When was the last time you heard Hezekiah mentioned in a sermon? When did you last read about him in a book? If you are an average American Christian, you might be straining to arrive at an answer. Most likely, the last time you heard about Hezekiah was when someone lamely told everyone to turn in their Bibles to “Hezekiah 8:16”. Church jokes: the comedic wasteland that gave birth to the somewhat better Stuff Christians Like and The Babylon Bee—that is, until every other Babylon Bee article became about politics.

Hezekiah is an important biblical figure. He was one of the few Old Testament kings to receive a largely positive assessment in scripture. As ruler of the southern kingdom of Judah during a difficult period when the Assyrian empire had taken the northern kingdom of Israel into exile and pushed all the way to the gate of Jerusalem, he had an important historical role to play. He is remembered for his conversations with the prophet Isaiah, recovery from a life-threatening illness, restoration of true religion after the disastrous reign of his father, and poor decision to allow visiting officials from Babylon to view his treasures.

Yes, despite the occasional slip-up, Hezekiah is viewed in a largely positive manner, but it is worth noting that not everyone in his own day viewed him that way. One particular episode in Hezekiah’s life suggests that while we may remember him today as a man devoted to the God of Israel, there were some who saw him as an opponent of the same. Let’s pick up the story in 2 Kings chapter 18.

Jerusalem Under Siege

In his fourteenth year on the throne, around the year 701 B.C./B.C.E., Hezekiah was forced to resume paying tribute to King Sennacherib of Assyria after the latter had seized most of the fortified cities in Judah. He sent the Assyrians silver from the Temple treasury and gold that had been removed from the Temple doors. This must have been deeply humiliating for the Judean king, but having witnessed the Assyrians’ destruction of the northern kingdom of Israel about two decades prior, when his father first began the policy of sending Temple treasure to Assyria (2 Kings 16:8), Hezekiah likely felt it was a necessary sacrifice to preserve the city of Jerusalem.

Unfortunately for Hezekiah, this payment did not satisfy Sennacherib. The Assyrian king sent three men—named as Tartan, Rab-saris, and Rabshakeh—to Jerusalem along with a large army. They approached the city and “stood by the conduit of the upper pool, which is on the highway of the fuller’s field.” (v. 17) Several years earlier, the prophet Isaiah had confronted Hezekiah’s father, Ahaz, at this same location and relayed one of the most famous prophecies in all of scripture: “Therefore, the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14) Now a second battle of words was to take place between the representatives of King Sennacherib of Assyria and King Hezekiah of Judah.

Standing before the walls of Jerusalem, in earshot of the Judean defenders, the Assyrian representative Rabshakeh offered up many boastful words, warning Hezekiah and his people not to depend on the support of the Egyptian Pharaoh to deliver them from their situation. He then told them not to depend on their God either, and the rationale he gave is rather interesting. Rabshakeh proclaimed, “But if you say to me, ‘We trust in the LORD our God,’ is it not He whose high places and whose altars Hezekiah has taken away, and has said to Judah and to Jerusalem, ‘You shall worship before this altar in Jerusalem’?” (2 Kings 18:22)

You read that correctly. In a rather ironic twist, the representative of a pagan nation attempted to discredit Hezekiah by painting him as anti-Yahweh, thus diminishing Yahweh Himself.

Was Hezekiah Anti-Yahweh?

The Assyrian official’s accusations raise two questions: 1) Did Hezekiah really remove the altars and high places of Yahweh? 2) If so, why did he do it? To answer these questions, we must return to an earlier portion of the chapter, where we read the following about King Hezekiah’s reign.

He did right in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his father David had done. He removed the high places and broke down the sacred pillars and cut down the Asherah. He also broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until those days the sons of Israel burned incense to it; and it was called Nehushtan.

2 Kings 18:3-4

This passage reveals that Hezekiah was attacking two different problems that had entered into public worship in Judah. The first was that places of worship had been constructed for false deities, and the people were offering incense and reverence at those locations. This was a clear violation of what are usually counted as the first and second of the Ten Commandments. “You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. You shall not worship them or serve them…” (Exodus 20:3-5a)

The second problem is in some ways more interesting. We are told that Hezekiah took the bronze serpent constructed by Moses and broke it into pieces. The backstory about the serpent comes in the Book of Numbers, when the people of Israel were wandering in the wilderness.

