Why Jesus Apologetics

16 They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world.  17 Sanctify them by the truth; Your word is truth.

John 17:16-17 (BSB)

At Why Jesus Apologetics, we’re tackling alleged Bible contradictions to strengthen believers’ confidence and address skeptics’ challenges. A commonly cited issue is the account of Athaliah’s violent coup in Judah: Did she succeed in destroying all the royal seed (2 Kings 11:1; 2 Chronicles 22:10), or did some survive, as the narrative immediately shows with Joash’s rescue?

Critics argue this is a flat contradiction—Scripture can’t have it both ways. Yet, as with other royal succession accounts in the divided monarchy period, a closer look at the historical context, Hebrew idiom, and the distinct purposes of Kings and Chronicles reveals complementary perspectives, not error.

This post stands alongside our previous resolution on Ahaziah’s age, continuing our exploration of this turbulent era marked by Omride influence, regency dynamics, and Davidic line preservation. Sit back, read carefully, and enjoy the solution.

The Passages in Question

The texts at the heart of this alleged contradiction are:

“And when Athaliah the mother of Ahaziah saw that her son was dead, she arose and destroyed all the seed royal.”

– 2 Kings 11:1 (KJV)

“She [Athaliah] looked, and there was the king [Joash] standing by the pillar… Jehosheba… had taken Joash son of Ahaziah and stolen him away from among the royal princes, who were about to be murdered.”

– 2 Kings 11:2–3 (NIV paraphrase for context)

Similar wording appears in:

“Then Athaliah… arose and destroyed all the seed royal of the house of Judah.”

– 2 Chronicles 22:10 (KJV)

Followed immediately by the rescue of Joash (22:11–12).

The Problem

1. Both 2 Kings 11:1 and 2 Chronicles 22:10 state that Athaliah “destroyed all the seed royal.”
2. Yet the very next verses in both books describe the survival and hiding of baby Joash, who later becomes king.

Critics ask: How can Athaliah destroy all the royal heirs if one (Joash) clearly survived? This seems like an irreconcilable contradiction—either she killed all, or she didn’t.

In this post, we will show that this is not a contradiction but a matter of Hebrew idiom, historical hyperbole common in ancient Near Eastern royal annals, and the theological emphasis on God’s preservation of the Davidic promise.

The Historical Context

Athaliah’s coup (c. 841 BCE) followed the death of her son Ahaziah at Jehu’s hands in Israel (2 Kings 9). As daughter (or granddaughter) of Omri and widow of Jehoram, Athaliah wielded immense influence in Judah’s court—effectively acting as a regent-like figure during her son’s short reign and now seizing sole power.

Historical Realities

i. Athaliah’s Regency and Usurpation

Unique in Judah’s history, Athaliah ruled openly for about six years (2 Kings 11:3; 2 Chron 22:12)—the only queen regnant. Her Omride background drove a pro-Baal policy, contrasting Judah’s Davidic Yahwistic tradition. Her coup was a desperate power grab to install northern-style dynastic rule and eliminate Davidic rivals.

ii. Royal Seed Massacres

Common in ancient coups (cf. Jehu’s purge in Israel, Abimelech in Judges 9). The goal was to eradicate competing claimants.

iii. Hyperbole in Ancient Records

Kings and annals often used absolute language (“all,” “none left”) for rhetorical effect, even when exceptions existed (e.g., Moabite Stone: “I killed all…”; Assyrian annals frequently claim total destruction despite survivors).

iv. Theological Framework

Both accounts stress divine preservation of the Davidic line (2 Sam 7:16). Joash’s survival fulfills God’s promise despite human threat.

Kings (Deuteronomistic) focuses on political-moral lessons; Chronicles (post-exilic, priestly) emphasizes temple continuity and Davidic legitimacy.

The Solution

Let’s read the key phrases:

“She arose and destroyed all the seed royal.” (2 Kings 11:1; 2 Chron 22:10)

Now, let’s examine this more closely.

a. Applying the Law of Non-Contradiction

To determine whether these passages are truly contradictory, we must apply the Law of Non-Contradiction:

“A thing cannot be both A and not-A at the same time and in the same respect.”

This is a foundational law of rationality and logic. If something violates this principle, it is logically incoherent or self-refuting. Geisler states:

“A contradiction occurs only when two statements assert opposing claims about the same subject, in the same sense, at the same time.”
(Geisler, Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, Bethany House, 2002, p. 118).

For a real contradiction to exist, three conditions must be met:

1. The statements must refer to the same thing,
2. They must speak of it at the same time, and
3. They must speak of it in the same sense.

A closer look shows that these passages fail to meet the criteria for a true contradiction.

Here:

• Both books say Athaliah attempted to destroy all royal heirs.
• Both immediately note Joash’s survival.

But they are not speaking in the same sense. The phrase “all the seed royal” is idiomatic hyperbole—common in Hebrew narrative for “all known/contending rivals” or “the entire visible line as far as public knowledge went.” It does not demand absolute literalness when the context clarifies an exception.

The statements are complementary: Athaliah succeeded in killing all discoverable heirs (from her perspective and public record), yet God sovereignly preserved one hidden heir.

No violation of non-contradiction.

N-O – B-I-B-L-E – C-O-N-T-R-A-D-I-C-T-I-O-N

b. Linguistic and Contextual Harmony: Hyperbole, Idiom, and Athaliah’s Regency

The Hebrew Phrase: כָּל־זֶרַע הַמַּמְלָכָה (“all the seed royal”) is an Hyperbole. Hyperbolic “All” (כָּל) is frequent in Scripture and ancient records when describing near-total destruction:. Let’s consider some instances in the Hebrew Bible.

