcement: removal of Judah, rejection of Jerusalem and the temple (v.27).
- The connection: Judah follows Israel’s path (II Kings 17:18).
- The hope: judgment is not the final word, God’s name would one day be restored in a new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34).
Illustration hooks
- A parent forgives a child for a broken window, but still makes them pay for the repair from their allowance. Grace and consequences can coexist.
- A town ignores repeated flood warnings because the levee has always held. Then the water comes. Thelevee was never unconditional.
- A marriage survives an affair, but trust takes years to rebuild. God’s covenant with Israel had been breached repeatedly.
Questions your congregation is asking
- If God loved Josiah, why did He let judgment fall anyway?
- Does God still reject people He once chose?
- How can I know if my nation or church is heading for judgment?
Leading a Discussion
II Kings 23:27 lands like a verdict. After the high of Josiah’s reform, God says He will remove Judah from His sight, reject Jerusalem and the temple. This passage forces us to wrestle with how God’s mercy and justice work together, especially when His chosen people turn away.
Discussion questions
- What does this verse reveal about God’s character? Which attributes stand out, justice, faithfulness, holiness?
- Josiah was a good king who did everything right (v.25). Why does God still pronounce judgment on Judah? What does Manasseh’s role (v.26) tell us about collective sin?
- Read I Kings 9:3-9. How does that promise compare with what happens here? Does God change His mind, or are the conditions clear from the start?
- “My name shall be there” was a statement of intimate presence. How does God’s judgment feel like the withdrawal of that presence? Where do we see God’s name present today?
- This verse says God “cast off” the city He “chose.” Does that trouble you? How do you reconcile divine sovereignty with human responsibility in this judgment?
- How does the fall of Israel (II Kings 17:18) function as a warning for Judah, and for us? What warnings has God given your community that you have not heeded?
- What hope remains after such a judgment? Skim forward to Jeremiah 31:31-34 or Ezra’s rebuilding of the temple. How does God restore what He rejects?
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)
| Deuteronomy 29:27 | Therefore Yahweh’s anger burned against this land, to bring on it all the curses that are written in this book. |
| Deuteronomy 29:28 | Yahweh rooted them out of their land in anger, in wrath, and in great indignation, and thrust them into another land, as it is today.” |
| I Kings 8:29 | that your eyes may be open toward this house night and day, even toward the place of which you have said, ‘My name shall be there;’ to listen to the prayer which your servant prays toward this place. |
| I Kings 9:3 | Yahweh said to him, “I have heard your prayer and your supplication that you have made before me. I have made this house holy, which you have built, to put my name there forever; and my eyes and my heart shall be there perpetually. |
| II Kings 17:18 | Therefore Yahweh was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight. There was none left but the tribe of Judah only. |
| II Kings 17:20 | Yahweh rejected all the offspring of Israel, afflicted them, and delivered them into the hands of raiders, until he had cast them out of his sight. |
| II Kings 18:11 | The king of Assyria carried Israel away to Assyria, and put them in Halah, and on the Habor, the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes, |
| II Kings 21:4 | He built altars in Yahweh’s house, of which Yahweh said, “I will put my name in Jerusalem.” |
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
7 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes notes that Judah's guilt was compounded because they had witnessed Israel's downfall as a clear warning, yet they failed to learn from it. Having seen their sister kingdom judged, they repeated the same sins with full knowledge.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator notes that the Revised Version follows the Hebrew word order exactly in this phrase, but regards that as its only merit. He implies the translation is awkward despite being faithfully literal.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva Notes stress that God's judgment on Judah mirrors his rejection of Israel, showing no partiality even toward Jerusalem, his chosen city, or the temple where he placed his name. Neither divine election nor the sanctuary guarantees protection when the people persist in sin.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill clarifies that God's removal of Judah "out of my sight" does not mean from divine omniscience, but from His special care and protection. He stresses this was a settled, irreversible decree, and that God would cast off Jerusalem and the temple, which had been chosen for His name, because the people turned to idols.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange insists the "book of the law" found in the temple was the entire Pentateuch, not just Deuteronomy, and that it was a genuine rediscovery, not a priestly forgery. He sees God's providence in preserving the scroll through Manasseh's persecution and bringing it to light, which explains why it produced such a profound effect on Josiah and sparked the reformation.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Matthew Henry emphasizes Josiah's unmatched sincerity and zeal in turning to the Lord and reforming Judah, yet God's fierce wrath against the nation remained because of Manasseh's provocations. Even the best king could not reverse the judgment already set in motion.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley stresses that God's promise was conditional, tied to specific terms the people repeatedly broke. When they failed, God justly withdrew what He had pledged, making them feel the weight of His broken promise as a fair consequence of their own unfaithfulness.