The Lord sent fiery serpents among the people and they bit the people, so that many people of Israel died. So the people came to Moses and said, ‘We have sinned, because we have spoken against the Lord and you; intercede with the Lord, that He may remove the serpents from us.’ And Moses interceded for the people. Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a standard; and it shall come about, that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, he will live.’ And Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on the standard; and it came about, that if a serpent bit any man, when he looked to the bronze serpent, he lived.

Numbers 21:6-9

As can be clearly seen in this passage, God Himself commanded Moses to make the bronze serpent, and He commanded any of the Israelites who were stricken to gaze upon it. This object was then preserved until the days of Hezekiah, when the Judeans were burning incense to it.

At this point, it is worth asking what was so wrong with the people of Judah burning incense before the serpent. After all, God had commanded them to make it. Not only that, but He had commanded them to look at it. Whereas those who prayed before wood carvings of Canaanite fertility goddesses clearly had sinful motives, I cannot help but wonder if many people in Hezekiah’s day didn’t think that burning incense before the bronze serpent was a perfectly legitimate way to honor Yahweh.

Perhaps you’re thinking, “But the Ten Commandments said not to worship images, so it was clearly illegitimate.” Yes, that is exactly what God commanded, but what if those Judeans had made an argument like this? “We’re not worshiping the serpent. The serpent points our thoughts to the true God. We are told to burn incense to God. Why not do it by this image He told us to create, which reminds us of Him and His power to deliver?”

Had those ancient Judeans had access to the New Testament, they could have also made the argument that the bronze serpent was a type of Christ, and they would have been right. Jesus said as much to Nicodemus. “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.” (John 3:14-15)

Consider again the taunting words of the Assyrian representative, Rabshakeh. He did not accuse Hezekiah of destroying centers of worship to foreign gods. He accused him of ending worship of Yahweh. No doubt, Rabshakeh had his own agenda to push in this situation, and his command of the facts seems to be somewhat lacking: the high places and altars Hezekiah destroyed were not for the worship of Yahweh. However, Rabshakeh may have been entirely right in the case of the bronze serpent. This object was created as a symbol of Yahweh’s deliverance, and Hezekiah certainly did break it into pieces.

So I ask again, why did Hezekiah insist on destroying the bronze serpent, a priceless reminder of God’s faithfulness to His covenant people? I believe the answer is that while those who burned incense before the serpent may have been intending to worship Yahweh, they were doing so in a manner He had not commanded. Remember, God never told the Israelites in the days of Moses to worship the image. He told them simply to look at it. That may seem like a small difference, but it was important enough to cause Hezekiah to destroy the bronze serpent. He evidently believed that even if the people worshiped the correct God, it was still idolatry if they did so in the wrong way.

A Cow Even Chick-fil-A Could Hate

Here it is useful to remember another case of idolatry that occurred much earlier in Israel’s history, before the bronze serpent was created. While Moses was up on Mount Sinai receiving the commandments of the Law, the people of Israel despaired. They approached Aaron, Moses’s brother and the nation’s first high priest, and said, “Come, make us a god who will go before us; as for this Moses, the man who brought us up from the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.” (Exodus 32:1b)

Aaron did oversee the creation of a golden calf that would become an object of worship. However, neither he nor the people ultimately created a completely new identity for this god or associated it with any of the other Ancient Near Eastern deities. Instead, they claimed it represented Yahweh, or something very like Him.

Then all the people tore off the gold rings which were in their ears and brought them to Aaron. He took this from their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool and made it into a molten calf; and they said, ‘This is your god, O Israel, who brought you up from the land of Egypt.’ Now when Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made a proclamation and said, ‘Tomorrow shall be a feast to the Lord.’ So the next day they rose early and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.

Exodus 32:3-6

Whatever their original intentions, the people of Israel seem to have eventually attempted to make their image worship somewhat Yahweh positive. They didn’t proclaim, “Hail to Baal! Phooey on Yahweh!” They declared that the reverence they gave to the golden calf was intended for the deity who brought them out of Egypt.

