II Kings 24:5-7 · Bible study
2 Kings 24:5-7 Commentary: Jehoiakim's End and Babylon's Rise
Hebrew · 10 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why does Kings point to other chronicles for Jehoiakim's acts?
Research Summary
- Meaning: Jehoiakim’s reign ends with a conventional death-notice, a reference to external chronicles, and a historical note explaining Egypt’s loss of power to Babylon.
- Key words: “slept with his fathers” (שָׁכַב, shakhav, a death euphemism); “brook of Egypt” (נַחַל מִצְרַיִם, nachal mitsrayim, the Wadi el-Arish, not the Nile); “did not add again” (Hiphil of יָסַף , yasaph, meaning he never again left Egypt).
- Main debate: Whether “slept with his fathers” implies a peaceful burial, given Jeremiah’s prophecy that Jehoiakim would be buried like a donkey (Jer 22:19).
- Theological theme: God’s sovereignty over world powers; the selective, theological nature of biblical history; the certainty of prophetic judgment.
- Best use: As an example of how Kings uses formulaic language to close a reign while pointing beyond itself, inviting readers to trust the Bible’s purpose even when details are sparse.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
5As for the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, along with all his accomplishments, are they not written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah?
6And Jehoiakim rested with his fathers, and his son Jehoiachin reigned in his place.
7Now the king of Egypt did not march out of his land again, because the king of Babylon had taken all his territory, from the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates River.
WEB World English Bible 2000
5Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, aren’t they written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
6So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers, and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his place.
7The king of Egypt didn’t come out of his land any more; for the king of Babylon had taken, from the brook of Egypt to the river Euphrates, all that belonged to the king of Egypt.
KJV King James Version 1769
5Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
6So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead.
7And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land: for the king of Babylon had taken from the river of Egypt unto the river Euphrates all that pertained to the king of Egypt.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
5Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
6So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers; and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead.
7And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land; for the king of Babylon had taken, from the brook of Egypt unto the river Euphrates, all that pertained to the king of Egypt.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
5And the rest of the matters of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, are they not written on the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah?
6And Jehoiakim lieth with his fathers, and Jehoiachin his son reigneth in his stead.
7And the king of Egypt hath not added any more to go out from his own land, for the king of Babylon hath taken, from the brook of Egypt unto the river Phrat, all that had been to the king of Egypt.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
5And the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
6And Jehoiakim slept with his fathers, and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead.
7And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land, for the king of Babylon had taken all that belonged to the king of Egypt, from the torrent of Egypt to the river Euphrates.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
5But the rest of the acts of Joakim, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the words of the days of the kings of Juda? And Joakim slept with his fathers:
6And Joachin, his son, reigned in his stead.
7And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his own country: for the king of Babylon had taken all that had belonged to the king of Egypt, from the river of Egypt, unto the river Euphrates.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · II Kings 24:5
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators from across traditions agree that this passage functions as a transitional formula, closing Jehoiakim's reign while pointing readers elsewhere for fuller detail. The reference to “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” is, in the words of the Cambridge Bible, a standard editorial device that signals the author’s selective purpose, the biblical historian is not attempting an exhaustive chronicle. Barnes notes that the same formula appears for most Judahite kings, creating space for what the writer does include: the theological meaning of the king’s end and the geopolitical shift it accompanies.
On the second verb phrase, “Jehoiakim slept with his fathers,” commentators diverge in how they reconcile this conventional death-language with the curses pronounced by Jeremiah. Barnes, Gill, and the Cambridge Bible all argue that the phrase is idiomatic, it simply means he died, and does not contradict the prophecy that he would be denied a proper burial (Jer 22:18, 19). Gill points out that 2 Chronicles 36:6 reports he was bound to be carried to Babylon, and various Fathers hold he died soon after leaving Jerusalem. The consensus, then, is that the biblical author used a standard euphemism but the surrounding record (including cross-references) shows Jehoiakim’s end was inglorious.
Regarding Egypt, all sources agree: Pharaoh Neco’s power was permanently broken. The “brook of Egypt” is identified as the Wadi el-Arish (not the Nile), and the Euphrates marks the northern boundary of Babylonian control. Keil and Delitzsch observe that this verse explains why Egypt could no longer intervene in Judah’s affairs, a key reason for the kingdom’s vulnerability.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Conventional idiom view: ‘Slept with his fathers’ is a standard death-formula in Kings; it does not guarantee a proper burial, only that the king died. Jeremiah’s prophecy about burial is not contradicted.
- Literal burial view: Some readers (especially in popular tradition) take the phrase to mean Jehoiakim was buried with his ancestors, creating tension with Jeremiah 22:18–19. This view requires harmonization (e.g., that his remains were later recovered).
- Theological silence view: The author deliberately omits the burial-notice, which is unusual in Kings formulas, to hint at the inglorious end without stating it directly. The chronicles reference then points readers to the fuller account.
