sign in sign up
<<
Home , 2 Kings 10, 2 Kings 13, 2 Kings 14, 2 Kings 16, 2 Kings 19, 2 Kings 2

a Grace Notes course

Second Kings

From Commentary on the

C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch

adapted for Grace Notes training by Warren Doud

Grace Notes Web Site: http://www.gracenotes.info E-mail: [email protected]

2 Kings - Keil and Delitzsch Contents

2 Kings 1 ...... 4 ...... 7 ...... 12 ...... 16 2 Kings 5 ...... 21 2 Kings 6 ...... 25 2 Kings 7 ...... 29 ...... 31 ...... 34 ...... 38 2 Kings 11 ...... 44 2 Kings 12 ...... 49 ...... 54 ...... 57 2 Kings 15 ...... 62 ...... 67 ...... 73 ...... 82 ...... 90 2 Kings 20 ...... 100 2 Kings 21 ...... 104 ...... 107 ...... 112 ...... 122 ...... 128

The Authors Carl Friedrich Keil (26 February 1807 – 5 May 1888) was a conservative German Lutheran Old Testament commentator. He was born at Lauterbach near Oelsnitz, Kingdom of Saxony, and died at Rätz, Saxony. Franz Delitzsch (Leipzig, February 23, 1813 – Leipzig, March 4, 1890) was a German Lutheran theologian and Hebraist. Born in Leipzig, he held the professorship of theology at the University of Rostock from 1846 to 1850, at the University of Erlangen until 1867, and after that at the University of Leipzig until his death. Delitzsch wrote many commentaries on books of the , Jewish antiquities, biblical psychology, a history of Jewish poetry, and Christian apologetics. Grace Notes Grace Notes is a Bible study ministry which began in 1994 using the Internet to distribute lessons and articles to people who are interested in God's Word. Thousands of Christians, in more than 110 countries around the world, have received Grace Notes lessons on the Internet, by E-mail and the World Wide Web. All courses and materials are distributed free of charge, and the work is supported by believers who want to see the ministry continue and grow. Grace Notes studies are also distributed on diskette and CD-ROM in order to reach those who do not have Internet access. Verse-by-verse (expositional) courses are available in 50 books of the Bible. Some of the courses include word studies (categorical doctrine) or historical articles (isagogics) that are relevant to the passages being discussed. Other courses offered are Bible character studies, comprehensive studies of the Christian Life and Basics of the Christian Life, an extensive series on the Person and Word of Jesus Christ, and a thorough study of the Attributes of God. You are invited to write to the address below, or write by e-mail, to inquire about Grace Notes materials. Warren Doud, Director 1705 Aggie Lane, Austin, Texas 78757 E-Mail: [email protected] Web Site: http://www.gracenotes.info

2 KINGS Page 4 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 KINGS palace, but hardly a grating in the floor of the Aliyah for the purpose of letting light into the lower rooms, as the Rabbins supposed. On account of this misfortune, Ahaziah resorted to Chapter 1. Ahaziah’s Illness. His Death the Ekronitish Baalzebub to obtain an oracle Announced by . ,.i.e ,בַעַ ל־זְּׂבּוב .concerning the result of his illness 2 Kings 1. After the Moabites had rebelled Fly-Baal, was not merely the “averter of swarms against Israel, Ahaziah became sick in of insects,” like the of consequence of a fall through a grating in his Elis (Ges., Winer, Movers, Phöniz. i. p. 175), upper room, and sent messengers to to since “the Fly-God cannot have received his consult the idol Baalzebub concerning the name as the enemy of flies, like lucus a non result of his illness. By the command of God, lucendo,” but was Μ θ ό (LXX, Joseph.), i.e., however, Elijah met the messengers on the God represented as a fly, as a fly-idol, to which road, and told them that the king would die (vv. the name Myiodes, gnat-like, in Plin. h. n. xxix. 6, 1–8). When Ahaziah sent soldiers to fetch clearly points, and as a god of the sun and of Elijah, the messengers were miraculously slain summer must have stood in a similar relation to on two successive occasions, and it was only his the flies to that of the oracle-god Apollo, who humiliation before the prophet which saved the both sent diseases and took them away (vid., J. third captain and his host from sharing a G. Müller, Art. in Herzog’s Cycl. i. p. similar fate; whereupon Elijah went with him to 768, and Stark, Gaza, pp. 260, 261). The latter the king, and repeated the threat already observes that “these (the flies), which are announced on account of his idolatry, which governed in their coming and going by all the was very soon fulfilled (vv. 9–18). conditions of the weather, are apparently 2 Kings 1:1–8. After the death of , endowed with prophetic power themselves.” rebelled against Israel (v. 1). The Moabites, who This explains the fact that a special power of had been subjugated by (2 Sam. 8:2), had prophecy was attributed to this god.1 Ekron, remained tributary to the kingdom of the ten now Akir, the most northerly of the five tribes after the division of the kingdom. but Philistine capitals (see at Josh. 13:3). when Israel was defeated by the Syrians at 2 Kings 1:3, 4. But the angel of the Lord, the Ramoth in the time of Ahab, they took mediator of the revelations made by the advantage of this defeat and the weakening of invisible God to the covenant nation (see Comm. the Israelitish power in the country to the east on the Pentateuch, vol. i. pp. 185–191, transl.), of the Jordan to shake off the yoke of the had spoken to Elijah to go and meet the king’s Israelites, and very soon afterwards attempted messengers, who were going to inquire of an invasion of the , in alliance Baalzebub, and to ask them whether it was as in מִבְּׂלִי אֵ ין) with the Edomite and other tribes of the desert, from the want of a God in Israel which terminated, however, in a great defeat, Ex. 14:11; see Ewald, § 323, a.) that they turned though it contributed to the maintenance of to Baalzebub, and to announce to them the their independence. For further remarks, see at word of Jehovah, that Ahaziah would not rise 2 Kings 3:4ff. up from his bed again, but would die. “And 2 Kings 1:2. Ahaziah could not do anything to Elijah went,” sc. to carry out the divine subjugate the Moabites any further, since he commission. was very soon afterwards taken grievously ill. 2 Kings 1:5–8. The messengers did not He fell through the grating in his upper room at recognise Elijah, but yet they turned back and the grating, is either a window reported the occurrence to the king, who knew ,הַשְּׂ בָכָ ה . furnished with a shutter of lattice-work, or a at once, from the description they gave of the door of lattice-work in the upper room of the habitus of the man in reply to his question, that

2 KINGS Page 5 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

what by hearing of his punishment, and because he“ : מֶהמִשְּׂ פַ ט הָאִ יש .it was Elijah the Tishbite increased his impudence by adding make haste is used here מִשְּׂ פָ ט ”?was the manner of the man .the LXX (Cod וַיַעַ ןוַיְּׂדַבֵ ר C. a Lap. For—”.(מְּׂהֵרָ ה) to denote the peculiarity of a person, that which in a certain sense constitutes the vital law and Alex.) have κ ὶ νέβη κ ὶ ἐλάλη , so that they ,The correctness of this reading .וַיַעַ ל right of the individual personality; figura et read would be an error of the וַיַעַ ן habitus (Vulg.). The servants described the according to which prophet according to his outward appearance, ,in vv. 9 and 13 וַיַעַ ל pen, is favoured not only by which in a man of character is a reflection of his which follows; for, as a general וַיְּׂדַבֵ ר vir pilosus, hirsutus. but also by ,אִ יש בַעַל שֵ עָ ר inner man, as The .וַ יֹּאמֶ ר would be followed by וַיַעַ ן ,This does not mean a man with a luxuriant rule growth of hair, but refers to the hairy dress, i.e., repetition of this judicial miracle was meant to the garment made of sheep-skin or goat-skin or show in the most striking manner not only the coarse camel-hair, which was wrapped round authority which rightfully belonged to the Kings 2:8; :13), prophet, but also the help and protection which 2) אַדֶרֶ ת his body; the the Lord gave to His servants. At the same time, .Zech. 13:4, cf. Matt. 3:4, Heb) אַדֶרֶת שֵ עָ ר or the question as to the “morality of the miracle,” 11:37), which was worn by the prophets, not as about which some have had grave doubts, is not mere ascetics, but as preachers of repentance, set at rest by the remark of Thenius, that “the the rough garment denoting the severity of the soldiers who were sent come into consideration divine judgments upon the effeminate nation, here purely as instruments of a will acting in which revelled in luxuriance and worldly lust. opposition to Jehovah.” The third captain also And this was also in keeping with “the leather carried out he ungodly command of the king, ζώνη δ τ νη (Matt. 3:4), and he was not slain (vv. 13ff.). The first two ,אֵ זור ֹעור ”,girdle whereas the ordinary girdle was of cotton or must therefore have been guilty of some crime, linen, and often very costly. which they and their people had to expiate with 2 Kings 1:9–16. After having executed the their death. This crime did not consist merely in divine command, Elijah returned to the summit their addressing him as “man of God,” for the of the mountain, on which he dwelt. Most of the third addressed Elijah in the same way (v. 13), commentators suppose it to have been one of but in their saying “Man of God, come down.” the peaks of Carmel, from 2 Kings 2:25 and 1 This summons to the prophet, to allow himself Kings 18:42, which is no doubt very probable, to be led as a prisoner before the king, involved though it cannot be raised into certainty. a contempt not only of the prophetic office in Elijah’s place of abode was known to the king; the person of Elijah, but also of the Lord, who he therefore sent a captain with fifty men to had accredited him by miracles as His servant. fetch the prophet. To the demand of the captain, The two captains who were first sent not only “Man of God, the king has said, Come down,” did what they were bound to do as servants of Elijah replied, “And if I am a man of God, let fire the king, but participated in the ungodly fall from heaven and consume thee and thy disposition of their lord ( β ν ντ τῷ and if, shows that κ ῷ τ ῦ φότ —Theodoret); they ,וְּׂאִ ם fifty.” (The expression attacked the Lord with reckless daring in the Elijah’s words followed immediately upon person of the prophet, and the second captain, those of the captain.) This judicial miracle was with his “Come down quickly,” did it even more immediately fulfilled. strongly than the first. This sin was punished, 2 Kings 1:11, 12. The same fate befell a second and that not by the prophet, but by the Lord captain, whom the king sent after the death of Himself, who fulfilled the word of His servant.2 the first. He was more insolent than the first, What Elijah here did was an act of holy zeal for “both because he was not brought to his senses the honour of the Lord, in the spirit of the old

2 KINGS Page 6 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study covenant, under which God destroyed the that in 2 Kings 3:1, to the effect that Joram insolent despisers of His name with fire and began to reign in the eighteenth year of sword, to manifest the energy of His holy , and with that in 1 Kings 22:52, majesty by the side of the dead idols of the viz., that Ahaziah ascended the throne in the heathen. But this act cannot be transferred to seventeenth year of the reign of Jehoshaphat, the times of the new covenant, as is clearly which lasted twenty-five years, and also with shown in Luke 9:54, 55, where Christ does not the statement in 2 Kings 8:16, that Joram of blame Elijah for what he did, but admonishes Judah became king over Judah in the fifth year His disciples, who overlooked the difference of Joram of Israel. If, for example, Ahaziah of between the economy of the law and that of the Israel died after a reign of not quite two years, gospel, and in their carnal zeal wanted to at the most a year and a half, in the eighteenth imitate what Elijah had done in divine zeal for year of Jehoshaphat; as Jehoshaphat himself the honour of the Lord, which had been injured reigned twenty-five years, he cannot have died in his own person. till the seventh year of Joram of Israel, and his 2 Kings 1:13, 14. The king, disregarding the son Joram followed him upon the throne. The punishing hand of the Lord, which, even if it last of these discrepancies may be solved very might possibly have been overlooked in the simply, from the fact that, according to 2 Kings calamity that befell the captain who was first 8:16, Jehoshaphat was still king when his son sent and his company, could not be Joram began to reign so that Jehoshaphat misunderstood when a similar fate befell the abdicated in favour of his son about two years second captain with his fifty men, sent a third before his death. And the first discrepancy (that company, in his defiant obduracy, to fetch the between 2 Kings 1:17 and 2 Kings 3:1) is is apparently an removed by Usher (Annales M. ad a.m. 3106 and חֲמִשִ ים after שְּׂ לִשִ ים) .prophet 3112), Lightfoot, and others, after the example -as the following word of the Seder Olam, by the assumption of the co ,שְּׂ לִ ישִ י error of the pen for shows.) But the third captain was better regency. According to this, when Jehoshaphat הַשְּׂ לִ ישִ י than his king, and wiser than his two went with Ahab to Ramoth in Gilead to war predecessors. He obeyed the command of the against the Syrians, in the eighteenth year of his king so far as to go to the prophet; but instead reign, which runs parallel to the twenty-second of haughtily summoning him to follow him, he year of the reign of Ahab, he appointed his son bent his knee before the man of God, and Joram to the co-regency, and transferred to him prayed that his own life and the lives of his the administration of the kingdom. It is from soldiers might be spared. this co-regency that the statement in 2 Kings 1:17 is dated, to the effect that Joram of Israel 2 Kings 1:15, 16. Then Elijah followed him to became king in the second year of Joram of before him, i.e., before the king, Judah. This second year of the co-regency of ,מִפָ נָיו) the king see Joram corresponds to the eighteenth year of the ,אִ ֹּתו for אֹּתו not before the captain; and Ewald, § 264, b.), having been directed to do so reign of Jehoshaphat (2 Kings 3:1). And in the by the angel of the Lord, and repeated to him fifth year of his co-regency Jehoshaphat gave up the word of the Lord, which he had also the reins of government entirely to him. It is conveyed to him through his messengers (see from this point in time, i.e., from the twenty- vv. 4 and 6). third year of Jehoshaphat, that we are to reckon 2 Kings 1:17, 18. When Ahaziah died, the eight years of the reign of Joram (of Judah), according to the word of the Lord through so that he only reigned six years more after his 3 Elijah, as he had no son, he was followed upon father’s death. We have no information as to the throne by his brother Joram, “in the second the reason which induced Jehoshaphat to year of Joram the son of Jehoshaphat, king of abdicate in favour of his son two years before Judah.” This statement is at variance both with his death; for there is very little probability in

2 KINGS Page 7 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study the conjecture of Lightfoot (Opp. i. p. 85), that to his being taken away. He wanted, therefore, Jehoshaphat did this when he commenced the to get rid of his servant, not “to test his love and war with the Moabites in alliance with Joram of attachment” (Vatabl.), but from humility (C. a Israel, for the simple reason that the Moabites Lap. and others), because he did not wish to revolted after the death of Ahab, and Joram have any one present to witness his made preparations for attacking them glorification without being well assured that it immediately after their rebellion (2 Kings 3:5– was in accordance with the will of God. 7), so that he must have commenced this 2 Kings 2:3. In the disciples of the expedition before the fifth year of his reign. prophets came to meet , and said to him, 2 Kings 2 “Knowest thou that Jehovah will take thy לָקַח מֵעַ ל ”?master from over thy head to-day expresses in a pictorial manner the taking רֹּאש Elijah’s Ascension to Heaven. Elisha’s First Miracles. away of Elijah from his side by raising him to 2 Kings 2:1–13. Elijah’s Ascension to heaven, like ἐ ιν and ὑ λ βάν ιν in Acts Heaven.—Vv. 1–10. Journey from to the 1:9, 10. Elisha replied, “I know it, be silent,” other side of the Jordan.—Vv. 1, 2. When the because he knew Elijah’s feeling. The Lord had time arrived that Jehovah was about to take up therefore revealed to the disciples of the His servant Elijah in a tempest to heaven, Elijah prophets the taking away of Elijah, to went with his attendant Elisha from Gilgal strengthen their faith. ,in the tempest or storm, 2 Kings 2:4–7. In Bethel, and again in ,בַסְּׂעָרָ ה .down to Bethel i.e., in a tempestuous storm, which was to which they both proceeded from Bethel, frequently the herald of the divine self- Elijah repeated the appeal to Elisha to stay revelations in the terrestrial world (vid., Job there, but always in vain. The taking away of is the Elijah had also been revealed to the disciples of הַשָמַ יִם .(Ezek. 1:4; Zech. 9:14 ;40:6 ;38:1 accusative of direction. Gilgal and Bethel (Beitin, the prophets at Jericho. Thus they both came to see at 1 Kings 12:29) were seats of schools of the Jordan, whilst fifty disciples of the prophets the prophets, which Elijah had founded in the from Jericho followed them at a distance, to be kingdom of the ten tribes. It is now generally eye-witnesses of the miraculous translation of admitted that Gilgal, from which they went their master. The course which Elijah took down to Bethel, cannot be the place of that before his departure from this earth, viz., from name which was situated in the Jordan valley to Gilgal past Bethel and Jericho, was not merely the east of Jericho, but must be the Gilgal upon occasioned by the fact that he was obliged to the mountains, the elevated Jiljilia to the south- touch at these places on the way to the Jordan, west of Silo (Seilun, see at Josh. 8:35). On the but had evidently also the same higher purpose, way Elijah said to Elisha, “Stay here, I pray, for for which his ascension to heaven had been the Lord has sent me to Bethel;” but Elisha revealed both to Elisha and to the disciples of declared with a solemn oath that he would not the prophets at Bethel and Jericho. Elijah leave him. The Lord had revealed to both that himself said that the Lord had sent him to the seal of divine attestation was to be Bethel, to Jericho, to the Jordan (vv. 2, 4, 6). He impressed upon the work of Elijah by his being therefore took this way from an impulse miraculously taken up into heaven, to received from the Spirit of God, that he might strengthen the faith not of Elisha only, but also visit the schools of the prophets, which he had of the disciples of the prophets and of all the founded, once more before his departure, and godly in Israel; but the revelation had been strengthen and fortify the disciples of the made to them separately, so that Elijah had no prophets in the consecration of their lives to suspicion that Elisha had also been informed as the service of the Lord, though without in the least surmising that they had been informed by