I think it unlikely that they believed the golden calf was Yahweh: not when they had seen His glory descended upon Mount Sinai. They must have known that the true God had an existence outside the work of their hands, but that did not keep them from saying, “This is your god, O Israel, who brought you up from the land of Egypt.” Though the word god is lower case there, I can’t help wondering if in some sense the Israelites thought they were legitimately worshipping Yahweh. Even Aaron said, “Tomorrow shall be a feast to the Lord.” (The word there is not the sacred name Yahweh but the more generic Adonai.) This god was specifically identified as the one who brought them out of Egypt. The difference was that they were choosing how they wanted to approach the divine. They were setting the rules and expressing themselves according to their sinful nature rather than honoring God’s rules and behaving according to godliness.

There is certainly room for debate as to the Israelites’ true intentions, but there can be no mistaking what happened next. God declared that the Israelites had corrupted themselves (v. 7) and said to Moses, “Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them; and I will make of you a great nation.” (v.10) In the end, thanks in part to the intercession of Moses, the Lord did not completely destroy the nation, but many people did end up dead. This indicates the severity of the nation’s actions.

Those Boys Were on Fire

When we consider this incident in light of the later narrative about Hezekiah’s destruction of the bronze serpent, we begin to discern the importance of not only worshiping Yahweh, but worshiping Him correctly. A third story that is worth noting in this regard occurred later in Israel’s wilderness wanderings. It tells of the sad deaths of Aaron’s two sons and fellow priests, Nadab and Abihu.

Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took their respective firepans, and after putting fire in them, placed incense on it and offered strange fire before the Lord, which He had not commanded them. And fire came out from the presence of the Lord and consumed them, and they died before the Lord. Then Moses said to Aaron, ‘It is what the Lord spoke, saying,

“By those who come near Me I will be treated as holy,

And before all the people I will be honored.”’

So Aaron, therefore, kept silent.

Leviticus 10:1-3

We do not know exactly what the “strange fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu entailed. However, we do know that 1) it was something not commanded by Yahweh and 2) they were evidently attempting to offer it to Him as a legitimate act of worship. Unfortunately, it was not the thought that counted in this case: it was the letter of the Law.

This was the same principle of which Hezekiah was entirely aware. He knew that even if some people were offering incense to God before the bronze serpent with good intentions, it was still an offense to that same God. Why? Because God had not commanded it. He had told the nation of Israel how to worship Him. It was not enough to say that something was being done on His behalf or, importantly, that an image could stand in for the object of veneration.

Why You’ll Love the Regulative Principle of Worship

What I am getting at here is something known as the regulative principle of worship. If you have some experience with Reformed theology, then this is old hat for you. The rest of you are in for a…treat? The regulative principle of worship is defined as follows in the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith.

The light of nature shews that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all; is just, good and doth good unto all; and is therefore to be feared, loved, praised, called upon, trusted in, and served, with all the heart and all the soul, and with all the might. But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God, is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshipped according to the imagination and devices of men, nor the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representations, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures.

1689 LBCF Chapter 22, Paragraph 1

I realize that the language and spelling in this document are a bit antiquated, but it essentially tells us that God is not to be worshiped in any way not commanded in scripture. If you have not been exposed to this principle before, it may sound very good and biblical to you at first glance. Even so, it seemed to me. It was only later, when I began to see the ways in which this principle was applied, that I started questioning its validity.

The regulative principle of worship can be contrasted with two other viewpoints: the inventive principle of the Roman Catholic Church and the normative principle held by some non-Reformed Protestant churches. Both of these principles tend more toward the idea that what is not forbidden in scripture is permitted when it comes to worship, or that things can be added to what is revealed in scripture. The Reformed view (regulative principle) is that God has told us the way He desires to be worshiped, and since the purpose of worship is to bring glory to God, we should worship in the way He has prescribed, for this will bring Him the most glory.

Where things become more controversial is in the application of the regulative principle (hereafter often abbreviated as RPW). Reformed Christians generally agree that the basic elements of a worship service under the New Covenant as commanded in scripture are the reading and preaching of the Word, the administration of the sacraments (baptism and the Lord’s Supper), prayer, congregational singing, and the collection of offerings. There may be slight differences in service structure. For example, ordination of elders is a legitimate part of a service, but it occurs more rarely. Some churches may choose not to pass an offering plate, but to provide a box for congregants to leave their gifts. Historic creeds are also commonly recited in Reformed worship services. However, the basic elements have been there since the beginning and are still there. Apart from certain incidental things like announcements, worship services are not to include anything not mentioned in this paragraph.

