Resettling Samaria and Syncretistic Worship

Study notes

New settlers arrive in Samaria's emptied cities and soon face the LORD's direct claim on the territory when lions kill among those who do not know his justice. Instruction from a returned priest at Bethel calls them to fear the LORD alone, yet each nation continues to serve the gods it brought from its homeland and places those images in the high places. The covenant words recalled in the narrative prohibit any such divided loyalty and promise rescue to those who keep the statutes given to Jacob. Instead the people appoint their own priests for the shrines and maintain the former customs, a pattern their children and grandchildren repeat without change.

What is Resettling Samaria and Syncretistic Worship about?

After the sons of Israel have been carried away, the king of Assyria brings new inhabitants into the cities of Samaria from Babylon, Cuthah, Ivvah, Hamath, and Sepharvaim. These groups take possession of the land and settle in its towns. At the outset they do not fear the LORD, and lions begin to kill among them. Word reaches the Assyrian king that the newcomers do not know the justice of the God of the land, so he sends back one of the exiled priests to live in Bethel and teach them how they should fear the LORD. The priest instructs them, yet each nation still fashions its own gods and places them in the high places. They fear the LORD while continuing to serve their former idols according to the customs of the places from which they came. Their children and grandchildren keep the same practices to this day. These verses therefore show what immediately follows the removal of Israel from the land and how worship takes shape among those who remain.

Where does this passage sit in 2 Kings?

These verses sit directly after the catalog of Israel’s covenant violations that led to the northern kingdom’s fall. Where 17:7-23 traces the long accumulation of sins that provoked the LORD to remove the sons of Israel, the resettlement narrative shows the land itself receiving new occupants who immediately repeat the same pattern of partial acknowledgment and divided loyalty. The lions that appear at the outset function as an immediate echo of the judgment language already used against the previous inhabitants, signaling that the ground itself still operates under the same divine claim.

The command to send back one of the exiled priests and the subsequent instruction in Bethel create a brief moment of apparent correction, yet the text quickly records that each group simply adds the LORD to its existing roster of deities. This sequence mirrors the earlier description of Jeroboam’s high-place system, now extended to foreign populations. The repeated insistence that they “feared the LORD” while serving their own gods therefore functions as a running refrain that links the new settlers to the very practices that brought exile upon the original residents.

Within the larger movement of 2 Kings, the account prepares for the shift southward. Once the northern territory has been repopulated under Assyrian oversight, the narrative turns to Hezekiah’s reign in Judah, where a different response to the same covenant demands will be tested. The closing notice that the mixed worship continues “to this day” leaves the northern region in a state of unresolved religious ambiguity, a condition the book does not revisit until later reflections on Samaritan practice appear in other canonical contexts.

How is the passage structured?

The verses open with the Assyrian king’s resettlement of five groups into Samaria’s cities, stated plainly as a completed action that replaces the former inhabitants. Immediately the narrative shifts to the consequence of their arrival: they do not fear the LORD, and lions appear as agents of death. The report that reaches the king repeats the cause—ignorance of the land’s God—yet adds the detail that the lions continue killing, creating a brief delay before any response. The king’s command then intervenes, ordering the return of one exiled priest to Bethel so that teaching may begin. Once the priest arrives and instructs the people, the account turns sharply: each nation proceeds to fashion its own gods and install them in the high places already present. A catalog of five distinct deities follows, each tied to a specific people and city, underscoring the simultaneous and separate character of the new cults. The next sentences record the dual practice without resolution: the settlers fear the LORD and appoint their own priests, yet they serve their former gods according to the customs of their homelands. Verse 34 marks a further turn by extending the description to the present day and stating outright that the people neither fear the LORD nor keep the statutes given to Jacob. At this point the text inserts a block of direct divine speech that rehearses the covenant prohibition against other gods and the requirement to fear the LORD alone. The speech ends with the promise of rescue, after which the narrative resumes with the simple report that the people did not listen and kept their former customs. The final verse returns to the opening tension, noting that the nations continue to fear the LORD while serving their idols, with the practice persisting across generations.

What is the historical background?

Assyrian kings routinely moved entire populations after conquests in order to weaken local loyalties and reduce the chance of organized revolt. The list of places in 17:24—Babylon, Cuthah, Ivvah, Hamath, and Sepharvaim—matches known regions under Assyrian control in the late eighth century, and the resettlement of these groups into the emptied cities of Samaria follows the same administrative pattern used elsewhere in the empire.