What is clear: Jehoiakim died, his son Jehoiachin succeeded him, and Egypt lost its imperial holdings to Babylon, permanently changing the political landscape of the region.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Validity of the phrase "slept with his fathers" | All commentators agree the phrase is a conventional idiom for death, not necessarily a statement about burial rites. | Some (Barnes, Gill) hold that Jehoiakim died violently and was denied a proper grave, while others argue the phrase itself implies a normal death; both sides agree the prophecy in Jeremiah stands. |
| Reference to the chronicles | The formula indicates the author did not intend to give an exhaustive biography; additional information existed in court records. | Traditions differ on how much of that extrabiblical material has been lost. Conservative scholars see it as a rhetorical device acknowledging source documentation; critical scholars often treat the chronicles as a real lost work. |
| Extent of Babylonian conquest | Babylon took all territory from the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates that had belonged to Egypt. | The identity of the “brook of Egypt” is not debated among these excerpts (Wadi el-Arish), but some earlier interpreters (e.g., Gill) note confusion with the Nile; modern scholarship firmly identifies it as the desert wadi. |
Historical & Cultural Context
Jehoiakim came to the throne of Judah in 609 BC as a vassal of Pharaoh Neco, who had killed his brother Jehoahaz and installed him (2 Kgs 23:34). For three years he served Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon after the Babylonian defeat of Egypt at Carchemish (605 BC), but then rebelled, likely hoping for renewed Egyptian support. That hope proved empty. Verse 7 explains why: Babylon had stripped Egypt of all its holdings from the “brook of Egypt” (the Wadi el-Arish, a desert stream marking the traditional border) all the way to the Euphrates River. This was the decisive end to Egyptian ambitions in Syria-Palestine after centuries of dominance.
The immediate context (vv. 1, 4) makes clear that the troops sent against Judah, Chaldeans, Syrians, Moabites, and Ammonites, were instruments of Yahweh’s judgment, sent because of the sins of Manasseh, especially the shedding of innocent blood. Jehoiakim’s own character, described in Jeremiah 22:13, 17 as greedy and unjust, fit this judgment. The Chronicler adds that toward the end of his reign, Nebuchadnezzar bound Jehoiakim in fetters to carry him to Babylon (2 Chr 36:6), though he apparently died before being taken away. The “rest of his acts” mentioned here likely included his burning of Jeremiah’s scroll (Jer 36) and other impious deeds that the Kings writer chose not to detail.
Literarily, the passage serves as a hinge: the formula “slept with his fathers” closes Jehoiakim’s story, and the notice about Egypt’s retreat explains the new balance of power. What follows is the brief three-month reign of Jehoiachin and the first Babylonian siege of Jerusalem (vv. 8, 17).
Textual Notes
The supplied commentaries and sources note no significant textual variants for II Kings 24:5, 7. The Masoretic Text is consistent, and ancient versions (LXX, Vulgate, Peshitta) reflect the same reading. The main interpretive challenge lies not in the wording but in the relationship between this passage and the prophecies in Jeremiah.
Reception History
In the early church, this passage was often read alongside Jeremiah’s oracles to show that God’s judgments through the prophets are fulfilled even when the historical record seems quiet. Jerome (ca. 400 AD) wrote a commentary on Jeremiah that cross-references Kings, noting the tension and resolving it by distinguishing “slept with his fathers” from “buried with his fathers.” Medieval exegetes (e.g., Nicholas of Lyra) used the chronicles formula to defend the truthfulness of Scripture, the writer was honest about his sources. During the Reformation, commentators like Calvin and Luther cited these verses to demonstrate the doctrine of divine providence in the rise and fall of kingdoms, and to warn against trusting in political alliances (such as Judah’s reliance on Egypt). In the Wesleyan tradition, Matthew Henry drew from this passage a pastoral lesson about the end of the wicked: even when Scripture uses mild language, the surrounding prophetic context reveals the terror of judgment.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The selective record. The author points to “the book of the chronicles” for more details, reminding us that Scripture is theological history, not exhaustive journalism. God gives us what we need to know for faith and repentance, not every fact.
- The euphemism that hides a tragedy. “Jehoiakim slept with his fathers” sounds peaceful, but Jeremiah’s prophecies (22:18, 19) promise he would be buried like a donkey. The formula is a convention; the reality was a dishonorable death, a sobering warning about the end of those who oppose God’s word.
- The shift of empires. Egypt once dominated Judah; now it cannot even leave its own land. The rise of Babylon is the backdrop for the exile. God uses pagan nations to discipline his people, and human power structures are never final.
Five-point outline
- Reference to an external source (v. 5).
- The ambiguous death-notice (v. 6).
- The absence of a burial report, a silent fulfillment of Jeremiah.
- Egypt’s confinement (v. 7).
- The transfer of territory to Babylon.
Illustration hooks
- An epitaph that says nothing. A tombstone that reads “He rests” when everyone knows he died by violence. The public euphemism versus the private truth, our culture often sanitizes death, but the Bible lets the tension stand.
- A student’s “see textbook.” The author of Kings is like a teacher who writes “for more details, see chapter 5.” We are pointed elsewhere for the extra facts; the core lesson is already given.
- A geopolitical earthquake. Think of the collapse of the Soviet Union, an empire that once controlled Eastern Europe suddenly confined to its own borders. Egypt’s retreat was equally stunning for its time.