Why You’ll Hate the Regulative Principle of Worship

If you’re thinking, “That still doesn’t seem very controversial,” wait for it. I have suffered more frustration on Twitter due to debates about the regulative principle of worship than nearly any other subject, and it is all due to the way the principle is applied. Some of these applications shocked me at first. They represent a minority view in the history of Christian thought: one to which many American Christians have little or no exposure. Coming from a more generically evangelical background, I freely admit that I was not prepared for my encounters with the RPW police.

The first thing that often shocks people about Reformed Christians is that they are against any images of a Person of the Trinity created by humans. “Wait…Does that mean like mangers and kids’ Bibles and stuff?” you ask. Yes, it often does. There is some debate among those who hold to the regulative principle of worship over whether an exception can be made for purely pedagogical images, which is to say pictures that are used to teach or tell a story rather than those that are incorporated into a worship service, e.g., appearing in a sanctuary or behind an altar. In general though, Christians who hold to the RPW take a very firm line on images of God, if only because such images have often become objects of veneration throughout Christian history.

Here it is important to think back to the story of Hezekiah and the bronze serpent. The people of Judah were burning incense before it, not because they worshiped snakes, but because they evidently thought it was a good way to worship the true God. Even so, there have been many Christians throughout history who have kept sacred images in their churches and homes. They have knelt and prayed before them, lit candles, and burned incense. All the while, they have made the argument that they are not venerating the image itself, but the thing represented by the image. In a similar way, when some Christians pray to saints, they do not declare that those saints are divine, but that their prayer will be transferred through that saint to God Himself.

I believe the story of Hezekiah and the bronze serpent indicates that such practices are not in line with the will of God for two reasons. First of all, they were never instituted by God in His Word. You will not find a single verse in scripture that commands the veneration of images of any kind. Even those images that God commanded the ancient Israelites to create, such as the bronze serpent or the cherubim carvings on the ark of the covenant, were never intended to be venerated, as demonstrated by the fact that Hezekiah broke the serpent into pieces when it was abused.

Second of all, scripture does not recognize a distinction between venerating an image and venerating the thing represented by the image. I present as proof Hezekiah’s destruction of the bronze serpent and God’s judgment on the people of Israel for venerating a golden calf that they claimed represented the one who had brought them up out of Egypt. I also do not believe there is a scriptural basis for differentiating between veneration and worship. This is a human distinction introduced to lend legitimacy to the veneration of images.

The trouble is that Christians have been using images for a very long time. There was even an early Church council that declared them to be biblically sound: the Second Council of Nicaea in 787 A.D./C.E. This final ecumenical council recognized by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches provides the basis for their policies of veneration down to the present day. Venerating images, praying to saints, and the like is such an essential part of Christian life for many that telling them it is idolatry is akin to accusing their mother of being a whore, which is to say it is deeply personal. It cuts to the heart of what it means for them to be a practicing Christian.

Those in Protestant churches do not typically bow before an image on their way into the sanctuary, but they might have stained glass windows depicting Christ, read books with pictures of Jesus to their children, or watch films such as The Passion of the Christ. Were you to mention the possibility that these things might be violations of the RPW, they would first ask you, “What in the world?” If you were to mention the word “idolatry”, that would quite possibly be the end of the conversation.

Being Kind: It’s Still a Thing

I therefore call on anyone who holds to the regulative principle of worship to be intensely gracious when addressing this issue, particularly with those who have no exposure to it. It is only natural for such people to react as if they have just been confronted with the legalistic Pharisees of Jesus’ day. These brothers and sisters in Christ, whether Protestant, Catholic, or something else, have not been doing what they do because they love idol worship. They believe they are honoring God and that these are sacred traditions handed down to them by their forefathers. Of course, this was the same situation confronted by King Hezekiah when he destroyed the beloved bronze serpent that had been treasured for generations.

In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ distinguished between the letter of the Law and the spirit of the Law, which is to say our actions and our heart condition. I believe this is an important distinction for us to keep in mind. It is possible for someone to act as God has commanded with sinful motivations. It is also possible for someone to erroneously do something God has not commanded, all the while wanting to please Him and believing their actions are legitimate. Both possibilities represent an error, but we should be clear about what kind of error they represent. We should also engage others in a loving manner and spend as much or more time listening than we do speaking. But at the end of the day, scripture suggests it isn’t simply the thought that counts when it comes to worship of the Almighty God. All worship is directed to Him and for Him and should therefore be performed according to His commands.