• 1 Kings 14:10: God will cut off from Jeroboam “every man-child” (literal “all who urinate against the wall”)—yet survivors existed.
• Exodus 9:6: “All the livestock of Egypt died”—yet later plagues affect Egyptian livestock (Exod 9:19).
• Assyrian king Sennacherib: “I destroyed all…” despite known survivors.

The phrase means “the entire royal line as publicly known or threatening.” Athaliah’s purge targeted all visible contenders to secure her regency.

Immediate Context Clarifies

Both books place the survival note immediately after (11:2; 22:11). Ancient readers understood this as explanatory, not contradictory—similar to modern headlines: “Dictator wipes out opposition” followed by “but one leader escaped into hiding.”

Athaliah’s Regency Role

Athaliah’s six-year rule is explicitly a usurpation/regency:

• She is never granted the title “queen” in the formal regnal formula (contrast legitimate queens like Maacah or Nehushta).
• Her power derived from eliminating rivals while the true Davidic heir (Joash) was hidden in the temple under priestly protection (Jehosheba and Jehoiada).
• The text portrays her as a foreign-influenced tyrant whose “reign” was illegitimate—God preserved the true line despite her apparent success.

This harmonizes perfectly — Athaliah destroyed “all” the royal seed that she could find or that posed an immediate threat, establishing her de facto regency. Yet divine providence hid Joash, ensuring Davidic continuity.

Athaliah’s Coup And Jehu’s Purge Comparison

Athaliah’s attempt to destroy the royal seed of Judah (2 Kings 11:1; 2 Chronicles 22:10) and Jehu’s purge of the house of Ahab in Israel (2 Kings 9–10) are closely linked events in the same turbulent year (c. 841 BCE). Both involve violent dynastic massacres using absolute language (“all”), yet hidden survivors emerge. This parallel strengthens the resolution of the alleged “all” contradiction in Athaliah’s case: biblical authors employ hyperbolic idiom common in ancient Near Eastern royal records to describe near-total purges.

Their Key Similarities

• Timing and Trigger: Jehu’s anointed coup kills Joram (Israel) and Ahaziah (Judah), ending Omride-linked rule. Athaliah, Ahaziah’s mother (Omride descendant), responds by targeting Judah’s Davidic heirs to secure power.
• Absolute Language with Exceptions:
  • Jehu: “killed all who remained of the house of Ahab… leaving him no survivor” (2 Kings 10:11, 17).
  • Athaliah: “destroyed all the seed royal” (2 Kings 11:1; 2 Chron 22:10).
  • Yet exceptions exist: Joash survives Athaliah’s purge (hidden by Jehosheba); broader Omride ties linger indirectly.
• Hyperbole in Ancient Context: Royal annals exaggerate totality for emphasis (e.g., Assyrian kings claim “all” destroyed despite survivors). Biblical writers use “all” (כָּל) rhetorically for “all known/threatening rivals.”
• Theological Framing
  • Jehu fulfills prophecy against Ahab (1 Kings 21:21–29) but overreaches (Hosea 1:4).
  • Athaliah’s failure preserves Davidic promise (2 Sam 7:16) through hidden Joash.
• Baal Temple Destruction: Jehu razes Baal’s temple in Samaria (2 Kings 10:27); Joash’s supporters destroy it in Jerusalem after Athaliah’s fall (2 Kings 11:18)—literary parallel underscoring purge of Omride idolatry.

Why the Parallel Resolves the “All” Issue

Jehu’s texts repeatedly claim he left “no survivor” of Ahab’s house—yet narrative assumes completeness from human perspective while allowing divine exception. Athaliah’s “all” functions identically: she eliminated all discoverable heirs, enabling her regency, but God preserved Joash unbeknownst to her.

Both purges highlight sovereignty — human attempts at total eradication (whether judgment or ambition) bow to God’s purposes—ending Omride corruption in Israel, preserving Davidic line in Judah.

c. Theological Purpose and Complementary Accounts

Kings emphasizes moral judgment on idolatry and the consequences of Omride alliances—Athaliah’s coup as fruit of wickedness.

Chronicles stresses temple/priestly preservation of the Davidic promise—Joash hidden “in the house of God” six years (22:12).

Both affirm Human evil nearly eradicated the line, but God sovereignly protected it.

Analogy to Help Understand — The Corporate Takeover

Imagine a ruthless executive (Athaliah) who, upon the CEO’s death, fires and blacklists every known heir and executive in the family business to seize control. News reports: “She eliminated the entire founding family line.”

Yet unknown to her, one infant heir was secretly adopted and hidden by a loyal board member in a secure facility. Six years later, the child emerges as rightful CEO.

Did the reports lie? No—they accurately described the public reality and her apparent total success. The hidden survival does not contradict; it completes the story of rightful restoration.

So here: Athaliah destroyed “all the seed royal” publicly known, securing her regency. Joash’s hidden survival fulfills God’s promise.

There is no contradiction—only dramatic Hebrew idiom and theological depth. Athaliah’s coup succeeded in human terms (establishing her regency), yet failed in God’s plan (the Davidic line endured through hidden Joash).

The Bible is consistent when read with ancient literary conventions and redemptive purpose in view.

So N-O – B-I-B-L-E – C-O-N-T-R-A-D-I-C-T-I-O-N —Just Contextual Clarity.

If you found this post helpful, please consider sharing it on your social media platforms and in your church groups!

Subscribe to stay equipped with thoughtful answers to tough questions.