2 KINGS Page 8 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study the Spirit of the Lord of his approaching misunderstood by many translators, from departure from this life. But as his ascension to Ephraem Syrus down to Köster and F. W. heaven took place not so much for his own Krummacher, who have supposed that Elisha sake, as because of those associates in his office wished to have a double measure of Elijah’s who were left behind, God had revealed it to so spirit (“that thy spirit may be twofold in me:” many, that they might be even more firmly Luther after the , “ut fiat in me duplex established in their calling by the miraculous spiritus tuus”); and some have taken it as glorification of their master than by his words, referring to the fact that Elisha performed his teaching, and his admonitions, so that they many more miracles and much greater ones might carry it on without fear or trembling, than Elijah (Cler., Pfeiffer, dub. vex. p. 442), even if their great master should no longer others to the gift of prophecy and miracles stand by their side with the might of his (Köster, δι η. p. 82), whilst others, like spiritual power to instruct, advise, or defend. Krummacher, have understood by it that the But above all, Elisha, whom the Lord had spirit of Elisha, as an evangelical spirit, was appointed as his successor (1 Kings 19:16), was twice as great as the legal spirit of Elijah. But to be prepared for carrying on his work by the there is no such meaning implied in the words, last journey of his master. He did not leave his nor can it be inferred from the answer of Elijah; side therefore, and resolved, certainly also from whilst it is impossible to show that there was an inward impulse of the Spirit of God, to be an any such measure of the Spirit in the life and eye-witness of his glorification, that he might works of Elisha in comparison with the spirit of receive the spiritual inheritance of the first- Elisha, although his request was fulfilled. The born from his departing spiritual father. request of Elisha is evidently based upon Deut. denotes the double פִ י־שְּׂ נַיִםבְּׂ Kings 2:8. When they reached the Jordan, 21:17, where 2 portion which the first-born received in (of) the ,גָלַ ם) Elijah took his prophet’s cloak, rolled it up ἁ . λ . convolvit), and smote the water with it; father’s inheritance, as R. Levi b. Gers., Seb. whereupon the water divided hither and Münst., Vatabl., Grot., and others have thither, so that they both passed through on dry perceived, and as Hengstenberg (Beitrr. ii. p. ground. The cloak, that outward sign of the 133f.) in our days has once more proved. Elisha, prophet’s office, became the vehicle of the resting his foot upon this law, requested of Spirit’s power which works unseen, and with Elijah as a first-born son the double portion of which the prophet was inspired. The miracle his spirit for his inheritance. Elisha looked upon itself is analogous to the miraculous dividing of himself as the first-born son of Elijah in relation the Red Sea by the stretching out of ’ rod to the other “sons of the prophets,” inasmuch as (Ex. 14:16, 21); but at the same time it is very Elijah by the command of God had called him to peculiar, and quite in accordance with the be his successor and to carry on his work. The prophetic character of Elijah, Moses, the leader answer of Elijah agrees with this: “Thou hast of the people, performed his miracles with his asked a hard thing,” he said, because the shepherd’s crook, Elijah the prophet divided granting of this request was not in his power, the river with his prophet’s mantle. but in the power of God. He therefore made its fulfilment dependent upon a condition, which 2 Kings 2:9, 10. After crossing the Jordan, did not rest with himself, but was under the Elijah allowed his servant and companion to control of God: “if thou shalt see me taken from make one more request before he was taken dropped, see ם partic. Pual with the ,לֻקָ ח) away, in the full confidence that the Lord would thee fulfil it in answer to his prayer; and Elisha Ges. § 52, Anm. b; Ewald, § 169, d.), let it be so δι λᾶ ἐν ν ύ τ , to thee; but if not, it will not be so.” From his ,פִ י־שְּׂ נַיִםבְּׂ רּוחֲ ָך asked, “Let own personal inclination Elijah did not wish to i.e., a double portion in (of) thy spirit be have Elisha, who was so closely related to him, granted to me.” This request has been

2 KINGS Page 9 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study as an eye-witness of his translation from the phenomenon, which appeared to the eyes of earth; but from his persistent refusal to leave Elisha as a chariot of fire with horses of fire, in him he could already see that he would not be which Elijah rode to heaven. The tempest was able to send him away. He therefore left the an earthly substratum for the theophany, the matter to the Lord, and made the guidance of fiery chariots and fiery horses the symbolical God the sign for Elisha whether the Lord would form in which the translation of his master to fulfil his request or not. Moreover, the request heaven presented itself to the eye of Elisha, itself even on the part of the petitioner who was left behind.4 presupposes a certain dependence, and for this The ascension of Elijah has been compared to reason Elisha could not possibly desire that the the death of Moses. “As God Himself buried double measure of Elijah’s spirit should be Moses, and his grave has not been found to this bestowed upon him. A dying man cannot leave day, so did He fetch Elias to heaven in a still to his heir more than he has himself. And, lastly, more glorious manner in a fiery chariot with even the ministry of Elisha, when compared fiery horses, so that fifty men, who searched for with that of Elijah, has all the appearance of him, did not find him on the earth” (Ziegler). being subordinate to it. He lives and labours This parallel has a real foundation in the merely as the continuer of the work already appearance of Moses and Elijah with Christ on begun by Elijah, both outwardly in relation to the mountain of transfiguration, only we must the worshippers of idols, and inwardly in not overlook the difference in the departure relation to the disciples of the prophets. Elisha from this life of these two witnesses of God. For performs the anointing of and , with Moses died and was to die in the wilderness which Elijah was charged, and thereby prepares because of his sin (Deut. 32:49ff.), and was only the way for the realization of that destruction of buried by the hand of the Lord, so that no one Ahab’s house which Elijah predicted to the has seen his grave, not so much for the purpose king; and he merely receives and fosters those of concealing it from men as to withdraw his schools of the prophets which Elijah had body from corruption, and preserve and glorify already founded. And again, it is not Elisha but it for the eternal life (see the Comm. on Deut. Elijah who appears as the Coryphaeus of 34:5, 6). Elijah did not die, but was received prophecy along with Moses, the representative into heaven by being “changed” (1 Cor. 15:51, of the law, upon the mount of transfiguration 52; 1 Thess. 4:15ff.). This difference is in perfect (Matt. 17:3).—It is only a thoroughly external harmony with the character and position of mode of observation that can discover in the these two men in the earthly kingdom of God. fact that Elisha performed a greater number of Moses the lawgiver departed from the earthly miracles than Elijah, a proof that the spirit of life by the way of the law, which worketh death Elijah rested doubly upon him. as the wages of sin (Rom. 6:23; 7:13); Elijah the 2 Kings 2:11–13. Elijah’s ascension.—V. 11. prophet, who was appointed to admonish for While they were walking on and talking to each future times (ὁ κ τ φ ὶ ἐν ἐλ ἰ other, “behold (there suddenly appeared) a κ ι ύ ), to pacify the wrath before the fiery chariot and fiery horses, and separated the judgment, to turn the heart of the father to the two (by driving between them), and Elijah went son, and to restore the tribes of Jacob (Ecclus. up in the tempest to heaven.” As God had 48:10), was taken to heaven as the forerunner formerly taken Enoch away, so that he did not of Christ (Mal. 3:23, 24; Matt. 11:10, 11) taste of death (see at Gen. 5:24), so did He also without tasting of death, to predict the suddenly take Elijah away from Elisha, and ascension of our Lord, and to set it forth in Old carry him to heaven without dying. It was Testament mode; for as a servant, as the in the tempest,” that he was taken servant of the law, who with his fiery zeal“ ,בַסְּׂעָרָ ה away. The storm was accompanied by a fiery preached both by word and deed the fire of the wrath of divine justice to the rebellious

2 KINGS Page 10 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study generation of his own time, Elijah was carried He?” and the water divided hither and thither, which ,אַ ף־הּוא .by the Lord to heaven in a fiery storm, the so that he was able to go through symbol of the judicial righteousness of God. “As the LXX did not understand, and have simply he was an unparalleled champion for the reproduced in Greek characters, φφώ, is an honour of the Lord, a fiery war-chariot was the emphatic apposition, “yea He,” such as we find symbol of his triumphal procession into is only a אַ ף after suffixes, e.g., Prov. 22:19; and heaven” (O. v. Gerlach). But Christ, as the Son, which is more usual when ,גַ ם to whom all power is given in heaven and on strengthened earth, after having taken away from death its emphatic prominence is given to the suffix (vid., sting and from hell its victory, by His Ges. § 121, 3). The Masoretic accentuation, resurrection from the grave (1 Cor. 15:55), which separates it from the preceding words, returned to the Father in the power of His rests upon a false interpretation. There is no eternal deity, and ascended to heaven in His need either for the alteration proposed by he had scarcely“ ,אַ ְך into אַ ף glorified body before the eyes of His disciples as Ewald, § 362, a., of the victor over death and hell, until a cloud smitten the water,” especially as not a single received Him and concealed His figure from analogous example can be adduced of the use of their sight (Luke 24:51; Acts 1:9).5 followed by a Vav consec.; or for the אַ ְך הּוא 2 Kings 2:12. When Elisha saw his master conjecture that the original reading in the text carried thus miraculously away, he exclaimed, was (Houb., Böttch., Then.), “where is now אֵ ֹפוא My father, my father, the chariot of Israel and“ horsemen thereof!” and as he saw him no more, the God of Elijah?” which derives no critical he took hold of his clothes and rent them in two support from the φφώ of the LXX, and is quite אֵ ֹפוא pieces, i.e., from the top to the bottom, as a at variance with Hebrew usage, since when it ,אַ יֵה proof of the greatness of his sorrow at his being generally stands immediately after ,.my father,” as serves to strengthen the interrogation (vid“ ,אָבִ י taken away. He called Elijah his spiritual father, who had begotten him as Judg. 9:38, Job 17:15, Isa. 19:12, Hos. 13:10). his son through the word of God. “Chariot (war- This miracle was intended partly to confirm chariot) and horsemen of Israel,” on which the Elisha’s conviction that his petition had been Israelitish kings based the might and security of fulfilled, and partly to accredit him in the eyes their kingdom, are a symbolical representation of the disciples of the prophets and the people of the strong defence which Elijah had been generally as the divinely appointed successor of through his ministry to the kingdom of Israel Elijah. All the disciples of the prophets from (cf. 2 Kings 13:14). Jericho saw also from this that the spirit of 2 Kings 2:13. He then took up Elijah’s Elijah rested upon Elisha, and came to meet him prophet’s mantle, which had fallen from him to do homage to him as being now their when he was snatched away, and returned to spiritual father and lord. the Jordan. The prophet’s mantle of the master 2 Kings 2:16–18. But the disciples of the fell to Elisha the disciple, as a pledge to himself prophets at Jericho were so unable to realize that his request was fulfilled, and as a visible the fact of Elijah’s translation, although it had sign to others that he was his divinely been previously revealed to them, that they appointed successor, and that the spirit of begged permission of Elisha to send out fifty whether :פֶ ן־נְּׂשָ או .Elijah rested upon him (v. 15). brave men to seek for Elijah 2 Kings 2:14–25. Return of Elisha to Jericho the Spirit of the Lord has not taken him and cast and Bethel, and his First Miracles.—Vv. 14, 15. him upon one of the mountains, or into one of with the perfect is used “where פֶ ן .Having returned to the banks of the Jordan, the valleys Elisha smote the water with Elijah’s mantle, there is fear of a fact, which as is conjectured saying, “Where is Jehovah the God of Elijah, yea

2 KINGS Page 11 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study almost with certainty has already happened,” soil, on account of the badness of the water; not like ὴ in the sense of “whether not” (vid., “the inhabitants, both man and beast” is not a wind sent by (Thenius). Elisha then told them to bring a new רּוחַ יְּׂהוָ ה .(.Ewald, § 337, b Jehovah (Ges.), but the Spirit of Jehovah, as in 1 dish with salt, and poured the salt into the spring with these words: “Thus saith the Lord, I is the regular גֵיאות Kings 18:12. The Chethîb have made this water sound; there will not .(מִשָ ם) ”Zech. 14:4); the Keri more be death and miscarriage thence) גֵיא or גַיְּׂא formation from ,is a substantive here (vid., Ewald, 160 מְּׂשַ לֶכֶ ת :the later form ,י and א with the transposition of is no doubt the present spring Ain מוצָ א הַמַ יִם .(.Ezek. 7:16; 31:12, etc. The belief e ,גֵאָ יות expressed by the disciples of the prophets, that es Sultân, the only spring near to Jericho, the Elijah might have been miraculously carried waters of which spread over the plain of away, was a popular belief, according to 1 Kings Jericho, thirty-five minutes’ distance from the 18:12, which the disciples of the prophets were present village and castle, taking its rise in a probably led to share, more especially in the group of elevations not far from the foot of the present case, by the fact that they could not mount Quarantana (Kuruntul); a large and imagine a translation to heaven as a possible beautiful spring, the water of which is neither thing, and with the indefiniteness of the cold nor warm, and has an agreeable and sweet (”could only (according to Steph. Schultz, “somewhat salt לָקַח מֵעַ לרֹּאשְּׂ ָך expression understand the divine revelation which they taste. It was formerly enclosed by a kind of had received as referring to removal by death. reservoir or semicircular wall of hewn stones, So that even if Elisha told them how from which the water was conducted in miraculously Elijah had been taken from him, different directions to the plain (vid., Rob. Pal. which he no doubt did, they might still believe ii. p. 283ff.). With regard to the miracle, a spring that by the appearance in the storm the Lord which supplied the whole of the city and had taken away His servant from this life, that district with water could not be so greatly is to say, had received his soul into heaven, and improved by pouring in a dish of salt, that the had left his earthly tabernacle somewhere on water lost its injurious qualities for ever, even if the earth, for which they would like to go in salt does possess the power of depriving bad search, that they might pay the last honours to water of its unpleasant taste and injurious their departed master. Elisha yielded to their effects. The use of these natural means does not continued urgency and granted their request; remove the miracle. Salt, according to its power whereupon fifty men sought for three days for of preserving from corruption and Elijah’s body, and after three days’ vain search decomposition, is a symbol of incorruptibility to being ashamed, and of the power of life which destroys death ,עַ ד־בֹּש .returned to Jericho i.e., till he was ashamed to refuse their request (see Bähr, Symbolik, ii. pp. 325, 326). As such it any longer (see at Judg. 3:25). formed the earthly substratum for the spiritual power of the divine word, through which the The two following miracles of Elisha (vv. 19– spring was made for ever sound. A new dish 25) were also intended to accredit him in the was taken for the purpose, not ob munditiem eyes of the people as a man endowed with the (Seb. Schm.), but as a symbol of the renewing Spirit and power of God, as Elijah had been. Vv. power of the word of God.—But if this miracle 19–22. Elisha makes the water at Jericho was adapted to show to the people the wholesome.—During his stay at Jericho (v. 18) beneficent character of the prophet’s ministry, the people of the city complained, that whilst the following occurrence was intended to prove the situation of the place was good in other to the despisers of God that the Lord does not respects, the water was bad and the land allow His servants to be ridiculed with .the land, i.e., the impunity ,הָאָרֶ ץ .produced miscarriages

