Who Wrote 2 Kings?
Quick Summary
The book of 2 Kings does not name its author and is best understood as an anonymous historical and theological work. Most scholars agree that it was shaped by editors working within the Deuteronomistic tradition, drawing on earlier royal records and prophetic narratives. Second Kings interprets Israel’s final centuries through covenant theology, explaining exile as the result of persistent unfaithfulness rather than political misfortune.
Introduction
Second Kings brings Israel’s national story to its most sobering conclusion. The book traces the decline of both the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah, ending with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Babylonian exile. Its tone is restrained, reflective, and unmistakably theological.
Because 2 Kings narrates catastrophe rather than triumph, questions of authorship matter deeply. The book does not read like a court-sponsored account or a national epic. Instead, it offers a theological reckoning. Understanding who wrote 2 Kings helps explain why the narrative focuses so consistently on covenant failure, prophetic warning, and moral responsibility.
Traditional Views of Authorship
Later Jewish tradition sometimes associated the books of Kings with the prophet Jeremiah. This association likely arose because Jeremiah lived through the final years of Judah and proclaimed themes similar to those found in Kings, including warnings about idolatry, injustice, and judgment.
However, 2 Kings does not identify Jeremiah or any other prophet as its author. While prophetic voices shape the narrative, traditional attributions should be understood as theological associations rather than historical claims about authorship.
What the Text of 2 Kings Reveals
Second Kings is written in the third person and frequently refers to earlier written sources, such as royal annals. These references suggest that the author or editors worked with existing historical material.
The book consistently evaluates kings according to covenant faithfulness. Political strength, military success, and longevity are secondary to worship practices and obedience. Kings who tolerate or promote idolatry are condemned regardless of their achievements.
The narrative also emphasizes prophetic authority. Figures such as Elijah and Elisha dominate large portions of the book, reinforcing the idea that divine word, not royal power, determines Israel’s fate. This theological framing points to intentional interpretation rather than neutral chronicle.
2 Kings and the Deuteronomistic History
Most modern scholars understand 2 Kings as the concluding book of the Deuteronomistic History, which includes Deuteronomy through Kings. These books share a consistent theological framework rooted in covenant obedience and accountability.
Within this framework, 2 Kings explains exile as the cumulative result of long-term unfaithfulness. The fall of Jerusalem is not portrayed as a surprise but as the inevitable outcome of ignored warnings and rejected reform.
John J. Collins notes that the Deuteronomistic editors shaped Israel’s history into a theological argument. Second Kings functions as the closing verdict, bringing that argument to its most painful conclusion.
Sources and Composition
Scholars generally agree that 2 Kings draws on multiple sources, including royal records, prophetic traditions, and historical summaries. These materials were collected and shaped by editors who arranged them to emphasize moral causality.
Steven L. McKenzie, a leading scholar on Kings, argues that the consistent evaluative language across 1 and 2 Kings points to intentional editorial activity. The goal was not to preserve every detail, but to interpret history through covenant theology.
This editorial shaping explains why similar events are treated differently depending on their theological significance. The narrative is selective, purposeful, and coherent.
When Was 2 Kings Written?
Many scholars suggest that 2 Kings reached its final form during the Babylonian exile. This setting helps explain the book’s reflective tone and its concern with explaining national disaster.
Writing from within or shortly after exile allowed Israel to ask not only what happened, but why. Second Kings offers an answer rooted in covenant responsibility rather than divine abandonment.
Why Authorship Matters
Understanding who wrote 2 Kings shapes how the book is read. The narrative is not simply a record of decline. It is a theological interpretation of loss, accountability, and hope.
Second Kings should also be read alongside Chronicles. Whereas Kings emphasizes moral failure and covenant breach, Chronicles retells much of the same period with selective focus on worship, repentance, and continuity. These differing portrayals do not contradict one another. They reflect inspired interpretation shaped for different moments in Israel’s life.
Divine inspiration does not require exhaustive reporting. In Scripture, inspiration works through faithful theological judgment. Second Kings tells the truth Israel needed to hear in exile, just as Chronicles told the truth Israel needed to hear after return.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did Jeremiah write the book of 2 Kings?
Later tradition associated Kings with Jeremiah, but most scholars understand the book as an anonymous work shaped by editors.
Is 2 Kings history or theology?
Second Kings preserves historical memory shaped by theological interpretation. Its primary aim is theological explanation.
Why does 2 Kings end so bleakly?
The ending reflects historical reality and theological honesty. It explains exile as the result of long-term covenant unfaithfulness.
Does authorship affect the authority of 2 Kings?
For most Jewish and Christian readers, authority comes from the book’s place in Scripture and its theological witness, not from identifying a named author.
Sources and Further Reading
Collins, John J. Introduction to the Hebrew Bible. 3rd ed. Fortress Press, 2018, pp. 218–232.
McKenzie, Steven L. 2 Kings. Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries. Abingdon Press, 2004, pp. 1–28.
