GospelMount
Search Topics Scripture Prayer Resources Ebooks About Support the mission Saved articles
Jump to ▾

2 Kings 23:35 Meaning: The Heavy Tax of , Just or Oppressive?

Jehoiakim gave the silver and the gold to Pharaoh; but he taxed the land to give the money according to the commandment of Pharaoh. He exacted the silver and the gold of the people of the land, from everyone according to his assessment, to give it to Pharaoh Necoh.

Meaning in one sentence

Examine Jehoiakim's taxation of the land to pay Pharaoh. Was it a fair assessment or an oppressive burden on the people? Discover the deeper meaning here.

II Kings Old Testament Hebrew

Context

This verse sits near the end of Judah's sad decline. Good King Josiah has died, and his son Jehoahaz ruled only three months before Pharaoh Neco deposed him and imposed a heavy fine: a hundred talents of silver and a talent of gold. Neco then placed another son of Josiah on the throne, renaming him Jehoiakim as a sign of submission. Jehoiakim became a vassal king, his first duty to raise the tribute for Egypt. But instead of drawing from the royal treasuries or the temple, he passed the entire cost onto the people of the land. Every person was assessed and forced to pay. The verse records the transaction with a cold precision that hints at the weight behind it.

Key Words

Three Hebrew words carry the emotional weight of this verse. The first is akh, translated as 'but' or 'only.' It is a small word of contrast. Jehoiakim gave the silver to Pharaoh, yes, but that is not the whole story. The 'only' sets up what follows as the real point: he made the people pay. The second word is he'erikh, from the root meaning 'to set in order' or 'arrange.' It became a term for assessing property value for tax. At first glance it sounds fair: a valuation based on what each person owned. But the third word undercuts that fairness. Nagas means 'to exact, to drive, to oppress.' It is the same word used for slave drivers in Egypt. The king did not simply collect taxes; he exacted them, with the sting of a taskmaster. The people were not citizens contributing to their own kingdom. They were squeezed to satisfy a foreign ruler, with their own king as the enforcer.

How Christians Read This Verse

Christian commentators see this verse as a window into Jehoiakim's character. Matthew Henry, in the Reformed tradition, notes that Jerusalem never saw good days after Josiah died. The king's actions are presented as part of the moral decay leading to exile. John Gill, a Baptist, emphasizes that everyone was taxed according to his ability, in principle a fair method. But Adam Clarke, a Methodist, fears that a bad king like Jehoiakim would not abide by that principle, likely overtaxing some while letting others off. The differing views agree on the basic fact: the king shifted a burden he should have borne onto the people he was meant to protect. Across traditions, this verse illustrates the failure of a leader who rules for himself rather than for God.

A common misunderstanding

A reader might think this verse simply describes routine tax collection. The king paid what was owed, and he raised the money by taxing the land, a normal practice. In fact, the verb used for 'exacted' (nagas) is the language of oppression, and the whole account is set against the background of a king who did evil in the Lord's sight (verse 37). The verse is not neutral. It records a ruler who crushed his own people to secure his position under a pagan Pharaoh.

Living This Out

You may not be a king, but you hold some kind of power: at work, at home, among friends. The question this verse asks is simple: when a cost comes due, who pays? Do you absorb it yourself, or do you pass it along to those who are weaker? Jehoiakim protected himself by burdening others. The week ahead will give you a chance to do the opposite. Maybe it means covering a mistake you could easily blame on someone else. Maybe it means taking a financial hit you could shift. Small acts of bearing the burden yourself are where godly leadership begins.

Main takeaway: A true leader bears the burden himself; a selfish leader passes it to the people he is called to serve.

For Families

For ages 5, 8

The king had to pay some money to another king, but instead of using his own money, he took it from all the people. That was not fair. A good leader takes care of his people.

For ages 9, 12

Jehoiakim was a king who did what was wrong. He had to pay a huge fine to the king of Egypt, but he made everyone else pay it for him. He didn't use the palace treasures or his own wealth. He forced every person to give according to how much they owned. This verse shows us that real leaders don't push their problems onto others. They find a way to handle the hard things themselves.

Questions People Ask

Why did Pharaoh change Eliakim's name to Jehoiakim?

Changing a name in the ancient world was a sign of authority and control. Pharaoh wanted to show that Jehoiakim was his vassal, not an independent king. Interestingly, both names are similar in meaning, but the new name included the divine name Yahweh, perhaps allowing Jehoiakim to keep some connection to the covenant God even under submission.

Was this taxation just according to the Bible?

The verse itself does not say 'this was unjust,' but the surrounding context strongly suggests it was oppressive. The word for 'exacted' in Hebrew (nagas) is used elsewhere for slave drivers and harsh taskmasters. Also, verse 37 says Jehoiakim did evil in the Lord's sight. So the Bible presents this taxation not as a fair levy but as part of a wicked reign.

How does this verse connect to the larger story of Judah's fall?

This is the beginning of the end for Judah. The heavy tribute to Egypt weakened the nation, and soon after, Babylon rose to power. Jehoiakim later switched allegiance to Babylon, then rebelled, bringing destruction. This verse shows the pattern of foolish leadership that led to exile. The king's selfishness hurt the whole people and set the stage for judgment.

What does the Hebrew word 'nagas' mean and why does it matter?

Nagas comes from a root meaning to press, drive, or oppress. It is used for the Egyptian taskmasters who forced the Israelites into hard labor (Exodus 3:7, 5:6). When the writer uses this word for Jehoiakim's tax collection, it hints that he is acting like a Pharaoh, not a shepherd of God's people. The word choice reveals the moral judgment hidden inside the plain report.

Did Jehoiakim have any other option besides taxing the people?

Earlier kings, like Ahaz and Hezekiah, sometimes paid tribute from the temple and palace treasuries (2 Kings 16:8, 18:15). Jehoiakim could have done the same. But the commentators suggest the treasuries were likely empty after years of trouble. Even so, he could have humbled himself before God rather than extorting his own people. The real issue is not the difficulty of the situation but the hardness of his heart.

For pastors & researchers

Hebrew interlinear, 8 commentaries & word study

Study page →