2 KINGS Page 12 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 Kings 2:23–25. The judgment of God upon the thence to Samaria, where, according to 2 Kings loose fellows at Bethel. Elisha proceeded from 6:32, he possessed a house. Jericho to Bethel, the chief seat of the idolatrous calf-worship, where there was also a school of 2 Kings 3 the prophets (v. 3). On the way thither there Joram of Israel, and the Expedition against Moab came small boys out of the city to meet him, Which He Undertook in Company with who ridiculed him by calling out, “Come up, Jehoshaphat. bald-head (with a ,קֵרֵחַ .bald-head, come,” etc 2 Kings 3:1–3. Reign of Joram of Israel.—For bald place at the back of the head), was used as the chronological statement in v. 1, see at 2 a term of scorn (cf. Isa. 3:17, 24); but hardly Kings 1:17. Joram or Jehoram was not so from a suspicion of leprosy (Winer, Thenius). It ungodly as his father Ahab and his Mother was rather as a natural defect, for Elisha, who . He had the statue or pillar of Baal, lived for fifty years after this (2 Kings 13:14), which his father had erected in Samaria, could not have been bald from age at that time. removed; and it was only to the sin of 2 Kings 2:24. The prophet then turned round , i.e., the calf-worship, that he and cursed the scoffers in the name of the Lord, adhered. Joram therefore wished to abolish the and there came two bears out of the wood, and worship of Baal and elevate the worship of tore forty-two boys of them in pieces. The Jehovah, under the image of the calf (ox), into supposed “immorality of cursing,” which the region of his kingdom once more. For the Thenius still adduces as a disproof of the see Ewald, § 317, a. He did מִמֶ נָ ה singular suffix historical truth of this miracle, even if it were established, would not affect Elisha only, but not succeed, however, in exterminating the would fall back upon the Lord God, who worship of Baal. It not only continued in executed the curse of His servant in such a Samaria, but appears to have been carried on manner upon these worthless boys. And there again in the most shameless manner (cf. 2 Kings is no need, in order to justify the judicial 10:18ff.); at which we cannot be surprised, miracle, to assume that there was a since his mother Jezebel, that fanatical preconcerted plan which had been devised by worshipper of Baal, was living throughout the the chief rulers of the city out of enmity to the whole of his reign (2 Kings 9:30). prophet of the Lord, so that the children had 2 Kings 3:4–27. War of Joram, in Alliance with merely been put forward (O. v. Gerlach). All that Jehoshaphat, against the Moabites.—Vv. 4, 5. is necessary is to admit that the worthless spirit The occasion of this war was the rebellion of which prevailed in Bethel was openly the Moabites, i.e., the refusal to pay tribute to manifested in the ridicule of the children, and Israel since the death of Ahab. the that these boys knew Elisha, and in his person (vassal-) king of Moab was a possessor of insulted the prophet of the Lord. If this was the flocks, and paid to the king of Israel 100,000 case, then Elisha cursed the boys for the lambs and 100,000 rams; not merely at the purpose of avenging the honour of the Lord, commencement of each new reign (Cler.), but to bring again = to ,הֵשִ יב) which had been injured in his person; and the as a yearly tribute Lord caused this curse to be fulfilled, to punish bring repeatedly, as in Num. 18:9, etc.). This in the children the sins of the parents, and to yearly tribute could not be exorbitant for the inspire the whole city with a salutary dread of land of the Moabites, which abounded in good His holy majesty.6 pasture, and was specially adapted for the 2 Kings 2:25. Elisha went from Bethel to rearing of flocks. The payment of tribute in Carmel (see at :19), probably to natural objects and in the produce of the land strengthen himself in solitude for the was very customary in ancient times, and is still signifies נוקֵ ד continuation of his master’s work. He returned usual among the tribes of Asia.7

2 KINGS Page 13 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study both a shepherd (Amos 1:1) and also a the north, or by going round the southern point possessor of flocks. In Arabic it is properly the of the , and advancing through the possessor of a superior kind of sheep and goats northern portion of the mountains of , may and thus entering it from the south. The latter צֶמֶ ר .(.vid., Boch. Hieroz. i. p. 483f. ed. Ros) way was the longer of the two, and the one or be ,הֵשִ יב either be taken as a second object to attended with the greatest difficulties and as an accusative of looser dangers, because the army would have to cross אֵ ילִ ים connected with government (Ewald, § 287, h.). In the first case mountains which were very difficult to ascend. the tribute would consist of the wool (the Nevertheless Jehoshaphat decided in its favour, fleeces) of 100,000 lambs and 100,000 rams; in partly because, if they took the northern route, the second, of 100,000 lambs and the wool of they would have the Syrians at Ramoth in 100,000 rams. In support of the latter we may Gilead to fear, partly also because the Moabites, quote Isa. 16:1, where lambs are mentioned as from their very confidence in the inaccessibility tribute. of their southern boundary, would hardly 2 Kings 3:5ff. The statement concerning the expect any attack from that side, and might rebellion of the Moabites, which has already therefore, if assailed at that point, be taken off been mentioned in 2 Kings 1:1, is repeated their guard and easily defeated, and probably here, because it furnished the occasion for the also from a regard to the king of Edom, whom expedition about to be described. Ahaziah had they could induce to join them with his troops if been unable to do anything during his short they took that route, not so much perhaps for reign to renew the subjugation of Moab; Joram the purpose of strengthening their own army as was therefore anxious to overtake what had to make sure of his forces, namely, that he been neglected immediately after his ascent of would not make a fresh attempt at rebellion by at that a second invasion of the kingdom of Judah ,בַ יום הַ הּוא the throne. He went to Samaria while Jehoshaphat was taking the field against time, namely, when he renewed his demand for the Moabites. the tribute and it was refused (Thenius), and mustered all Israel, i.e., raised an army out of 2 Kings 3:9. But however cleverly this plan the whole kingdom, and asked Jehoshaphat to may have been contrived, when the united join in the war, which he willingly promised to army had been marching round for seven days do (as in 1 Kings 22:4), notwithstanding the and was passing through the deep rocky valley 8 fact that he had been blamed by prophets for of the Ahsy, which divided the territories of his alliance with Ahab and Ahaziah (2 Chron. Edom and Moab, it was in the greatest danger 19:2 and 20:37). He probably wished to of perishing from want of water for men and chastise the Moabites still further on this cattle, as the river which flows through this occasion for their invasion of Judah (2 Chron. valley, and in which they probably hoped to 20), and to do his part by bringing them once find a sufficient supply of water, since more under the yoke of Israel, to put it out of according to Robinson (Pal. ii. pp. 476 and 488) their power to make fresh incursions into it is a stream which never fails, was at that time Judah. perfectly dry. 2 Kings 3:8. In reply to Joram’s question, “By In this distress the hearts of the two kings were which way shall we advance (against Moab)?” manifested.—Vv. 10–12. Joram cried out in his Jehoshaphat decided in favour of “the way despair: “Woe, that Jehovah has called these through the desert of Edom.” There were two three kings, to give them into the hand of that, serves to give emphasis to the ,כִ י) ”!ways by which it was possible to enter the land Moab of the Moabites; namely, either by going above assurance; see Ewald, § 330, b.) Jehoshaphat, on the Dead Sea, and crossing the Jordan and the the other hand, had confidence in the Lord, and boundary river Arnon, and so entering it from inquired whether there was no prophet there,

2 KINGS Page 14 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study through whom they could seek counsel of the as in 1 Kings 18:46), so that he said in the name Lord (as in 1 Kings 22:7); whereupon one of the of the Lord: “Make this valley full of trenches גֵבִ ים גֵבִ ים inf. abs. for the imperative; for ,עָ שֹּה) servants of the Israelitish king answered that Elisha was there, who had poured water upon see Ges. § 108, 4); for thus saith the Lord, ye the hands of Elijah, i.e., had been with him daily will see neither wind nor rain, and this valley as his servant, and therefore could probably will be filled with water, that ye may be able to obtain and give a revelation from god. Elisha are גֵבִ ים ”.drink, and your flocks and your cattle may perhaps have come to the neighbourhood of the army at the instigation of the Spirit of trenches for collecting water (vid., Jer. 14:3), God, because the distress of the kings was to be which would suddenly flow down through the one means in the hand of the Lord, not only of brook-valley. This large quantity of water came distinguishing the prophet in the eyes of Joram, on the (following) morning “by the way of but also of pointing Joram to the Lord as the Edom” (v. 20), a heavy fall of rain or violent only true God. The three kings, humbled by the storm having taken place, as is evident from the calamity, went in person to Elisha, instead of context, in the eastern mountains of Edom, at a sending for him. great distance from the Israelitish camp, the water of which filled the brook-valley, i.e., the 2 Kings 3:13, 14. In order still further to Wady el Kurahy and el Ahsy (see at v. 9) at once, humble the king of Israel, who was already without the Israelites observing anything either bowed down by the trouble, and to produce of the wind, which always precedes rain in the some salutary fruit of repentance in his heart, East (Harmar, Beobb. i. pp. 51, 52), or of the rain Elisha addressed him in these words: “What itself. are the flocks intended for מִקְּׂ נֵיכֶ ם (-have I to do with thee? Go to the (Baal .the beasts of burden בְּׂהֶמְֹּּׂתְּׂ כֶ ם ,prophets of thy father and thy mother! Let them slaughtering help thee.” When Joram replied to this in a 2 Kings 3:18, 19. Elisha continued: “and this is no, pray (as in Ruth 1:13), too little for Jehovah (the comparative force of ,עַ ל :supplicatory tone is implied in the context, especially in the נָקַ ל i.e., speak not in this refusing way, for the Lord has brought these three kings—not me alone, alternating combination of the two clauses, but Jehoshaphat and the king of Edom also— :(.see Ewald, § 360, c ,וְּׂ … וְּׂ which is indicated by into this trouble; Elisha said to him with a solemn oath (cf. :1): “If I did not He will also give Moab into your hand, and ye regard Jehoshaphat, I should not look at thee will smite all the fortified and choice cities, fell and have respect to thee,” i.e., I should not all the good trees (fruit-trees), stop up all the deign to look at thee, much less to help thee. springs of water, and spoil all the good fields with stones.” and are intended to מִבְּׂ חור מִבְּׂצָ ר ,Kings 3:15–17. He then sent for a minstrel 2 to collect his mind from the impressions of the produce a play upon words, through the outer world by the soft tones of the instrument, resemblance in their sound and meaning and by subduing the self-life and life in the (Ewald, § 160, c.). In the announcement of the external world to become absorbed in the devastation of the land there is an allusion to intuition of divine things. On this influence of Deut. 20:19, 20, according to which the music upon the state of the mind, see the Israelites were ordered to spare the fruit-trees remark on 1 Sam. 16:16, and Passavant’s when Canaan was taken. These instructions Untersuchungen über den Lebens-magnetismus, were not to apply to Moab, because the p. 207 (ed. 2).—As the minstrel was playing, the Moabites themselves as the arch-foes of Israel would not act in any other way with the land of וְּׂהָ יָה) hand of the Lord came upon him to ,הִכְּׂאִ ב .Israel if they should gain the victory .as in 1 Sam ,וַיְּׂהִ י according to the later usage for add pain, is a poetical expression for spoiling a יַדיְּׂהוָ ה etc.; compare Ewald, § 345, b., and ,17:48

2 KINGS Page 15 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study field or rendering it infertile through the cause of the blood could only have been that heaping up of stones. their enemies had massacred one another, 2 Kings 3:20. The water came in the morning more especially as the jealousy between Israel at the time of the morning sacrifice (see 1 Kings and Judah was not unknown to them, and they 18:36), to indicate that the Lord was once more could have no doubt that Edom had only come restoring His favour to the people on account of with them as a forced ally after the unsuccessful the sacrifice presented to Him in His temple. attempt at rebellion which it had made a short time before; and, lastly, they cannot quite have The help of God, which preserved the Israelitish forgotten their own last expedition against army from destruction, also prepared Judah in alliance with the Edomites and destruction for the Moabites. Vv. 21–23. On Ammonites, which had completely failed, hearing the report of the march of the allied because the men composing their own army kings, Moab had raised all the men that were had destroyed one another. But if they came capable of bearing arms, and stationed them on into collision with the allied army of the the frontier. In the morning, when the sun had Israelites under such a delusion as this, the risen above the water, the Moabites saw the battle could only end in defeat and in a general water opposite to them like blood, and said: flight so far as they were concerned. “That is blood: the (allied) kings have destroyed themselves and smitten one another; and now 2 Kings 3:24, 25. The Israelites followed the to the spoil, Moab!” Coming with this fugitives into their own land and laid it waste, expectation to the Israelitish camp, they were as Elisha had prophesied (v. 25 compared with וַיָבו בָ ּה is to be read ויבו־בָ ּה received by the allies, who were ready for v. 19). The Chethîb as in 1 Kings 12:12): and (Israel) came וַיָבוא battle, and put to flight. The divine help (for consisted, therefore, not in a miracle which into the land and smote Moab. The Keri is a וַיַכּו surpassed the laws of nature, but simply in the is either the infinitive הַ כות .fact that the Lord God, as He had predicted bad emendation through His prophet, caused the forces of construct used instead of the infin. absolute nature ordained by Him to work in the (Ewald, § 351, c.), or an unusual form of the inf. till one (= so ,עַ ד־הִשְּׂאִ יר .(.predetermined manner. As the sudden supply absol. (Ewald, § 240, b of an abundance of water was caused in a that one only) left its stones in Kir-chareseth. On natural way by a heavy fall of rain, so the the infinitive form see at Josh. 8:22. The הִשְּׂאִ יר illusion, which was so fatal to the Moabites, is probably points forward to the אֲבָ נֶיהָ also to be explained in the natural manner suffix in indicated in the text. From the reddish earth of following noun (Ewald, § 309, c.). The city קִ יר חֶרֶ ש here and Isa. 16:7, and קִ יר חֲרֶשֶ ת the freshly dug trenches the water collected in called them had acquired a reddish colour, which was in Isa. 16:11 and Jer. 48:31, 36, i.e., probably considerably intensified by the rays of the city of potsherds, is called elsewhere , קִ יר מואָ ב rising sun, so that when seen from a distance it resembled blood. The Moabites, however, were the citadel of Moab (Isa. 15:1), as the principal כְּׂרַ כָ א .the less likely to entertain the thought of an fortress of the land (in the Chaldee Vers ,and still exists under the name of Kerak ,(דְּׂ מואָ ב optical delusion, from the fact that with their accurate acquaintance with the country they with a strong castle build by the Crusaders, knew very well that there was no water in the upon a lofty and steep chalk rock, surrounded wady at that time, and they had neither seen by a deep and narrow valley, which runs nor heard anything of the rain which had fallen westward under the name of Wady Kerak and at a great distance off in the Edomitish falls into the Dead Sea (vid., Burckhardt, Syr. pp. mountains. The thought was therefore a natural 643ff., C. v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 271, 272). This one, that the water was blood, and that the