All the evidence I see in scripture indicates that God is more concerned with keeping us far away from image worship than He is with finding ways for us to safely incorporate images into worship. Why? Because there is no “safe” incorporation of images into worship. Images of flawed human beings, however redeemed, are not to be venerated, because that is worshiping the creature rather than the Creator. (Romans 1:25) It is something never commanded in scripture, and it perverts the worship of God.

There is also no safe incorporation of images of God Himself, for such man-made objects can never capture the glory and transcendence of the real thing. It will always cause our thoughts about God to become more human. Earthly images do not do justice to the vast gulf between the Creator and the creature. More to the point, as John Calvin so famously pointed out, the human heart is an idol factory that will always pervert worship without the help of the Spirit. Images will always present a temptation at the very least, and is that not cause enough for us to remove them from our sanctuaries?

“But Jesus became man, and lots of people saw him walking around,” you say. Yes, I grant that this is true, and it is part of the reason that some Christians who hold to the RPW do struggle with how to treat images used for solely pedagogical purposes. I believe there is also an elephant in the room. At least, there was for me when I first encountered this issue.

Muslims are strongly opposed to images of God and His prophets. (There is a debate to be had over whether we should treat the deity of Islam as a completely different being from Yahweh or an erroneous understanding of Yahweh.) Over the past few years, we have seen journalists attacked for drawing cartoons of Mohammed. Muslims are also strongly opposed to depictions of other deities, which is why radical groups have made a point of destroying ancient art that depicts gods. Most of this looks to us like the work of a bunch of thugs who just like to break things, and it is worth noting that this is how many of the early Reformed Christians would have been viewed when they started destroying icons and statues of Mary.

I’m not arguing for the destruction of private property, famed artworks, or historical artifacts. When I see paintings of Jesus in a museum, they don’t bother me in the least. I don’t get offended if I pass by a manger scene. I don’t divert my eyes if someone has a Jesus Storybook Bible at their house. If a Christian becomes convicted that these things go against the command of God, then they should cease using them for the sake of their conscience, and fellow believers should respect their conviction. However, if you see another person who does not hold this conviction and feels comfortable sending out a card with a manger scene, then I am not convinced that confronting them as a vile idolater is really the best course, and particularly not if they have little or no exposure to the underlying biblical reasoning supporting the RPW.

This is the real problem that comes with the RPW: it turns everything into an absolute. Consider that there are some Reformed Christians who are convicted that instruments should not be used in worship or that we should only sing Psalms. A person can hold these views as a preference, and that is entirely fine, but if they become convinced that it is a clear biblical restriction, then everything else becomes idolatry—the kind of idolatry that got Nadab and Abihu killed. That doesn’t leave much room for negotiation, and it has sadly been my experience that applying the regulative principle of worship to the actions of others can turn some Reformed Christians into absolute jerks. At that point, one sin may have been avoided, but you have fallen into another.

I believe that all sin is idolatry, for it is a failure to give God His due. Therefore, it would be wrong for any of us to say, “You are an idolater and I am not.” We are redeemed people, not inherently righteous people. It is better to say, “I believe God will be more glorified in this way,” or, “Perhaps we should consider if this is the best practice for our church.” The family Christmas party is not the right time to have a battle royale with the in-laws because they gave your kid a Jesus pop-up book. Let everything be done lovingly and appropriately.

Should we abandon the regulative principle of worship because some people abuse it? No, I don’t believe so. It took me a while to reach a point where I could affirm the RPW, because I initially felt very hurt by some interactions I had about these issues. When you see a group of people behaving badly, it is worth asking if a problem in their doctrine has contributed to the issue. However, we should not assume that the bad behavior of some adherents necessarily means that their doctrine is invalid. We all struggle to put our beliefs into practice in a loving manner and without contradiction.

In the end, I believe we should follow the regulative principle of worship because I feel it is most in line with the teaching of scripture and what it reveals about the character and will of God. That does not mean we will always agree on how to apply this principle, but it is a better starting point than some of the alternatives.

But Wait! There’s More…Objections!