Questions your congregation is asking
- How can the Bible say Jehoiakim “slept with his fathers” if Jeremiah says he would be cast out?
- Why doesn’t the Bible record what actually happened to him? Doesn’t that make the record incomplete?
- What is the “brook of Egypt,” and why does it matter that Babylon took everything up to the Euphrates?
Leading a Discussion
This passage appears to be a simple transition, but it raises important questions about how the biblical writers select and present history. Not every detail is preserved, the author points us to other records. At the same time, the words chosen (or omitted) carry theological weight, especially the tension between “slept with his fathers” and the harsh prophecies of Jeremiah. As you discuss these verses, note both what the text says and what it leaves unsaid.
Discussion questions
- What does the phrase “the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim…are they not written in the book of the chronicles” tell you about the purpose of the book of Kings?
- Why do you think the author included the reference to an external source rather than simply providing more information?
- Read Jeremiah 22:18, 19. How does that prophecy shape your understanding of “Jehoiakim slept with his fathers” in verse 6?
- What does verse 7 explain about why Egypt could no longer help Judah? How does this affect the story of Jehoiakim’s rebellion?
- In what ways do we sometimes wish the Bible gave us more historical or biographical detail? How does trusting its selective focus test our faith?
- Pastoral application: How does knowing God’s sovereignty over empires (Babylon’s rise, Egypt’s fall) help you process current world events?
- Is there a person in your life whose public reputation and private reality are sharply different? How might this passage inform how you see them in light of God’s justice?
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 Chronicles 36:8 | Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and his abominations which he did, and that which was found in him, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah; and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his place. |
| Jeremiah 22:13 | “Woe to him who builds his house by unrighteousness, and his rooms by injustice; who uses his neighbor’s service without wages, and doesn’t give him his hire; |
| Jeremiah 22:17 | But your eyes and your heart are only for your covetousness, for shedding innocent blood, for oppression, and for doing violence.” |
| Jeremiah 26:1 | In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, this word came from Yahweh: |
| Jeremiah 26:24 | But the hand of Ahikam the son of Shaphan was with Jeremiah, so that they didn’t give him into the hand of the people to put him to death. |
| II Chronicles 36:6 | Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up against him, and bound him in fetters to carry him to Babylon. |
| Jeremiah 22:18 | Therefore Yahweh says concerning Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah: “They won’t lament for him, saying, ‘Ah my brother!’ or, ‘Ah sister!’ They won’t lament for him, saying ‘Ah lord!’ or, ‘Ah his glory!’ |
| Jeremiah 22:19 | He will be buried with the burial of a donkey, drawn and cast out beyond the gates of 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
10 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke argues that Jehoiachin's three-month reign scarcely counts because he was only a Babylonian viceroy, fulfilling Jeremiah's prophecy that Jehoiakim would have no true successor on David's throne. He also notes that the king of Egypt was so thoroughly crushed by Babylon that he never again attempted any conquests.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes notes that Jeremiah deliberately shortened Jehoiachin's name from Jeconiah to Coniah, cutting off the part meaning "will establish." This small change carried a large meaning: God would not establish this prince as king, despite what his name originally declared.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
This commentator highlights Jehoiakim's shocking callousness in burning Jeremiah's scroll without any fear or remorse. The prophecies that followed are grim: no descendant would sit on David's throne, and his body would be cast out like an ass's carcass. The historian records no details of his violent death or burial.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva Bible notes draw attention to a decisive shift in regional power: the King of Egypt stopped venturing out because the King of Babylon had seized all his territory from the border river of Egypt to the Euphrates. This explains the political context behind the events described in Jehoiakim's reign.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill notes that Jehoiakim's "abominations" included idolatrous marks cut into his flesh. He also died as soon as he left Jerusalem, cast out without burial, fulfilling Jeremiah's prophecy. The king of Egypt could no longer leave his land because Babylon had seized all territory between the Nile and the Euphrates.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB clarifies that "slept with his fathers" simply means Jehoiakim died, not that he was buried honorably; he was denied proper burial as prophesied. His grandson Jehoiachin's brief three-month reign does not contradict the prophecy against Jehoiakim because it was too short to count as a succession.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil and Delitzsch argue that the troops sent against Jehoiakim were not Babylon's main army but allied forces already nearby. Nebuchadnezzar was too busy consolidating his empire to come himself. They also reason that Jehoiakim was slain in battle and left unburied, reconciling Kings' language with Jeremiah's harsher prophecy.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange stresses that Judah's destruction came not from God punishing them for Manasseh's sins alone, but because the nation persisted in those same sins generation after generation. The judgment was just, not arbitrary, because each successive
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry observes that Nebuchadnezzar's name appears in biblical history only because God employed him to destroy Jerusalem and carry Judah captive. Jehoiakim's rebellion after three years of submission brought this judgment, as the Lord sent enemy bands to fulfill what the prophets had spoken.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley draws attention to the wording "with his fathers" while noting that this king was not actually buried with them. He connects this to Jeremiah's prophecy of a burial like a donkey, with no lament. He also observes that Pharaoh could not come to Judah's aid, being barely able to defend his own land.