2 KINGS Page 16 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study fortress the allied kings besieged. “The slingers 2 Kings 4 surrounded and smote it,” i.e., bombarded it. 2 Kings 3:26. When the king of Moab saw that Elisha Works Several Miracles. the battle was too strong for him, he attempted 2 Kings 4. From 2 Kings 4 through 2 Kings 8:6 to fight a way through the besiegers with 700 there follows a series of miracles on the part of lit., to split Elisha, which both proved this prophet to be ,לְּׂהַבְּׂקִ יעַ ) men with drawn swords them) to the king of Edom, i.e., on the side the continuer of the work which Elijah had which was held by this king, from whom he begun, of converting Israel from the service of probably hoped that he should meet with the Baal to the service of the living God, and also weakest resistance. manifested the beneficent fruits of the zeal of Elijah for the honour of the Lord of Sabaoth in 2 Kings 3:27. But when this attempt failed, in the midst of the idolatrous generation of his his desperation he took his first-born son, who time, partly in the view which we obtain from was to succeed him as king, and offered him as several of these accounts of the continuance a sacrifice upon the wall, i.e., in the sight of the and prosperity of the schools of the prophets, besiegers, not to the God of Israel (Joseph. Ephr. and partly in the attitude of Elisha towards the Syr., etc.), but to his own god Camos (see at 1 godly in the land as well as towards Joram the Kings 11:7), to procure help from him by king, the son of the idolatrous Ahab, and in the appeasing his wrath; just as the heathen extension of his fame beyond the limits of constantly sought to appease the wrath of their Israel. (See the remarks on the labours of both gods by human sacrifices on the occasion of prophets at pp. 161ff., and those on the schools great calamities (vid., Euseb. praepar. ev. iv. 16, of the prophets at 1 Sam. 19:24.)—All the and E. v. Lasaulx, die Sühnopfer der Griechen miracles described in this section belong to the und Römer, pp. 8ff.).—“And there was (came) reign of Joram king of Israel. They are not all great wrath upon Israel, and they departed related, however, in chronological order, but from him (the king of Moab) and returned into the chronology is frequently disregarded for is used of the divine the purpose of groping together events which הָ יָה קֶ צֶף עַ ל their land.” As wrath or judgment, which a man brings upon are homogeneous in their nature. This is himself by sinning, in every other case in which evident, not only from the fact that (a) several the phrase occurs, we cannot understand it of these accounts are attached quite loosely to here as signifying the “human indignation,” or one another without any particle to indicate ill-will, which broke out among the besieged sequence (vid., 2 Kings 4:1, 38, 42; 5:1; 6:8, and (Budd., Schulz, and others). The meaning is: this 8:1), and (b) we have first of all those miracles act of abomination, to which the king of the which were performed for the good of the Moabites had been impelled by the extremity of scholars of the prophets and of particular his distress, brought a severe judgment from private persons (2 Kings 4–6:7), and then such God upon Israel. The besiegers, that is to say, works of the prophet as bore more upon the felt the wrath of God, which they had brought political circumstances of the nation, and of the upon themselves by occasioning human king as the leader of the nation (2 Kings 6:8– sacrifice, which is strictly forbidden in the law 7:20), but also from the circumstance that in (Lev. 18:21; 20:3), either inwardly in their the case of some of these facts you cannot fail to conscience or in some outwardly visible signs, perceive that their position is regulated by their so that they gave up the further prosecution of substantial relation to what precedes or what the siege and the conquest of the city, without follows, without any regard to the time at which having attained the object of the expedition, they occurred. Thus, for example, the namely, to renew the subjugation of Moab occurrence described in 2 Kings 8:1–6, which under the power of Israel. should undoubtedly stand before 2 Kings 5 so far as the chronology is concerned, is placed at

2 KINGS Page 17 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

,(make not few, sc. to beg ,אַ ל־ֹּתַמְּׂעִיטִ י) the end of the miracles which Elisha wrought not a few for king Joram, simply because it exhibits in the and then to shut herself in with her sons, and to clearest manner the salutary fruit of what he pour from her flask of oil into all these vessels had done. And so, again, the account of till they were full, and then to sell this oil and the leper is placed in 2 Kings 5, although its pay her debt with the money, and use the rest proper position would be after 2 Kings 6:7, for the maintenance of herself and her children. because it closes the series of miracles She was to close the house-door, that she might performed for and upon private persons, and not be disturbed in her occupation by other the miracle was wrought upon a foreigner, so people, and also generally to avoid all needless that the fame of the prophet had already observation while the miracle was being penetrated into a foreign country; whereas in let that which is filled be ,הַמָ לֵ אֹּתַסִיעִ י .performed order of time it should either stand between vv. 23 and 24 of the sixth chapter (because the put on one side, namely by the sons, who incursions of the flying parties of Syrians, to handed her the vessels, according to vv. 5 and 6, which 2 Kings 6:8–23 refers, had already taken so that she was able to pour without ,is a participle Piel מיצקת place), or not till after the close of 2 Kings 7. On intermission. The form the other hand, the partial separation of the and is quite appropriate as an emphatic form; Hiphil) is an unnecessary) מוצֶקֶ ת miracles performed for the schools of the the Keri prophets (2 Kings 4:1–7, 38–41, 42–44, and 2 .הִצִ יק is יָצַ ק alteration, especially as the Hiphil of Kings 6:1–7) can only be explained on then the oil stood, i.e., it ceased to ,וַיַעֲ מֹּד הַשֶמֶ ן chronological grounds; and this is favoured by is very harsh, and וְּׂאַֹּתְּׂ בָ נַיְִך the circumstance that the events inserted flow. The asyndeton between are attached by a Vav consec., which the Vav copul. has probably dropped out. With does indicate the order of sequence (2 Kings the alteration proposed by L. de Dieu, viz., of 5:8ff. and 6:1ff.). Regarded as a whole, however, ֹּתִחְּׂ יִי live with thy sons,” the verb“ ,וְּׂאֶ ת into וְּׂאַֹּתְּׂ the section 2 Kings 4:1–8:6, which was no doubt taken from a prophetical monograph and would necessarily stand first (Thenius). inserted into the annals of the kings, is in its 2 Kings 4:8–37. The Shunammite and her true chronological place, since the account in 2 Son.—V. 8. When Elisha was going one day (lit., Kings 3 belongs to the earlier period of the the day, i.e., at that time, then) to history, and the events narrated from 2 Kings (Solam, at the south-western foot of the Lesser 8:7 onwards to the later period. Hermon; see at 1 Kings 1:3), a wealthy woman as in 1 Sam. 25:2, etc.) constrained him to גְּׂדולָ ה) Kings 4:1–7. The Widow’s Cruse of Oil.—A 2 poor widow of the scholars of the prophets eat at her house; whereupon, as often as he complained to Elisha of her distress, namely, passed by that place in his subsequent journeys that a creditor was about to take her two sons from Carmel to Jezreel and back, he was .as in Gen סּור) as servants (slaves). The Mosaic law gave a accustomed to call upon her creditor the right to claim the person and 19:2). children of a debtor who was unable to pay, and 2 Kings 4:9, 10. The woman then asked her they were obliged to serve him as slaves till the husband to build a small upper chamber for year of jubilee, when they were once more set this holy man of God, and to furnish it with the free (Lev. 25:39, 40). When the prophet necessary articles of furniture (viz., bed, table, learned, on inquiry that she had nothing in her seat, and lamp), that he might always turn in at ,סּוְך from ,אָ סּוְך) house but a small flask of oil is either a walled upper עֲלִ יַת־קִ יר .their house means an anointing flask, a small vessel for the chamber, i.e., one built with brick and not with oil necessary for anointing the body), he told wooden walls (Cler., Then.), or an upper her to beg of all her neighbours empty vessels, chamber built upon the wall of the house (Ges.).

2 KINGS Page 18 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 Kings 4:11–13. After some time, when Elisha revelation of the omnipotence of the Lord, who had spent the night in the chamber provided for works through the medium of His prophets. him, he wanted to make some acknowledgment When the child presented to her by God had to his hostess for the love which she had shown grown up into a lad, he complained one day to him, and told his servant to call her, and the reapers of the field of a violent headache, say to her: “Thou hast taken all this care for us, saying to his father, “My head, my head!” He what shall I do to thee? Hast thou (anything) to was then taken home to his mother, and died at say to the king or the chief captain?” i.e., hast noon upon her knees, no doubt from thou any wish that I could convey to them, and inflammation of the brain produced by a intercede for thee? There is something striking sunstroke. here in the fact that Elisha did not address the 2 Kings 4:21–23. The mother took the dead woman himself, as she was standing before child at once up to the chamber built for Elisha, him, but told her servant to announce to her his laid it upon the bed of the man of God, and shut willingness to make some return for what she the door behind her; she then asked her had done. This was, probably, simply from a husband, without telling him of the death of the regard to the great awe which she had of the boy, to send a young man with a she-ass, that “holy man of God” (v. 9), and to inspire her with she might ride as quickly as possible to the man courage to give expression to the wishes of her of God; and when her husband asked her, heart.9 She answered: “I dwell among my “Wherefore wilt thou go to him to-day, since it people,” i.e., not, I merely belong to the people is neither new moon nor Sabbath?”10 she (Thenius), but, I live quietly and peaceably replied, shalom; i.e., either “it is all well,” or among my countrymen, so that I have no need “never mind.” For this word, which is used in for any intercession with the king and great reply to a question after one’s health (see v. 26), men of the kingdom. Α ύνῃ χ ὼ κ ὶ is apparently also used, as Clericus has ἰ ηνικῶ διά ω κ ὶ ό τιν φι βήτη ιν ὐκ correctly observed, when the object is to avoid νέχ ι (Theodoret). giving a definite answer to any one, and yet at 2 Kings 4:14–16. When Elisha conversed with the same time to satisfy him. Gehazi still further on the matter, the latter 2 Kings 4:24, 25. She then rode without said: “But she has no son, and her husband is stopping, upon the animal driven by the young אַ ל־ֹּתַעֲצָ ר־לִ י .old.” Elisha then had her called again, and told man, to Elisha at her when she had entered the door: “At this , literally, do not hinder me from riding. לִרְּׂ כֹּב lit., at the time ,כָ עֵת חַ יָ ה) time a year hence when it revives again; see at Gen. 18:10) thou 2 Kings 4:25–27. When the prophet saw her from the opposite), that is to say, saw her) מִ נֶגֶד wilt embrace a son.” The same favour was to be granted to the Shunammite as that which Sarah coming in the distance, and recognised her as had received in her old age, that she might learn the Shunammite, he sent Gehazi to meet her, to that the God of Abraham still ruled in and for ask her about her own health and that of her Israel. She replied: “No, my lord, thou man of husband and child. She answered, shalom, i.e., I do not excite in thy servant any well, that she might not be detained by any ,אַ ל־ֹּתְּׂ כַזֵ ב ”,God deceptive hopes. further discussion, and came to the prophet and 2 Kings 4:17. But however incredible this embraced his feet, to pray for the help of the promise might appear to her, as it had formerly “holy man of God.” Gehazi wanted to thrust her done to Sarah (Gen. 18:12, 13), it was fulfilled away, “because it seemed to him an immodest at the appointed time (cf. Gen. 21:2). importunity to wish to urge the prophet in such a way as this, and as it were to compel him” 2 Kings 4:18–20. But even the faith of the (Seb. Schm.); but the prophet said, “Let her pious woman was soon to be put to the test, and to be confirmed by a still more glorious

2 KINGS Page 19 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study alone, for her soul is troubled, and Jehovah has from the measures adopted by Elisha; for she hidden it from me and has not told me.”11 swears most solemnly that she will not leave 2 Kings 4:28. The pious woman then uttered him. But the question arises, whether this this complaint to the prophet: “Did I ask a son urging of the prophet to come himself and help of the Lord? Did I not say, Do not deceive me?” arose from doubt as to the result of Gehazi’s What had happened to her she did not say,—a mission, or whether it was not rather an fact which may easily be explained on involuntary utterance of her excessive grief, psychological grounds from her deep sorrow,— and of the warmest wish of her maternal heart but Elisha could not fail to discover it from to see her beloved child recalled to life. We may what she said. probably infer the latter from the fulfilment of her request by Elisha. 2 Kings 4:29. He therefore directed his servant Gehazi: “Gird thy loins and take thy staff in thy 2 Kings 4:31. Gehazi did as he was hand and go: if thou meet any one, thou wilt not commanded, but the dead child did not come to salute him; and if any one salute thee, thou wilt life again; the prophet’s staff worked no not answer him; and lay my staff upon the face miracle. “There was no sound and no of the boy.” The object of this command neither attention,” i.e., the dead one gave no sign of life. both here אֵ ין קול וְּׂאֵ ין קֶשֶ ב to salute nor to return salutations by the way, This is the meaning of was not merely to ensure the greatest haste and 1 Kings 18:29, where it is used of dead (Thenius and many others), inasmuch as the idols. The attempt of Gehazi to awaken the child people of the East lose a great deal of time in was unsuccessful, not propter fidem ipsi a prolonged salutations (Niebuhr, Beschr. v. Arab. muliere non adhibitam (Seb. Schm.), nor p. 48),12 but the prophet wished thereby to because of the vainglory of Gehazi himself, but preclude at the very outset the possibility of simply to promote in the godly of Israel true attributing the failure of Gehazi’s attempt to faith in the Lord. awaken the child to any external or accidental 2 Kings 4:32–35. Elisha then entered the circumstance of this kind. For since it is house, where the boy was lying dead upon his inconceivable that the prophet should have bed, and shut the door behind them both (i.e., adopted a wrong method, that is to say, should himself and the dead child), and prayed to the have sent Gehazi with the hope that he would Lord. He then lay down upon the boy, so that restore the dead boy to life, his only intention in his mouth, his eyes, and his hands lay upon the sending the servant must have been to give to mouth, eyes, and hands of the child, bowing the Shunammite and her family, and possibly see at 1 Kings 18:42); and ;גָהַ ר) down over him also to Gehazi himself, a practical proof that the power to work miracles was not connected in the flesh (the body) of the child became warm. any magical way with his person or his staff, He then turned round, i.e., turned away from but that miracles as works of divine the boy, went once up and down in the room, omnipotence could only be wrought through and bowed himself over him again; whereupon faith and prayer; not indeed with the secondary the boy sneezed seven times, and then opened intention of showing that he alone could work his eyes. This raising of the dead boy to life miracles, and so of increasing his own does indeed resemble the raising of the dead by importance (Köster), but to purify the faith of Elijah (1 Kings 17:20ff.); but it differs so the godly from erroneous ideas, and elevate obviously in the manner in which it was them from superstitious reliance upon his own effected, that we may see at once from this that human person to true reliance upon the Lord Elisha did not possess the double measure of God. the spirit of Elijah. It is true that Elijah stretched himself three times upon the dead 2 Kings 4:30. The mother of the boy does not child, but at his prayer the dead returned appear, indeed, to have anticipated any result immediately to life, whereas in the case of

2 KINGS Page 20 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Elisha the restoration to life was a gradual according to Oken, a green fleshy fruit of almost thing.13 And they both differ essentially from a finger’s length and an inch thick, which crack the raising of the dead by Christ, who recalled with a loud noise, when quite ripe, and very the dead to life by one word of His omnipotence gentle pressure, spirting out both juice and (Mark 5:39–42; :13–15; John 11:43, 44), seeds, and have a very bitter taste. The reason a sign that He was the only-begotten Son of for this decision is, that the peculiarity ,to split ,פָקַ ֹע God, to whom the Father gave to have life in mentioned answers to the etymon Himself, even as the Father has life in Himself in Syr. and Chald. to crack. Nevertheless the (John 5:25ff.), in whose name the Apostle Peter rendering given by the old translators is also was able through prayer to recall the dead apparently the more correct of the two; for the Tabitha to life, whereas Elisha and Elijah had colocynths also belong to the genus of the only to prophesy by word and deed of the cucumbers, creep upon the ground, and are a future revelation of the glory of God. round yellow fruit of the size of a large orange, 2 Kings 4:36, 37. After the restoration of the and moreover are extremely bitter, producing boy to life, Elisha had his mother called and colic, and affecting the nerves. The form of this gave her back her son, for which she fell at his fruit is far more suitable for oval architectural Kings 6:18; 7:24) than that 1 ,פְּׂקָ עִ ים) feet with thanksgiving. ornaments 2 Kings 4:38–41. Elisha Makes Uneatable Food of the wild cucumber. Wholesome.—V. 38. When Elisha had returned 2 Kings 4:40. The extremely bitter flavour of to Gilgal, the seat of a school of the prophets the fruit so alarmed the pupils of the prophets (see at 2 Kings 2:1), i.e., had come thither once when they began to eat of the dish, that they more on his yearly circuit, during the famine cried out, “Death in the pot,” and therefore which prevailed in the land (see at 2 Kings 8:1), thought the fruit was poison. If eaten in any and the prophets’ scholars sat before him (the large quantity, colocynths might really produce teacher and master), he directed his servant death: vid., Dioscorid. iv. 175 (178). (i.e., probably not Gehazi, but the pupil who waited upon him) to put the large pot to the fire 2 Kings 4:41. Elisha then had some meal and boil a dish for the pupils of the prophets. brought and poured it into the pot, after which the people were able to eat of the dish, and answers to the German beisetzen, which is שָ ֹפַ ת there was no longer anything injurious in the used for placing a vessel upon the fire (cf. Ezek. denoting sequence in ּו ,then take ,ּוקְּׂ חּו .pot 24:3). thought (vid., Ewald, § 348, a.). The meal might 2 Kings 4:39. One (of these pupils) then went somewhat modify the bitterness and injurious olera: for qualities of the vegetable, but could not take ,אֹּרֹּת) to the field to gather vegetables the different explanations of this word see them entirely away; the author of the Exegetical Celsii Hierobot. i. 459ff., and Ges. Thes. p. 56), Handbook therefore endeavours to get rid of i.e., not wild vines, but wild the miracle, by observing that Elisha may have ,גֶֹפֶן שָדֶ ה and found creepers (Luther), field-creepers resembling added something else. The meal, the most vines; and having gathered his lap full of wild wholesome food of man, was only the earthly cucumbers, took them home and cut them into substratum for the working of the Spirit, which the vegetable pot. because they did not know proceeded from Elisha, and made the noxious .is rendered in the ancient versions food perfectly wholesome פַקֻ ֹעֹּת .them colocynths (LXX λ ὴ , i.e., according to 2 Kings 4:42–44. Feeding of a Hundred Pupils Suid., Colocynthis), whereas Gesenius (Thes. p. of the Prophets with Twenty Barley Loaves.—A 1122), Winer, and others, follow Celsius (l.c. i. man of Baal-Shalisha (a place in the land of 393ff.), have decided in favour of wild Shalisha, the country to the west of Gilgal, cucumbers, a fruit resembling an acorn, or, Jiljilia; see at 1 Sam. 9:4) brought the prophet as