Before concluding, I wish to address two possible objections to the regulative principle of worship that could be brought forward based on New Testament practice. So far, I have only discussed Old Testament passages. As a Reformed Baptist (more technically called a Particular Baptist), I do not see as much continuity between the Old and New Covenants as my Presbyterian and Reformed brothers and sisters, but I still believe the Old Testament has much to teach us about worship. Nevertheless, I realize that many evangelical churches look to the New Testament first and foremost for indications of how they should worship.

When Jesus met the Samaritan woman at the well, she asked Him if it was correct to worship on the mountain that was used by the Samaritans or at the Temple in Jerusalem. His response was as follows.

Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.’

John 4:21-24

You could make an argument that this passage represents a redefinition of worship for the New Covenant age in which the only defining maxims are spirit and truth. It then becomes necessary to define “spirit” and “truth”. If it simply means, “With all your emotion and not in contradiction with scripture,” then you could hold to something like the normative principle of worship, i.e., anything that is not forbidden is permitted. However, if it means, “You must worship by the power of the Spirit according to what is outlined in God’s Word,” then you are closer to the regulative principle of worship.

I personally do not believe that Christ meant to indicate that proper worship of God could change along with shifting human emotions, or that the individual experience of worship was more important than the glorification of God. Rather, His words seem to indicate that some of the externals of worship under the Old Covenant would be dropped, such as the necessity of pilgrimage to Jerusalem, but the Spirit and the Word are the same in all ages.

Some may also argue that restricting worship to a limited list of activities specifically prescribed in scripture is unbiblical because a person’s entire life is an act of worship. Here they might point to the words of the Apostle Paul. “Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.” (Romans 12:1) If our bodies are a living sacrifice, and this is a spiritual service of worship, then every action we do in our bodies could be described as worship in some sense: this much is true.

However, I believe there is a distinction to be made between formal worship (particularly in a congregational setting) and the normal affairs of our daily life. If worship is bringing glory to God, then anything we do could potentially be worship. However, washing a car is somewhat different from praying before an altar. It is not such a conscious act of worship. The glorification of God, while important, is somewhat secondary to the ordinary process of participating in the activities, whereas formal worship purposefully orients the mind toward God.

We obviously cannot restrict all of life to the activities defined by the regulative principle of worship. The point is to direct the life of the Church, and particularly congregational gatherings. Even if you go to a sanctuary yourself to pray before an icon, you are doing something more formally church-like than sitting at home knitting, though a person can do both things out of a desire to glorify God.

Remember Hezekiah

I have written an awful lot at this point, but I wish to return to the story of Hezekiah, which got us started on this subject. He received one of the most glowing reviews ever given to a king in scripture.

“He did right in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his father David had done. He removed the high places and broke down the sacred pillars and cut down the Asherah. He also broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until those days the sons of Israel burned incense to it; and it was called Nehushtan. He trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel; so that after him there was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor among those who were before him. For he clung to the Lord; he did not depart from following Him, but kept His commandments, which the Lord had commanded Moses.”

2 Kings 18:3-6

Hezekiah received this praise because, unlike his immediate father Ahaz, he did not take the commands of the Lord lightly. He was passionate about protecting the true worship of Yahweh, so much so that he was willing to destroy something precious and anger a lot of people. Why? Because he was more concerned about the glory of God than his own glory—more concerned with pleasing his Maker than his constituents.

Does this mean that we should begin accusing fellow Christians of idolatry whenever they do not conform to our understanding of the RPW? Probably not. While there are important issues here that all Christians need to consider, the whole purpose of the RPW is to glorify God, and we are not doing that if we show a lack of love. These are tough questions that lead us to wrestle. We must be patient with those who are still working through them.

Most of all, we must realize that what glorifies God most is also what is best for human flourishing. Augustine of Hippo acknowledged this many years ago.

“Great are You, O Lord, and greatly to be praised; great is Your power, and of Your wisdom there is no end. And man, being a part of Your creation, desires to praise You—man, who bears about with him his mortality, the witness of his sin, even the witness that You resist the proud,—yet man, this part of Your creation, desires to praise You. You move us to delight in praising You; for You have made us for Yourself, and our hearts are restless until they rest in You.”

Augustine, Confessions, Book 1, Chapter 1[1]

All scripture quotations are from The New American Standard Bible, copyright The Lockman Foundation.

[1] Translated by J.G. Pilkington. From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 1. Edited by Philip Schaff. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1887.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.<http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/110101.htm>.