Catalogue of new gods and mixed worship

These verses sit inside the explanation of why the northern kingdom fell and what happened afterward. Just before this, the narrative tells how foreign peoples were brought into the land and how a priest was sent to teach “the custom of the God of the land,” producing a kind of partial learning. This unit then catalogs the specific gods and practices that appeared, and it closes by repeating the key assessment: they “feared Yahweh” and also served other gods. The repetition drives home the mixed character of the new religious life in Samaria.

The passage reflects an Assyrian-era policy of moving populations to secure control of conquered regions. Samaria, once the center of Israel’s northern kingdom, now contains people from multiple cities and regions, each carrying its own worship traditions. The “houses of the high places” suggest local shrine sites already established in the land and then reused by the newcomers. The list of deities matches the idea of diverse origins, and the mention of child-burning highlights that some imported rites were viewed as severe and socially destructive within the narrator’s moral framework.

Shared ground

These verses describe a deliberately “mixed” religious situation in Samaria after the population reshuffling. Multiple resettled groups keep their own traditional deities and set them up locally in existing shrine buildings (“houses of the high places”). The writer then summarizes the outcome twice: they “feared Yahweh,” yet they also served their own gods.

The catalogue of gods underscores variety (“every nation”) and local placement (“in their cities”). The mention of child-burning (v. 31) marks that some imported worship practices were seen as especially severe within the narrator’s moral evaluation.

Where interpretation differs

What “feared Yahweh” means here (vv. 32–33). Some readers take “fear” to mean a real (though incomplete) acknowledgment of Yahweh’s authority—perhaps treating Yahweh as one more powerful deity in the land. Others read the phrase more skeptically, as describing outward, pragmatic compliance rather than genuine worship, since it is paired with continued service of other gods.

What “made” gods means (vv. 29–30). Some understand this as crafting physical images. Others think it can also include establishing or restoring a cult—setting up recognized worship for a deity—whether or not new statues were produced.

Why the disagreement exists

The text itself holds two statements together without explaining the inner attitude: they “feared Yahweh” and “served their own gods.” Because “fear” language can signal anything from reverent worship to political-religious caution, interpreters weigh the repeated negative summary and the shrine/priests details differently.

What this passage clearly contributes

Explicitly, the passage depicts a patchwork religion created by resettled peoples: each group installs its gods locally, appoints its own priests for the high-place shrines, and continues homeland customs. The writer’s central evaluation is not that Yahweh worship replaced the old religions, but that Yahweh was added alongside them. This sets up a key theme in the larger chapter: Israel’s land and identity are not treated as compatible with a “both-and” approach to worship (cf. 2 Kings 17:33).