2 KINGS Page 21 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Kings 5 2 גֶרֶ ש = כַרְּׂ מֶ ל first-fruits twenty barley loaves and i.e., roasted ears of corn (see the Comm. Curing of the Leprosy of Naaman the Syrian, and ,כַרְּׂ מֶ ל .ἁ . λ ., sack or Punishment of Gehazi ,צִקְּׂ לון) on Lev. 2:14), in his sack pocket). Elisha ordered this present to be given 2 Kings 5:1–19. Curing of Naaman from to the people, i.e., to the pupils of the prophets Leprosy.—V. 1. Naaman, the commander-in- who dwelt in one common home, for them to chief of the Syrian king, who was a very great eat; and when his servant made this objection: man before his lord, i.e., who held a high place “How shall I set this (this little) before a in the service of his king and was greatly hundred men?” he repeated his command, ,(cf. Isa. 3:3; 9:14 ,נְּׂשֻ א ֹפָ נִים) distinguished “Give it to the people, that they may eat; for thus hath the Lord spoken: They will eat and because God had given the Syrians salvation (victory) through him, was as a warrior ,infin. absol.; see Ewald, § 328 ,אָ כול וְּׂ הותֵ ר) ”leave has not dropped out ו afflicted with leprosy. The a.); which actually was the case. That twenty nor has the copula been omitted ,מְּׂ צֹּרָ ֹע barley loaves and a portion of roasted grains of before corn were not a sufficient quantity to satisfy a for the purpose of sharpening the antithesis hundred men, is evident from the fact that one (Thenius), for the appeal to Ewald, § 354, a., man was able to carry the whole of this gift in a proves nothing, since the passages quoted there is a גִ בור חַ יִל sack, and still more so from the remark of the are of a totally different kind; but servant, which shows that there was no second predicate: the man was as a brave proportion between the whole of this quantity warrior leprous. There is an allusion here to the and the food required by a hundred persons. In difference between the Syrians and the this respect the food, which was so blessed by Israelites in their views of leprosy. Whereas in the word of the Lord that a hundred men were Israel lepers were excluded from human society satisfied by so small a quantity and left some (see at Lev. 13 and 14), in Syria a man afflicted over, forms a type of the miraculous feeding of with leprosy could hold a very high state-office the people by Christ (Matt. 14:16ff., 15:36, 37; in the closest association with the king. John 6:11, 12); though there was this distinction between them, that the prophet 2 Kings 5:2, 3. And in Naaman’s house before Elisha did not produce the miraculous increase his wife, i.e., in her service, there was an of the food, but merely predicted it. The object, Israelitish maiden, whom the Syrians had יָצְּׂ אּו ) therefore, in communicating this account is not carried off in a marauding expedition they had gone out in (as) marauding :גְּׂדּודִ ים to relate another miracle of Elisha, but to show how the Lord cared for His servants, and bands). She said to her mistress: “O that my assigned to them that which had been lord were before the prophet at Samaria! appropriated in the law to the Levitical priests, (where Elisha had a house, 2 Kings 6:32), he who were to receive, according to Deut. 18:4, 5, to ,אָסַף מִצָרַ עַ ת ”.would free him from his leprosy and Num. 18:13, the first-fruits of corn, new wine, and oil. This account therefore furnishes receive (again) from leprosy, in the sense of “to fresh evidence that the godly men in Israel did heal,” may be explained from Num. 12:14, 15, is applied to the reception of Miriam אָסַ ף not regard the worship introduced by Jeroboam where (his state-church) as legitimate worship, but into the camp again, from which she had been sought and found in the schools of the prophets excluded on account of her leprosy. a substitute for the lawful worship of God (vid., 2 Kings 5:4, 5. When Naaman related this to Hengstenberg, Beitrr. ii. S. 136f.). his lord (the king), he told him to go to Samaria furnished with a letter to the king of Israel; and he took with him rich presents as compensation

2 KINGS Page 22 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study for the cure he was to receive, viz., ten talents of putrefaction. The reason why Elisha did not go silver, about 25,000 thalers (£3750—Tr.); 600 out to Naaman himself, is not to be sought for in shekels (= two talents) of gold, about 50,000 the legal prohibition of intercourse with lepers, thalers (£7500); and ten changes of clothes, a as Ephraem Syrus and many others suppose, present still highly valued in the East (see the nor in his fear of the leper, as Thenius thinks, Comm. on Gen. 45:22). This very large present nor even in the wish to magnify the miracle in was quite in keeping with Naaman’s position, the eyes of Naaman, as C. a Lapide imagines, but and was not too great for the object in view, simply in Naaman’s state of mind. This is namely, his deliverance from a malady which evident from his exclamation concerning the would be certainly, even if slowly, fatal. way in which he was treated. Enraged at his 2 Kings 5:6, 7. When the king of Israel (Joram) treatment, he said to his servant (vv. 11, 12): “I received the letter of the Syrian king on thought, he will come out to me and stand and Naaman’s arrival, and read therein that he was call upon the name of Jehovah his God, and go and with his hand over the place (i.e., move his hand ,וְּׂעַֹּתָ ה) to cure Naaman of his leprosy to and fro over the diseased places), and take now,—showing in the letter the transition to away the leprosy.” , the leprous = the הַמְּׂ צורָ ֹע the main point, which is the only thing communicated here; cf. Ewald, § 353, b.), he disease of leprosy, the scabs and ulcers of rent his clothes in alarm, and exclaimed, “Am I leprosy. “Are not Abana and Pharpar, the rivers God, to be able to kill and make alive?” i.e., am I of , better than all the waters of ,נַהֲ רות with טוב omnipotent like God? (cf. Deut. 32:39; 1 Sam. Israel? (for the combination of 2:6); “for he sends to me to cure a man of his see Ewald, § 174f.) Should I not bathe in them, so and become clean?” With these words he“ ,וַאֲסַֹפְּׂ ֹּתו leprosy.” The words of the letter cure him,” were certainly not so insolent in turned back, going away in a rage. Naaman had their meaning as Joram supposed, but simply been greatly strengthened in the pride, which is meant: have him cured, as thou hast a wonder- innate in every natural man, by the exalted working prophet; the Syrian king imagining, position which he held in the state, and in according to his heathen notions of priests and which every one bowed before him, and served goëtes, that Joram could do what he liked with him in the most reverential manner, with the his prophets and their miraculous powers. exception of his lord the king; and he was There was no ground, therefore, for the therefore to receive a salutary lesson of suspicion which Joram expressed: “for only humiliation, and at the same time was also to observe and see, that he seeks occasion against learn that he owed his cure not to any magic to seek occasion, sc. for a quarrel touch from the prophet, but solely to the power הִתְּׂאַ נֶ ה ”.me of God working through him.—Of the two rivers (cf. Judg. 14:4). of Damascus, Abana or Amana (the reading of ב Kings 5:8. When Elisha heard of this, he the Keri with the interchange of the labials 2 reproved the king for his unbelieving alarm, see Song of Sol. 4:8) is no doubt the ,ם and told him to send the man to him, “that he and may learn that there is a prophet in Israel.” present Barada or Barady (Arab. brdâ, i.e., the 2 Kings 5:9, 10. When Naaman stopped with cold river), the Chrysorrhoas (Strabo, xvi. p. his horses and chariot before the house of 755; Plin. h. n. 18 or 16), which rises in the Elisha, the prophet sent a messenger out to him table-land to the south of Zebedany, and flows to say, “Go and wash thyself seven times in the through this city itself, and then dividing into Jordan, and thy flesh will return to thee, i.e., two arms, enters two small lakes about 4 3/4 hours to the east of the city. The Pharpar is ,יָשֹּב ”.become sound, and thou wilt be clean probably the only other independent river of return, inasmuch as the flesh had been changed any importance in the district of Damascus, through the leprosy into festering matter and namely, the Avaj, which arises from the union of

2 KINGS Page 23 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

and“ ,וָ לֹּא :several brooks around Sa’sa’, and flows through 2 Kings 5:17, 18. Then Naaman said the plain to the south of Damascus into the lake not” = and if not, κ ὶ ἰ ή (LXX; not “and O,” Heijâny (see Rob. Bibl. Researches, p. 444). The according to Ewald, § 358, b., Anm.), “let there water of the Barada is beautiful, clear and be given to thy servant (= to me) two mules’ transparent (Rob.), whereas the water of the burden of earth (on the construction see Ewald, Jordan is turbid, “of a clayey colour” (Rob. Pal. § 287, h.), for thy servant will no more make ii. p. 256); and therefore Naaman might very (offer) burnt-offerings and slain-offerings to naturally think that his own native rivers were any other gods than Jehovah. May Jehovah better than the Jordan. forgive thy servant in this thing, when my lord 2 Kings 5:13. His servants then addressed him (the king of Syria) goeth into the house of in a friendly manner, and said, “My father, if the Rimmon, to fall down (worship) there, and he prophet had said to thee a great thing (i.e., a supports himself upon my hand, that I fall down thing difficult to carry out), shouldst thou not (with him) in the house of Rimmon; if I (thus) have done it? how much more then, since he fall down in the house of Rimmon, may,” etc. It has said to thee, Wash, and thou wilt be clean?” is very evident from Naaman’s explanation, “for my father, is a confidential expression thy servant,” etc., that he wanted to take a load ,אָבִ י arising from childlike piety, as in 2 Kings 6:21 of earth with him out of the land of Israel, that and 1 Sam. 24:12; and the etymological jugglery he might be able to offer sacrifice upon it to the Ewald, Gr. § God of Israel, because he was still a slave to the) לּו = לָוִ י = לָבִ י from אָבִ י which traces polytheistic superstition, that no god could be Thenius), is quite worshipped in a proper and acceptable manner) אִ ם Anm.), or from ,358 superfluous (see Delitzsch on Job, vol. ii. p. 265, except in his own land, or upon an altar built of is a conditional clause the earth of his own land. And because דִבֶ ר … דָבָ ר גָדול—.(.transl see Ewald, § 357, b.), and the object Naaman’s knowledge of God was still) אִ ם without adulterated with superstition, he was not yet is placed first for the sake of emphasis prepared to make an unreserved confession how much before men of his faith in Jehovah as the only ,אַ ף כִ י .(.according to Ewald, § 309, a) more (see Ewald, § 354, c.), sc. shouldst thou do true God, but hoped that Jehovah would forgive what is required, since he has ordered thee so him if he still continued to join outwardly in the small and easy a thing. worship of idols, so far as his official duty 2 Kings 5:14. Naaman then went down (from required. Rimmon (i.e., the pomegranate) is Samaria to the Jordan) and dipped in Jordan here, and probably also in the local name as Hadad-rimmon (Zech. 12:11), the name of the יָשֹּב) seven times, and his flesh became sound supreme deity of the Damascene Syrians, and in v. 10) like the flesh of a little boy. Seven times, probably only a contracted form of Hadad- to show that the healing was a work of God, for rimmon, since Hadad was the supreme deity or seven is the stamp of the works of God. sun-god of the Syrians (see at 2 Sam. 8:3), 2 Kings 5:15, 16. After the cure had been signifying the sun-god with the modification effected, he returned with all his train to the expressed by Rimmon, which has been man of God with this acknowledgment: differently interpreted according to the “Behold, I have found that there is no God in all supposed derivation of the word. Some derive the earth except in Israel,” and with the request as the supreme god of ,רּום = רָ מַ ם the name from that he would accept a blessing (a present, heaven, like the Ελι ῦν of Sanchun. (Cler., Seld., as in Gen. 33:11, 1 Sam. 25:27, etc.) from ,בְּׂרָ כָ ה a ,רִ מון Ges. thes. p. 1292); others from him, which the prophet, however, stedfastly refused, notwithstanding all his urging, that he pomegranate, as a faecundantis, since the might avoid all appearance of selfishness, by pomegranate with its abundance of seeds is which the false prophets were actuated. used in the symbolism of both Oriental and

2 KINGS Page 24 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Greek mythology along with the Phallus as a from his chariot in reverential gratitude to the as in Gen. 24:64), he asked in the יִפֹּל) symbol of the generative power (vid., Bähr, prophet Symbolik, ii. pp. 122, 123), and is also found name of Elisha for a talent of silver and two upon Assyrian monuments (vid., Layard, changes of raiment, professedly for two poor and its Remains, p. 343); others again, pupils of the prophets, who had come to the .jaculari, as the prophet from Mount Ephraim ,רָ מָ ה with less probability, from sun-god who vivifies and fertilizes the earth 2 Kings 5:23. But Naaman forced him to accept be pleased to take; and ,הואֵ ל קַ ח) with his rays, like the ἑκηβόλ Ά όλλων; and two talents Arab. rmm, computruit, as the = רָ מַ ם others from with the dual ending, ne pereat indicium ,כִכָרַ יִם dying winter sun (according to Movers and numeri—Winer) in two purses, and two Hitzig; see Leyrer in Herzog’s Cyclopaedia).— changes of raiment, and out of politeness had The words “and he supports himself upon my these presents carried by two of his servants hand” are not to be understood literally, but are before Gehazi. a general expressly denoting the service which Naaman had to render as the aide-de-camp to 2 Kings 5:24. When Gehazi came to the hill the well-known hill before the city) he ,הָ ֹעֹֹּפֶ ל) his king (cf. 2 Kings 7:2, 17). For the Chaldaic see Ewald, § 156, a.—In the took the presents from the bearers, and ,הִשְֹּּׂתַחֲ וָיָתִ י form repetition of the words “if I fall down in the dismissing the men, laid them up in the house. .to bring into safe custody ,פָקַ דבְּׂ temple of Rimmon,” etc., he expresses the urgency of his wish. 2 Kings 5:25, 26. But when he entered his 2 Kings 5:19. Elisha answered, “Go in peace,” master’s presence again, he asked him, wishing the departing Syrian the peace of God “Whence (comest thou), Gehazi?” and on his upon the road, without thereby either returning the lying answer that he had not been approving or disapproving the religious anywhere, charged him with all that he had had not my heart gone, when“ ,לֹּא ילִבִ הָ לַ ְך .conviction which he had expressed. For as done Naaman had not asked permission to go with the man turned from his chariot to meet thee?” his king into the temple of Rimmon, but had This is the simplest and the only correct simply said, might Jehovah forgive him or be interpretation of these difficult words, which indulgent with him in this matter, Elisha could have been explained in very different ways. do nothing more, without a special command Theodoret ( ὐχὶ ἡ κ δ ἦ τὰ ῦ) and from God, than commend the heathen, who had the Vulgate (nonne cor meum in praesenti erat, been brought to belief in the God of Israel as the quando, etc.) have already given the same true God by the miraculous cure of his leprosy, explanation, and so far as the sense is to the further guidance of the Lord and of His concerned it agrees with that adopted by grace.14 Thenius: was I not (in spirit) away (from here) stands in a distinct הָ לַ ְך ?(Kings 5:20–27. Punishment of Gehazi.—Vv. and present (there 2 20–22. When Naaman had gone a stretch of the is it“ :הַעֵ ת וגו׳—.of Gehazi לֹּא הָ לַ ְך relation to the v. 19; see at Gen. 35:16), there ,כִבְּׂרַ ת אֶרֶ ץ) way time to take silver, and clothes, and olive-trees, arose in Gehazi, the servant of Elisha, the desire and vineyards, and sheep and oxen, and for a portion of the presents of the Syrian which servants and maidens?” i.e., is this the time, his master had refused ( , as truly as when so many hypocrites pretend to be חַ י יי׳ כִי אִ ם prophets from selfishness and avarice, and כִי אִ ם ;Jehovah liveth, assuredly I run after him as in 1 Sam. 25:34). He therefore hastened after bring the prophetic office into contempt with him; and as Naaman no sooner saw Gehazi unbelievers, for a servant of the true God to running after him than he sprang quickly down take money and goods from a non-Israelite for