Ancient Near Eastern peoples assumed that each territory belonged to its own deity, whose “justice” or mishpat governed the land’s fertility, safety, and order. When the newcomers suffered lion attacks, officials interpreted the deaths as punishment for failing to honor the God of the land, a diagnosis that prompted the Assyrian king to return one exiled priest. Bethel, the site chosen for the priest’s residence, had long served as a major northern sanctuary; placing instruction there connected the new settlers to an existing cultic center rather than creating an entirely new one.

The gods named in 17:30-31 reflect the homelands of each group. Succoth-benoth and Nergal belong to Babylonian and Cuthite pantheons, while Ashima, Nibhaz, and Tartak appear to be deities from Hamath and the Avvim. The people of Sepharvaim continued the regional custom of child sacrifice to Adrammelech and Anammelech. These imported cults were housed in the same high-place shrines that earlier Israelite kings had built, allowing each nation to maintain its ancestral rites alongside whatever instruction the returned priest provided.

The covenant language quoted in 17:35-39 recalls the exodus deliverance and the prohibition against fearing other gods, language that echoes the commands given at Sinai. The text notes that the resettled groups continued their former customs “to this day,” indicating that the mixed worship described here persisted in the region long after the initial resettlement.

What does this passage teach about God?

The LORD asserts ownership of the land through direct action. When the new settlers do not fear him, he sends lions that kill among them. The report to the Assyrian king names this as the consequence of ignorance: the people know nothing of the justice of the God of the land. The same God who judges also answers the request for instruction by returning one exiled priest to Bethel. That priest teaches how they should fear the LORD, yet the teaching does not displace the gods each nation brings from its former home.

The covenant stands at the center of the passage. The LORD made a covenant with the people he brought up from Egypt and commanded them not to fear other gods, bow down to them, serve them, or sacrifice to them. The positive requirement follows at once: they must fear the LORD with an outstretched arm and keep the statutes, the customs, the instruction, and the commandment written for them. The promise attached to this obedience is rescue from every enemy. The text records the opposite response. They feared the LORD and appointed priests from among themselves for the high places, yet they also served their own gods according to the custom of the nations from which they had been exiled.

This divided practice receives no approval. The passage states that to this day the nations continue the former customs and do not follow what the LORD gave to the sons of Jacob. Their children and grandchildren repeat the same pattern. The God who judges by lions and who offers rescue through covenant loyalty receives only partial acknowledgment. The settlers keep the old idols in the houses of the high places while adding a form of service to the LORD. The result is worship that the covenant itself forbids.

What are the interpretive difficulties?

One tension arises from the repeated statements that the new settlers feared the LORD. The account first links their ignorance to the lions sent in judgment, then records the priest’s arrival in Bethel to instruct them in that fear. Yet after describing their appointment of local priests and service at the high places, the narrative states outright that to this day they do not fear the LORD nor follow the statutes given to the sons of Jacob. The same verses that record their fear also record their continued service of the gods they brought from Babylon, Cuthah, Hamath, and Sepharvaim. Readers must decide whether the earlier language of fear describes only an initial, incomplete response or functions as a description of mixed practice that the later verdict then corrects.

A second question concerns the priest sent from exile. The Assyrian king orders one of the deported priests to return and teach the justice of the God of the land, and the man settles in Bethel. The text gives no further information about his own faithfulness or the content of his teaching beyond the bare statement that he instructed the people how they should fear the LORD. Nothing indicates whether he confronted the idols or simply added the LORD to the existing roster of deities. The silence leaves open how much responsibility the priest bears for the syncretism that follows.

The covenant commands quoted in verses 35–39 introduce another layer. These verses restate the prohibition against fearing other gods and recall the LORD’s deliverance from Egypt, yet they are addressed to the very nations now living in Samaria. The passage does not clarify whether this is a fresh divine address or a reminder of the original covenant with Israel now applied to newcomers. Either reading leaves the settlers under the same obligations that Israel had broken, while the closing verses record that their children and grandchildren continued the same mixed customs to the present day. The account therefore registers both the enduring claim of the covenant and the persistent refusal to keep it exclusive.

Notes accompany the Anselm Project Bible, an AI translation from the original languages. Tap any verse above for the committee's word-level decisions.