What is the context?
The narrator adds that Manasseh sheds innocent blood throughout Jerusalem, alongside the sin into which he leads Judah. The account of his reign therefore concerns violence as well as forbidden worship.
Kings ends the notice with his death, burial in the palace garden, and Amon’s succession. It does not recount a change of heart within these verses.
2 Chronicles 33:10–20 supplies an additional account of his distress, prayer, humbling, restoration, and removal of idols. That later repentance must be recognized without erasing the innocent blood or the damage already described in Kings.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Wesley refers to Manasseh’s repentance when interpreting the burial and Amon’s later conduct. The repentance itself is stated in Chronicles, but Wesley’s suggestion that Manasseh chose this burial as a testimony to it is not stated there. Likewise, Kings does not name every victim, so later traditions about particular deaths should not be presented as facts narrated by this passage.
What is our position?
We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.
Where can I study this further?
No deeper study linked yet.