2 KINGS Page 25 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study that which God has done through him, that he ever have been thought of from either of these may acquire property and luxury for himself? localities. 2 Kings 5:27. “And let the leprosy of Naaman 2 Kings 6:5. In the felling of the beams, the cleave to thee and to thy seed for ever.” This iron, i.e., the axe, of one of the pupils of the punishment took effect immediately. Gehazi prophets fell into the water, at which he went out from Elisha covered with leprosy as if exclaimed with lamentation: “Alas, my lord (i.e., with snow (cf. ex. 4:6, Num. 12:10). It was not Elisha), and it was begged!” The sorrowful too harsh a punishment that the leprosy taken exclamation implied a petition for help. and as for the iron, it fell into the“ :וְּׂאֶ ת־הַבַ רְּׂ זֶל from Naaman on account of his faith in the living God, should pass to Gehazi on account of does not stand אֵ ת water;” so that even here his departure from the true God. For it was not his avarice only that was to be punished, but before the nominative, but serves to place the the abuse of the prophet’s name for the noun in subjection to the clause (cf. Ewald, § does not mean borrowed, but שָ אּול .(.purpose of carrying out his selfish purpose, and 277, a his misrepresentation of the prophet.15 begged. The meaning to borrow is attributed to from a misinterpretation of particular שָאַ ל Kings 6 2 passages (see the Comm. on Ex. 3:22). The The Floating Iron. The Syrians Smitten with prophets’ pupil had begged the axe, because Blindness. from his poverty he was unable to buy one, and hence the loss was so painful to him. 2 Kings 6:1–7. Elisha Causes an Iron Axe to Float.—The following account gives us an 2 Kings 6:6, 7. When he showed Elisha, in insight into the straitened life of the pupils of answer to his inquiry, the place where it had the prophets. Vv. 1–4. As the common dwelling- fallen, the latter cut off a stick and threw it place had become too small for them, they thither (into the water) and made the iron flow, ;(to flow, as in Deut. 11:4 ,צּוף from יָצֶ ף) resolved, with Elisha’s consent, to build a new i.e., float house, and went, accompanied by the prophet, whereupon the prophets’ pupil picked the axe to the woody bank of the Jordan to fell the out of the water with his hand. The object of the wood that was required for the building. The miracle was similar to that of the stater in the place where the common abode had become fish’s mouth (Matt. 17:27), or of the miraculous too small is not given, but most of the feeding, namely, to show how the Lord could commentators suppose it to have been Gilgal, relieve earthly want through the medium of His chiefly from the erroneous assumption that the prophet. The natural interpretation of the Gilgal mentioned in 2 Kings 2:1 was in the miracle, which is repeated by Thenius, namely, Jordan valley to the east of Jericho. Thenius that “Elisha struck the eye of the axe with the only cites in support of this the reference in long stick which he thrust into the river, so that dwell with thee) to 2 Kings 4:38; the iron was lifted by the wood,” needs no) יֹּשְּׂ בִ ים לִֹפָ נֶיָך but this decides nothing, as the pupils of the refutation, since the raising of an iron axe by a prophets sat before Elisha, or gathered together long stick, so as to make it float in the water, is around their master in a common home, not impossible according to the laws of gravitation. merely in Gilgal, but also in Bethel and Jericho. 2 Kings 6:8–23. Elisha’s Action in the War with We might rather think of Jericho, since Bethel the Syrians.—Vv. 8–10. In a war which the and Gilgal (Jiljilia) were so far distant from the Syrians carried on against the Israelitish king Jordan, that there is very little probability that a Joram (not Jehoahaz, as Ewald, Gesch. iii. p. 557, removal of the meeting-place to the Jordan, erroneously supposes), by sending flying would parties into the land of Israel (cf. v. 23), Elisha ,נַעֲשֶ ה־לָנּו שָ ם מָ קום such as is indicated by repeatedly informed king Joram of the place where the Syrians had determined to encamp,

2 KINGS Page 26 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

, רמֵאֲשֶ לָ נּו = מִשֶ לָ נּו .and thereby frustrated the plans of the enemy. of Israel?” i.e., takes his part at the place of so and so shall probably according to an Aramaean dialect: see“ :ֹּתַחֲ נֹּתִ י … אֶל־מְּׂ קום as in 1 Sam. 21:3 (see at Ewald, § 181, b., though he pronounces the פְּׂ ֹלנִי אַ לְּׂ מֹּנִי ”.my camp be but ,מִכֻלָ נּו the encamping or the place of reading incorrect, and would read ,ֹּתַחֲ נות .(Ruth 4:1 encampment (cf. Ewald, § 161, a.), is quite without any ground and quite unsuitably, as the appropriate, so that there is no need either for king would thereby reckon himself among the traitors. ye shall hide“ ,ֹּתֵחָבְּׂ אּו the alteration into 2 Kings 6:12ff. Then one of the servants yourselves” (Then.), or into , with the answered, “No, my lord king,” i.e., it is not we ֹּתַ נְּׂ חֹּתּו meaning which is arbitrarily postulated, “ye who disclose thy plans to the king of Israel, “but shall place an ambush” (Ewald, Gesch. iii. p. Elisha the prophet tells him what thou sayest in 558), or for the much simpler alteration into thy bed-chamber;” whereupon the king of Syria pitch the camp for me” (Böttcher). The inquired where the prophet lived, and sent a“ ,ֹּתַחֲ נּו לִ י refers to the king as powerful army to Dothan, with horses and ֹּתַחֲ נֹּתִ י singular suffix in chariots, to take him prisoner there. Dothan leader of the war: “my camp” = the camp of my (see Gen. 37:17), which according to the Onom. army. “Beware of passing over ( ) this place,” was twelve Roman miles to the north of עֲ בֹּר i.e., of leaving it unoccupied, “for there have the Samaria, has been preserved under its old name Syrians determined to make their invasion.” in a Tell covered with ruins to the south-west of going down, with dagesh Jenin, on the caravan-road from Gilead to Egypt ,נָחֵ ת from ,נְּׂחִֹּתִ ים euphon., whereas Ewald (§ 187, b.) is of opinion (see Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 158, and V. de Velde, .(instead of being an intrans. part. Kal, Journey, i. pp. 273, 274 ,נְּׂחִֹּתִ ים that which would 2 Kings 6:15–17. When Elisha’s servant went ,חַ ת might rather be a part. Niph. of out the next morning and saw the army, which not yield, however, any suitable meaning. had surrounded the town in the night, he said to pass by this place,” to the prophet, “Alas, my lord, how shall we“ ,מֵעֲ בֹּר Thenius renders which would be grammatically admissible, but do?” But Elisha quieted him, saying, “Fear not, is connected with his conjecture concerning for those with us are more than those with and irreconcilable with v. 10. When the them.” He then prayed that the Lord might open ,ֹּתַחֲ נֹּתִ י king of Israel, according to v. 10, sent to the his servant’s eyes, whereupon he saw the place indicated on account of Elisha’s mountain upon which Dothan stood full of fiery information, he can only have sent troops to horses and chariots round about Elisha. occupy it; so that when the Syrians arrived they Opening the eyes was translation into the found Israelitish troops there, and were unable ecstatic state of clairvoyance, in which an to attack the place. There is nothing in the text insight into the invisible spirit-world was about the Syrians bursting forth from their granted him. The fiery horses and chariots were ,means to enlighten, instruct, but symbols of the protecting powers of Heaven הִ זְּׂהִ יר .ambush which surrounded the prophet. The fiery form he took care there,” i.e., indicated the super-terrestrial origin of this“ ,נִשְּׂמַ ר־שָ ם .not to warn he occupied the place with troops, to defend it host. Fire, as the most ethereal of all earthly against the Syrians, so that they were unable to elements, was the most appropriate substratum do anything, “not once and not twice,” i.e., for making the spirit-world visible. The sight several times. was based upon Jacob’s vision (Gen. 32:2), in 2 Kings 6:11. The king of the Syrians was which he saw a double army of angels enraged at this, and said to his servants, “Do ye encamped around him, at the time when he was not show me who of our men (leans) to the king threatened with danger from Esau.

2 KINGS Page 27 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 Kings 6:18–20. When the enemy came down frustrated if the Syrians had been slain. For the to Elisha, he prayed to the Lord that He would intention was to show the Syrians that they had smite them with blindness; and when this took to do with a prophet of the true God, against place according to his word, he said to them, whom no human power could be of any avail, This is not the way and this is not the city; that they might learn to fear the almighty God. follow me, and I will lead you to the man whom Even when regarded from a political point of ye are seeking; and led them to Samaria, which view, the prophet’s advice was more likely to was about four hours’ distance from Dothan, ensure peace than the king’s proposal, as the where their eyes were opened at Elisha’s result of v. 23 clearly shows. The Syrians did prayer, so that they saw where they had been not venture any more to invade the land of cannot be understood as referring Israel with flying parties, from fear of the וַיֵרְּׂ דּו אֵ לָ יו .led to Elisha and his servant, who went down to the obvious protection of Israel by its God; though Syrian army, as J. H. Mich., Budd., F. v. Meyer, this did not preclude a regular war, like that see the אָבִ י related in the following account. For ,אֲ לֵיהֶ ם into אֵ לָ יו and Thenius, who wants to alter art thou“ :הַאֲשֶר שָ בִ יתָ וגו׳ .suppose, but must refer to the Syrians, who Comm. on 2 Kings 5:13 went down to the prophet, as is evident from accustomed to slay that which thou hast taken what followed. For the assumption that the captive with sword and bow?” i.e., since thou Syrians had stationed themselves below and dost not even slay those whom thou hast made round the mountain on which Dothan stood, prisoners in open battle, how wouldst thou he ,יִכְּׂרֶ ה לָהֶ ם כֵרָ ה ?and therefore would have had to come up to venture to put these to death Elisha, need not occasion an unnatural is a denom. from כָרָ ה .prepared them a meal interpretation of the words. It is true that a meal, so called from the union of several ,כֵרָ ה Dothan stands upon an isolated hill in the midst of the plain; but on the eastern side it is persons, like coena from κ ινή (vid., Dietr. on .(כרה .enclosed by a ranger of hills, which project into Ges. Lex. s. v the plain (see V. de Velde, R. i. p. 273). The Syrians who had been sent against Elisha had Elisha’s Action During a Famine in Samaria. posted themselves on this range of hills, and 2 Kings 6:24–33. After this there arose so thence they came down towards the town of fearful a famine in Samaria on the occasion of a Dothan, which stood on the hill, whilst Elisha siege by Benhadad, that one mother went out of the town to meet them. It is true complained to the king of another, because she that Elisha’s going out is not expressly would not keep her agreement to give up her mentioned, but in v. 19 it is clearly son to be eaten, as she herself had already done. is mental blindness here, as סַ נְּׂוֵרִ ים .presupposed 2 Kings 6:25. The famine became great—till an in the similar case mentioned in Gen. 19:11, ass’s head was worth eighty shekels of silver, that is to say, a state of blindness in which, and a quarter of a cab of dove’s dung was worth though a man has eyes that can see, he does not five shekels. , to become for = to be worth. הָ יָהבְּׂ ,see correctly. Elisha’s untruthful statement “this is not the way,” etc., is to be judged in the The ass was an unclean animal, so that it was same manner as every other ruse de guerre, by not lawful to eat its flesh. Moreover the head of which the enemy is deceived. an ass is the most inedible part of the animal. Eighty shekels were about seventy thalers (£10, 2 Kings 6:21–23. Elisha forbade king Joram to 10s.—Tr.), or if the Mosaic bekas were called slay the enemy that he had brought to him, shekels in ordinary life, thirty-five thalers (£5, because he had not taken them prisoners in 5s.; see Bertheau, Zur Gesch. der Isr. p. 49). war, and recommended him to treat them According to Thenius, a quarter of a cab is a hospitably and then let them return to their sixth of a small Dresden measure (Mässchen), lord. The object of the miracle would have been

2 KINGS Page 28 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study not quite ten Parisian cubic inches. Five sign of humiliation before God, though it was shekels: more than four thalers (twelve indeed more an opus operatum than a true shillings), or more than two thalers (six bending of the heart before God and His .judgment. This is proved by his conduct in v חָרֵ י is to be read חרייונים shillings). The Chethîb 31. When, for example, the complaint of the excrementa columbarum, for which the ,יונִים woman brought the heart-breaking distress of fluxus, the city before him, he exclaimed, “God do so to ,דִ יב יונִים Keri substitutes the euphemistic profluvium columbarum. The expression may be me … if the head of Elisha remain upon him to- taken literally, since dung has been known to be day.” Elisha had probably advised that on no collected for eating in times of terrible famine condition should the city be given up, and (vid., Joseph. Bell. Jud. v. 13, 7); but it may also promised that God would deliver it, if they be figuratively employed to signify a very humbled themselves before Him in sincere miserable kind of food, as the Arabs call the humility and prayed for His assistance. The king herba Alcali Arab. s n n, i.e., sparrow’s dung, thought that he had done his part by putting on and the Germans call Asa foetida Teufelsdreck. the hairy garment; and as the anticipated help But there is no ground for thinking of wasted had nevertheless failed to come, he flew into a chick-pease, as Bochart (Hieroz. ii. p. 582, ed. rage, for which the prophet was to pay the Ros.) supposes (see, on the other hand, Celsii penalty. It is true that this rage only proceeded Hierobot. ii. p. 30ff.).16 from a momentary ebullition of passion, and 2 Kings 6:26. As the king was passing by upon quickly gave place to a better movement of his the wall to conduct the defence, a woman cried conscience. The king hastened after the to him for help; whereupon he replied: messenger whom he had sent to behead Elisha, should Jehovah not help thee, for the purpose of preventing the execution of“ ,אַ ל־יושִ יעֵ ְך יי׳ the murderous command which he had given in whence shall I help thee? from the threshing- the hurry of his boiling wrath (v. 32); but it floor or from the wine-press?” It is difficult to proves, nevertheless, that the king was still which Ewald (§ 355, b.) wanting in that true repentance, which would ,אַ ל explain the Thenius gives a have sprung from the recognition of the . םאִ לֹּא supposes to stand for simpler explanation, namely, that it is a distress as a judgment inflicted by the Lord. The subjective negation and the sentence desperate deed, to which his violent wrath had hypothetical, so that the condition would be impelled him, would have been accomplished, if only expressed by the close connection of the the Lord had not protected His prophet and two clauses (according to Ewald, § 357). “From revealed to him the king’s design, that he might the threshing-floor or from the wine-press?” adopt defensive measures. i.e., I can neither help thee with corn nor with 2 Kings 6:32. The elders of the city were wine, cannot procure thee either food or drink. assembled together in Elisha’s house, probably He then asked her what her trouble was; upon to seek for counsel and consolation; and the which she related to him the horrible account king sent a man before him (namely, to behead of the slaying of her own child to appease her the prophet); but before the messenger arrived, hunger, etc. the prophet told the elders of the king’s 2 Kings 6:30. The king, shuddering at this intention: “See ye that this son of a murderer horrible account, in which the curses of the law (Joram, by descent and disposition a genuine in Lev. 26:29 and Deut. 28:53, 57 had been son of Ahab, the murderer of Naboth and the literally fulfilled, rent his clothes; and the prophets) is sending to cut off my head?” and people then saw that he wore upon his body the commanded them to shut the door against the ,messenger and to force him back at the door ,מִבַ יִת ,hairy garment of penitence and mourning because he already heard the sound of his within, i.e., beneath the upper garment, as a master’s feet behind him. These measures of

2 KINGS Page 29 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Elisha, therefore, were not dictated by any with thine eyes, but not eat thereof” (see vv. desire to resist the lawful authorities, but were 17ff.). The fulfilment of these words of Elisha acts of prudence by which he delayed the was brought about by the event narrated in vv. execution of an unrighteous and murderous 3ff. command which had been issued in haste, and 2 Kings 7:3–7. “Four men were before the gate thereby rendered a service to the king as lepers,” or at the gateway, separated from himself.—In v. 33 we have to supply from the human society, according to the law in Lev. context that the king followed close upon the 13:46, Num. 5:3, probably in a building erected messenger, who came down to Elisha while he for the purpose (cf. 2 Kings 15:5), just as at the was talking with the elders; and he (the king) present day the lepers at have their would of course be admitted at once. For the huts by the side of the Zion gate (vid., Strauss, ,is not the messenger, but the Sinai u. Golgatha, p. 205, and Tobler וַ יֹּאמֶ ר subject to king, as is evident from 2 Kings 7:2 and 17. The Denkblätter aus Jerus. p. 411ff.). These men king said: “Behold the calamity from the Lord, being on the point of starvation, resolved to why shall I wait still further for the Lord?”—the invade the camp of the Syrians, and carried out in the evening twilight, not ,בַ נֶשֶ ף words of a despairing man, in whose soul, this resolution however, there was a spark of faith still the morning twilight (Seb. Schm., Cler., etc.), on glimmering. The very utterance of his feelings account of v. 12, where the king is said to have to the prophet shows that he had still a weak received the news of the flight of the Syrians glimmer of hope in the Lord, and wished to be during the night. Coming to “the end of the strengthened and sustained by the prophet; Syrian camp,” i.e., to the outskirts of it on the and this strengthening he received. city side, they found no one there. For (vv. 6, 7) 2 Kings 7 “the Lord had caused the army of the Syrians to hear a noise of chariots and horses, a noise of a 2 Kings 7:1, 2. Elisha announced to him the great army,” so that, believing the king of Israel word of the Lord: “At the (this) time to-morrow to have hired the kings of the Hittites and see at 1 Kings 5:2) Egyptians to fall upon them, they fled from the ,סֹּלֶ ת) a seah of wheaten flour with regard to ,אֶ ל־נַֹפְּׂשָ ם will be worth a shekel, and two seahs of barley camp in the twilight a shekel in the gate, i.e., in the market, at their life, i.e., to save their life only, leaving Samaria.” A seah, or a third of an ephah = a behind them their tents, horses, and asses, and Dresden peck (Metze), for a shekel was still a the camp as it was.—The miracle, by which God high price; but in comparison with the prices delivered Samaria from the famine or from given in 2 Kings 6:25 as those obtained for the surrendering to the foe, consisted in an oral most worthless kinds of food, it was incredibly delusion, namely, in the fact that the besiegers see at 2 thought they heard the march of hostile armies :שָ לִ יש) cheap. The king’s aide-de-camp an error in writing for from the north and south, and were seized with , ראֲשֶ לַמֶ לֶ ְךנִשְּׂ עָ ן ;Sam. 23:8 cf. v. 17, and for the explanation 2 such panic terror that they fled in the greatest , ראֲשֶ הַמֶ לֶ ְך נש׳ haste, leaving behind them their baggage, and Kings 5:18) therefore replied with mockery at their beasts of draught and burden. It is this prophecy: “Behold (i.e., granted that) the impossible to decide whether the noise which Lord made windows in heaven, will this indeed they heard had any objective reality, say a be?” i.e., such cheapness take place. (For the miraculous buzzing in the air, or whether it was construction, see Ewald, § 357, b.) The ridicule merely a deception of the senses produced in lay more especially in the “windows in heaven,” their ears by God; and this is a matter of no in which there is an allusion to Gen. 7:11, sc. to importance, since in either case it was rain down a flood of flour and corn. Elisha produced miraculously by God. The kings of the answered seriously: “Behold, thou wilt see it Hittites are kings of northern Canaan, upon

2 KINGS Page 30 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

in the horseback and not the horses themselves that חִֹּתִ ים ;Lebanon and towards Phoenicia broader sense for Canaanites, as in 1 Kings were to be sent out as spies) can but share the 10:29. The plural, “kings of the Egyptians,” is fate of the rest of the people of Samaria, probably only occasioned by the parallel whether they return unhurt to meet death by expression “kings of the Hittites,” and is not to starvation with the people that still remain, or be pressed. fall into the hands of the enemy and are put to death, in which case they will only suffer the lot 2 Kings 7:8–11. When these lepers (these, of those who have already perished. Five horses pointing back to vv. 3ff.) came into the camp is an approximative small number, and is which the Syrians had left, they first of all therefore not at variance with the following satisfied their own hunger with the provisions statement, that two pair of horses were sent out which they found in the tents, and then took with chariots and men. The Chethîb is not הַהֲ מון different valuables and concealed them. But their consciences were soon aroused, so that to be altered, since there are other instances in they said: We are not doing right; this day is a which the first noun is written with the article, day of joyful tidings: if we are silent and wait till though in the construct state (vid., Ewald, § the morning light, guilt will overtake us; “for it 290, e.); and the Keri is only conformed to the Vv. 14b and 15. They then .כְּׂכָ ל־הֲ מון is the duty of citizens to make known things following relating to public safety” (Grotius). They then sent out two chariots with horses, who pursued resolved to announce the joyful event in the the flying enemy to the Jordan, and found the king’s palace, and reported it to the watchman whole of the road full of traces of the hurried stands as a generic flight, consisting of clothes and vessels that had שֹּעֵ ר הָעִ יר .at the city gate is the בְּׂהֵחָ ֹפְּׂ זָם term in a collective sense for the persons who been thrown away. The Chethîb watched at the gate; hence the following plural only correct reading, since it is only in the has the meaning to fly in great חָ ֹפַ ז And the gate-keepers Niphal that“ .הַ שֹּעֲרִ ים and in v. 11 ,לָהֶ ם cried out (what they had heard) and reported it haste (cf. 1 Sam. 23:26, Ps. 48:6; 104:7). in the king’s palace.” 2 Kings 7:16, 17. When the returning 2 Kings 7:12ff. The king imagined that the messengers reported this, the people went out unexpected departure of the Syrians was only a and plundered the camp of the Syrians, and this ruse, namely, that they had left the camp and was followed by the consequent cheapness of hidden themselves in the field, to entice the provisions predicted by Elisha. As the people besieged out of the fortress, and then fall upon streamed out, the unbelieving aide-de-camp, according whom the king had ordered to take the בְּׂהַשָדֶ ה .them and press into the city to deliver the ,הִֹפְּׂקִ יד) vid., Ewald, § 244, a). In oversight at the gate) בַשָדֶ ה to later usage for order to make sure of the correctness or oversight) for the purpose of preserving order incorrectness of this conjecture, one of the in the crowding of the starving multitude, was king’s servants (counsellors) gave this advice: trodden down by the people, so that he died, .as in 2 Kings whereby this prediction of Elisha was fulfilled יִקְּׂ חּו Let them take (the Vav before“ The exact fulfilment of this prediction appeared 4:41) five of the horses left in the city, that we so memorable to the historian, that he repeats may send and see how the matter stands.” The this prophecy in vv. 18–20 along with the event words, “Behold they (the five horses) are as the which occasioned it, and refers again to its whole multitude of Israel that are left in it (the fulfilment. city); behold they are as the whole multitude of Israel that are gone,” have this meaning: The five horsemen (for horses stand for horsemen, as it is self-evident that it was men on

2 KINGS Page 31 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 Kings 8 2 Kings 8:4. And just at that time the king was asking Gehazi to relate to him the great things Elisha Helps the Shunammite to Her Property that Elisha had done; and among these he was Through the Honour in Which He Was Held; And giving an account of the restoration of the Predicts to Hazael His Possession of the Throne. Shunammite’s son to life. Reigns of Joram and Ahaziah, Kings of Judah. 2 Kings 8:5, 6. While he was relating this, the 2 Kings 8:1–6. Elisha’s Influence Helps the woman herself came into invoke the help of the Shunammite to the Possession of her House and king to recover her property, and was pointed Field.—Vv. 1 and 2. By the advice of Elisha, the out to the king by Gehazi as the very woman of woman whose son the prophet had restored to whom he was speaking, which caused the king life (2 Kings 4:33) had gone with her family into to be so interested in her favour, that after the land of the Philistines during a seven years’ hearing her complaint he sent a chamberlain famine, and had remained there seven years. with her (saris as in 1 Kings 22:9), with The two verses are rendered by most instructions to procure for her not only the commentators in the pluperfect, and that with whole of her property, but the produce of the without עָ זְּׂבָ ה perfect correctness, for they are circumstantial land during her absence.—For .is merely a continuation of mappiq, see Ewald, § 247, d וַֹּתָקָ ם clauses, and the two together preparing the way for, 2 Kings 8:7–15. Elisha Predicts to Hazael at ,דִבֶ ר and introducing the following event. The object Damascus the Possession of the Throne.—Vv. is not to relate a prophecy of Elisha of the seven 7ff. Elisha then came to Damascus at the years’ famine, but what afterwards occurred, instigation of the Spirit of God, to carry out the namely, how king Joram was induced by the commission which Elijah had received at Horeb account of Elisha’s miraculous works to have with regard to Hazael (1 Kings 19:15). the property of the Shunammite restored to her Benhadad king of Syria was sick at that time, upon her application. The seven years’ famine and when Elisha’s arrival was announced to occurred in the middle of Joram’s reign, and the him, sent Hazael with a considerable present to event related here took place before the curing the man of God, to inquire of Jehovah through of Naaman the Syrian (2 Kings 5), as is evident him concerning his illness. The form of the here and v. 15) is etymologically) חֲ זָהאֵ ל from the fact that Gehazi talked with the king name (v. 4), and therefore had not yet been punished correct; but afterwards it is always written and that all kinds of“) וְּׂכָ ל־טּוב דם׳ .ה with leprosy. But it cannot have originally stood without between 2 Kings 4:37 and 4:38, as Thenius good of Damascus”) follows with a more supposes, because the incidents related in 2 precise description of the minchah—“a burden Kings 4:38–44 belong to the time of this famine of forty camels.” The present consisted of (cf. 2 Kings 4:38), and therefore precede the produce or wares of the rich commercial city of occurrence mentioned here. By the words, “the Damascus, and was no doubt very considerable; Lord called the famine, and it came seven at the same time, it was not so large that forty years” (sc., lasting that time), the famine is camels were required to carry it. The affair described as a divine judgment for the idolatry must be judged according to the Oriental of the nation. custom, of making a grand display with the 2 Kings 8:3. When the woman returned to her sending of presents, and employing as many home at the end of the seven years, she went to men or beasts of burden as possible to carry the king to cry, i.e., to invoke his help, with them, every one carrying only a single article regard to her house and her field, of which, as is (cf. Harmar, Beobb. ii. p. 29, iii. p. 43, and evident from the context, another had taken Rosenmüller, A. u. N. Morgenl. iii. p. 17). possession during her absence.

2 KINGS Page 32 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Kings 8:11. Elisha then fixed Hazael for a 2 ,לֹּא חָ יֹּה Kings 8:10. According to the Chethîb 2 וַיַעֲמֵ ד וגו׳ .Elisha’s answer was, “Thou wilt not live, and long time with his eye, and wept (for) Jehovah has shown me that he will die;” literally, he made his face stand fast, and as עַ ד־בֹּש .tell him: Thou wilt directed it (upon Hazael) to shaming“ ,לו חָ יֹּה according to the Keri live, but Jehovah,” etc. Most of the in Judg. 3:25; not in a shameless manner commentators follow the ancient versions, and (Thenius), but till Hazael was embarrassed by .among the it לֹּא the Masoretes, who reckon our fifteen passages of the O.T. in which it stands 2 Kings 8:12. When Hazael asked him the vid., Hilleri Arcan. Keri, p. cause of his weeping, Elisha replied: “I know) לו for the pronoun the evil which thou wilt do to the sons of Israel: 62f.), and some of the codices, and decide in ,שִ לֵחַ בָאֵ ש) favour of the Keri. (1) because the conjecture their fortresses wilt thou set on fire in order that Elisha see at Judg. 1:8), their youths wilt thou slay לֹּא was altered into לו that with the sword, and wilt dash their children to might not be made to utter an untruth, is a very pieces, and cut asunder their women with natural one; and (2) on account of the extreme split, cut open the womb). This ,בִקֵעַ ) ”rarity with which a negative stands before the child inf. abs. with the finite verb following. But there cruel conduct towards Israel which is here is not much force in either argument. The rarity predicted of Hazael, was only a special before the inf. abs. followed elaboration of the brief statement made by the לֹּא of the position of Lord to Elijah concerning Hazael (1 Kings by a finite verb, in connection with the omission 19:17). The fulfilment of this prediction is of the pronoun after , might be the very indicated generally in 2 Kings 10:32, 33, and אֱ מֹּר לו was taken as a pronoun; and the 13:3ff.; and we may infer with certainty from לֹּא reason why confirmation of this opinion might be found in Hos. 10:14 and 14:1, that Hazael really the fact that Hazael brought back this answer to practised the cruelties mentioned. the king: “Thou wilt live” (v. 14). The reading in 2 Kings 8:13ff. But when Hazael replied in non) is favoured by the feigned humility, What is thy servant, the dog) לֹּא the text .see at 1 Sam כֶלֶ ב circumstance that it is the more difficult of the (i.e., so base a fellow: for two, partly because of the unusual position of 24:15), that he should do such great things? the negative, and partly because of the Elisha said to him, “Jehovah has shown thee to is found in the me as king over ;” whereupon Hazael לֹּא contradiction to v. 14. But the same position in other passages (Gen. 3:4, Ps. returned to his lord, brought him the pretended 49:8, and Amos 9:8), where the emphasis lies answer of Elisha that he would live (recover), upon the negation; and the contradiction to v. and the next day suffocated him with a cloth to plait or ,כָבַ ר from ,מַכְּׂבֵ ר .may be explained very simply, from the fact dipped in water 14 that Hazael did not tell his king the truth, twist, literally, anything twisted; not, however, because he wanted to put him to death and a net for gnats or flies (Joseph., J. D. Mich., etc.), usurp the throne. We therefore prefer the but a twisted thick cloth, which when dipped in reading in the text, since it is not in harmony water became so thick, that when it was spread with the character of the prophets to utter an over the face of the sick man it was sufficient to untruth; and the explanation, “thou wilt not die suffocate him. of thine illness, but come to a violent death,” 2 Kings 8:16–24. Reign of Joram of Judah (cf. 2 puts into the words a meaning which they do Chron. 21:2–20).—Joram became king in the not possess. For even if Benhadad did not die of fifth year of Joram of Israel, while Jehoshaphat his illness, he did not recover from it. his father was (still) king, the latter handing over the government to him two years before

2 KINGS Page 33 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study his death (see at 2 Kings 1:17), and reigned and shut in, so that in the night he fought his eight years, namely, two years to the death of way through, and had reason to be glad that he Jehoshaphat and six years afterwards.17 The had escaped utter destruction, since his army is an unknown place צָעִ ירָ ה .is not to be altered, since the fled to their homes שְּׂ מֹּנֶ ה שָ נָ ה Chethîb rule that the numbers two to ten take the noun in Idumaea, which Movers, Hitzig, and Ewald in the plural is not without exception (cf. Ewald, take to be Zoar, but without considering that § 287, i.). Zoar was in the land of Moab, not in Edom. The with his“ ,עִם שָרָ יו Kings 8:18, 19. Joram had married a Chronicles have instead 2 daughter of Ahab, namely (v. 26), and captains,” from a mere conjecture; whilst as altered by mistake צֹעירה walked in the ways of the house of Ahab, Thenius regards transplanting the worship of Baal into his from (“to Seir”), which is very שֵ עִ ירָ ה kingdom. Immediately after the death of Jehoshaphat he murdered his brothers, improbable in the case of so well-known a is a later mode of writing הַ סֹּבֵ יב .שֵ עִ יר apparently with no other object than to obtain name as probably occasioned by the ,הַ סובֵ ב possession of the treasures which his father for had left them (2 Chron. 21:2–4). This frequently occurring word . “To this day,” סָבִ יב wickedness of Joram would have been followed by the destruction of Judah, had not the Lord i.e., to the time when the original sources of our preserved a shoot to the royal house for David’s books were composed. For the Edomites were see 1 Kings 11:36. The subjugated again by Amaziah and (2 לָתֵ ת לו נִיר sake. For Kings 14:7 and 22), though under they .serves as an explanation of made incursions into Judah again (2 Chron לְּׂבָ נָיו following word a light with regard to his sons,” i.e., by 28:17).—At that time also revolted. This“ ,לו נִיר the fact that he kept sons (descendants) upon was a royal city of the early Canaanites, and at a the throne. later period it was still a considerable fortress (2 Kings 19:8). It is probably to be sought for in 2 Kings 8:20–22. Nevertheless the divine the ruins of Arak el Menshiyeh, two hours to the chastisement was not omitted. The ungodliness west of Beit-Jibrin (see the Comm. on Josh. of Joram was punished partly by the revolt of 10:29). This city probably revolted from Judah the Edomites and of the city of Libnah from his on the occurrence of an invasion of the land by rule, and partly by a horrible sickness of which the Philistines, when the sons of Joram were he died (2 Chron. 21:12–15). Edom, which had carried off, with the exception of the youngest, hitherto had only a vicegerent with the title of Jehoahaz (Ahaziah: 2 Chron. 21:16, 17). king (see 2 Kings 3:9 and 1 Kings 22:48), threw off the authority of Judah, and appointed its 2 Kings 8:23, 24. According to 2 Chron. own king, under whom it acquired 21:18ff., Joram died of a terrible disease, in independence, as the attempt of Joram to bring which his bowels fell out, and was buried in the it back again under his control completely , though not in the family sepulchre failed. The account of this attempt in v. 21 and 2 of the kings.18 Chron. 21:9 is very obscure. “Joram went over 2 Kings 8:25–29. Reign of (cf. to Zair, and all his chariots of war with him; and 2 Chron. 22:1–6).—Ahaziah, the youngest son it came to pass that he rose up by night and of Joram, ascended the throne in the twenty- smote the Edomites round about, and indeed second year of his age. The statement in 2 the captains of the war-chariots, and the people Chron. 22:2, that he was forty-two years old fled (i.e., the Judaean men of war, not the when he became king, rests upon a copyist’s ם twenty with ך Edomites) to their tents.” It is evident from this, error, namely, a confusion of that Joram had advanced to Zair in Idumaea; forty. Now, since his father became king at the but there he appears to have been surrounded age of thirty-two, and reigned eight years,

2 KINGS Page 34 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

v. 28; see at 1 ,בְּׂרָ מֹּתגִלְּׂעָ ד = בָרָ מָ ה .Ahaziah must have been born in the nineteenth 2 Kings 8:29 year of his age. Consequently it may appear Kings 22:4. strange that Ahaziah had brothers still older than himself (2 Chron. 21:17); but as early 2 Kings 9 marriages are common in the East, and the royal princes had generally concubines along Jehu Anointed King. His Conspiracy against with their wife of the first rank, as is expressly Joram. Joram, Ahaziah, and Jezebel Slain. stated of Joram in 2 Chron. 21:17, he might 2 Kings 9:1–10. Anointing of Jehu by Command have had some sons in his nineteenth year. His of Elisha.—While the Israelitish army was at mother was called Athaliah, and was a daughter Ramoth, Elisha executed the last of the of the idolatrous Jezebel. In v. 26 and 2 Chron. commissions which Elijah had received at 22:2 she is called the daughter, i.e., grand- Horeb (1 Kings 19:16), by sending a pupil of the daughter, of ; for, according to v. 18, she prophets into the camp to anoint Jehu the was a daughter of Ahab. Omri, the grand-father, commander-in-chief of the army as king, and to is mentioned in v. 26 as the founder of the announce to him, in the name of Jehovah, that dynasty which brought so much trouble upon he would be king over Israel; and to charge him Israel and Judah through its idolatry. to exterminate the house of Ahab. 2 Kings 8:27. Ahaziah, like his father, reigned 2 Kings 9:1–3. Vv. 1–3 contain the instructions in the spirit of Ahab, because he allowed his which Elisha gave to the pupil of the prophets. look ,רְּׂ אֵה םשָ יֵהּוא .as in 1 Sam. 10:1 פַ ְך הַשֶמֶ ן .(mother to act as his adviser (2 Chron. 22:3, 4 let him (bid ,הֲקֵ מֹּתו וגו׳ .Kings 8:28, 29. Ahaziah went with Joram of round there for Jehu 2 Israel, his mother’s brother, to the war with the Syrians at Ramoth. The contest for this city, him) rise up from the midst of his brethren, i.e., the true :חֶדֶ רבְּׂחֶדֶ ר .which had already cost Ahab his life (1 Kings of his comrades in arms 22), was to furnish the occasion, according to meaning is, “into the innermost chamber” (see the overruling providence of God, for the at 1 Kings 20:30). V. 3 contains only the leading extermination of the whole of Omri’s family. points of the commission to Jehu, the full Being wounded in the battle with the Syrians, particulars are communicated in the account of Joram king of Israel returned to Jezreel to be the fulfilment in vv. 6ff. “And flee, and thou healed of his wounds. His nephew Ahaziah shalt not wait.” Elisha gave him this command, visited him there, and there he met with his not to protect him from danger on the part of death at the same time as Joram at the hands of the secret adherents of Ahab (Theodoret, Cler.), Jehu, who had conspired against Joram (see 2 but to prevent all further discussions, or “that Kings 9:14ff. and 2 Chron. 22:7–9). Whether the he might not mix himself up with other affairs” war with Hazael at Ramoth was for the (Seb. Schmidt). recapture of this city, which had been taken by 2 Kings 9:4. “And the young man, the servant has the נַעַ ר the Syrians, or simply for holding it against the of the prophet, went.” The second Syrians, it is impossible to determine. All that article in the construct state, contrary to the we can gather from 2 Kings 9:14 is, that at that rule (vid., Ges. § 110, 2, b.). time Ramoth was in the possession of the Israelites, whether it had come into their 2 Kings 9:5ff. After the communication of the possession again after the disgraceful rout of fact that he had a word to Jehu, the latter rose the Syrians before Samaria (2 Kings 7), or up and went with him into the house, i.e., into whether, perhaps, it was not recovered till this the interior of the house, in the court of which without the article see Ewald, § the captains were sitting together. There the אֲרַ מִ ים war. For pupil of the prophets poured oil upon Jehu’s 277, c. head, and announced to him that Jehovah had anointed him king for Israel, and that he was to

2 KINGS Page 35 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

,in the sense of substantia rei עֶצֶ ם smite, i.e., exterminate, the house of Ahab, to Hebrew avenge upon it the blood of the prophets (vid., 1 whereas the rendering given by Lud. de Dieu, Kings 18:4; 19:10). after the Arabic jarm, sectio—super aliquem e 2 Kings 9:8–10. Vv. 8–10 are simply a gradibus, is without analogy in Hebrew usage repetition of the threat in 1 Kings 21:21–23. For (vid., L. de Dieu ad h. l., and Ges. Thes. p. 303).19 see at 1 Kings 21:23. The meaning is, that without looking for a ,בְּׂחֵ לֶ ק יז׳ suitable place on which to erect a throne, they 2 Kings 9:11–15. Jehu’s Conspiracy against laid their clothes upon the bare steps, or the Joram.—V. 11. When Jehu came out again to his staircase of the house in which they were comrades in arms, after the departure of the assembled, and set him thereon to proclaim .i.e., him king ,הֲשָ לום pupil of the prophets, they inquired “is it all well? why did this madman come to 2 Kings 9:14, 15. Thus Jehu conspired against thee?” not because they were afraid that he Joram, who (as is related again in the might have done him some injury (Ewald), or circumstantial clause which follows from וְּׂ יורָ ם that he might have brought some evil tidings cf. 2 Kings 8:28, 29) had been ;מֶ לֶ ְך אֲרָ ם to הָ יָה Thenius), but simply because they conjectured) that he had brought some important news. keeping guard at Ramoth in Gilead, i.e., had ,a madman, in defended this city against the attacks of Hazael ,מְּׂשֻ גָֹע They called the prophet derision, with reference to the ecstatic and had returned to Jezreel to be healed of the utterances of the prophets when in a state of wounds which he had received; and said, “If it is let no fugitive go from the ,(נַֹפְּׂשְּׂ כֶ ם) holy inspiration. Jehu answered evasively, “Ye your wish know the man and his muttering,” i.e., ye know city, to announce it in Jezreel (viz., what had taken place, the conspiracy or the proclamation שִיחַ .that he is mad and says nothing rational includes both meditating and speaking. of Jehu as king).” It is evident from this, that the Israelites were in possession of the city of 2 Kings 9:12. They were not contented with Ramoth, and were defending it against the i.e., thou ,שֶקֶ ר this answer, however, but said in v. 14 שָמַ ר attacks of the Syrians, so that dost not speak truth. Jehu thereupon informed cannot be understood as relating to the siege of them that he had anointed him king over Israel is not to be לְּׂהַ גִיד for לַגִיד in the name of Jehovah. Ramoth. The Chethîb 2 Kings 9:13. After hearing this, they took altered according to the Keri, as there are many quickly every man his garment, laid it under hi examples to be found of syncope in cases of this upon the steps, blew the trumpet, and kind (vid., Olshausen, Lehrb. d. Hebr. Spr. p. proclaimed him king. The clothes, which 140). consisted simply of a large piece of cloth for 2 Kings 9:16–29. Slaying of the Two Kings, wrapping round the body (see at 1 Kings Joram of Israel and Ahaziah of Judah.—V. 16. 11:29), they spread out in the place of carpets Jehu drove without delay to Jezreel, where upon the steps, which served as a throne, to do Joram was lying sick, and Ahaziah had come homage to Jehu. For these signs of homage upon a visit to him. compare Matt. 21:7 and Wetstein, N. Test. ad h. 2 Kings 9:17–21. As the horsemen, who were as to the sent to meet him on the announcement of the ,אֶ ל־גֶרֶ ם הַמַעֲ לות l. The difficult words meaning of which the early translators have watchman upon the tower at Jezreel that a done nothing but guess, can hardly be rendered troop was approaching, joined the followers of in any other way than that proposed by Kimchi Jehu, and eventually the watchman, looking (lib. rad.), super ipsosmet gradus, upon the steps down from the tower, thought that he could being discover the driving of Jehu in the approaching גֶרֶ ם ;themselves = upon the bare steps troop, Joram and Ahaziah mounted their taken according to Chaldee usage like the

2 KINGS Page 36 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

shows: literally, think of רֹּכְּׂבִ ים chariots to drive and meet him, and came upon as the apposition him by the portion of the ground of Naboth the me and thee, the riders. The olden translators and therefore transposed ,אֲ נִי in v. 17 is a rarer were misled by שִ ֹפְּׂעַ ת Jezreelite. The second form of the absolute state (see Ges. § 80, 2, into the first person, and Thenius naturally זְּׂ כֹּר :מַ ה־לְּׂ ָך ּולְּׂשָ לום—.(.Anm. 2, and Ewald, § 173, d riding in pairs. This ,רֹּכְּׂבִ ים צְּׂמָדִ ים .follows them “what hast thou to do with peace?” i.e., to is the rendering adopted by most of the turn“ :סֹּב אֶל־אַחֲרַ י .trouble thyself about it commentators, although it might be taken, as it the is by Kimchi and Bochart, as signifying the two“ :הַמִ נְּׂהָ ג כם׳ .behind me,” sc. to follow me driving is like the driving of Jehu; for he drives persons who are carried in the same chariot. a burden, then a prophetic utterance of a ,מַשָ א in insania, i.e., in actual ,בְּׂשִ גָֹעון ”.like a madman fact in praecipitatione (Vatabl.). “The portion of threatening nature (see the Comm. on Nah. ,וַ יהוָ ה וגו׳ Naboth” is the vineyard of Naboth mentioned in 1:1). For the connection of the clauses 1 Kings 21, which formed only one portion of see Ewald, § 338, a. In v. 26 Jehu quotes the the gardens of the king’s palace. word of God concerning Ahab in 1 Kings 21:19 2 Kings 9:22. To Joram’s inquiry, “Is it peace, so far as the substance is concerned, to show Jehu?” the latter replied, “What peace, so long that he is merely the agent employed in a particle used in an ,אִ ם־לֹּא) as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and executing it. “Truly her many witchcrafts continue?” The notion of oath) the blood of Naboth and the blood of his see Ewald, § 217, sons have I seen yesterday, saith the Lord, and) עַ ד continuance is implied in is spiritual whoredom, i.e., idolatry. upon this field will I requite him.” The slaying of זְּׂ נּונִים ;(.e incantationes magicae, then witchcrafts the sons of Naboth is not expressly mentioned ,כְּׂשָ ֹפִ ים in 1 Kings 21:13, “because it was so usual a generally, which were usually associated with thing, that the historian might leave it out as a idolatry (cf. Deut. 18:10ff.). matter of course” (J. D. Mich., Ewald). It 2 Kings 9:23. Joram detecting the conspiracy necessarily followed, however, from the fact as in 1 that Naboth’s field was confiscated (see at 1 יַהֲ ֹפְֹּך יָדָ יו) from this reply, turned round Kings 22:34) and fled, calling out to Ahaziah Kings 21:14). deceit,” i.e., we are deceived, in actual 2 Kings 9:27, 28. When Ahaziah saw this, he“ ,מִרְּׂ מָ ה fact betrayed. fled by the way to the garden-house, but was smitten, i.e., mortally wounded, by Jehu at the height of Gur near Jibleam, so that as he was מִ לֵ א יָדו ) Kings 9:24. But Jehu seized the bow 2 lit., filled his hand with the bow), and flying still farther to Megiddo he died, and was ,בַקֶשֶ ת shot Joram “between his arms,” i.e., in his back carried as a corpse by his servants to Jerusalem, ,and him also“ ,הַכֻ הּו between the shoulders in an oblique direction, and buried there. After and they“ ,וַיַכֻ הּו so that the arrow came out at his heart, and smite him,” we must supply Joram sank down in his chariot. smote him,” which has probably only dropped 2 Kings 9:25. Jehu then commanded his aide- out through a copyist’s error. The way by which see at 2 Sam. 23:8) Bidkar to Ahaziah fled, and the place where he was ,שָ לִ יש) de-camp cast the slain man into the field of Naboth the mortally wounded, cannot be exactly Jezreelite, and said, “For remember how we, I determined, as the situation of the localities and thou, both rode (or drove) behind his named has not yet been ascertained. The cannot have formed a (בֵ ית הַ גָ ן) ”father Ahab, and Jehovah pronounced this “garden-house are accusatives, portion of the royal gardens, but must have אֲ נִיוָאַֹּתָ ה ”.threat upon him ,stood at some distance from the city of Jezreel ,אֹּתִי וְּׂ אותְּׂ ָך written with a looser connection for

2 KINGS Page 37 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

is a very פּוְך ”.as Ahaziah went away by the road thither, and and placed herself at the window was not wounded till he reached the height of favourite eye-paint with Oriental women even the ascent or to the present day. It is prepared from ,מַעֲלֵ ה־גּור .Gur near Jibleam eminence of Gur, is defined by Jibleam. Now, as antimony ore (Arab. kḥl, Cohol or Stibium of the Ahaziah fled from Jezreel to Megiddo past Arabs), which when pounded yields a black Jibleam, Thenius thinks that Jibleam must have powder with a metallic brilliancy, which was been situated between Jezreel and Megiddo. laid upon the eyebrows and eyelashes either in But between Jezreel and Megiddo there is only a dry state as a black powder, or moistened the plain of Jezreel or Esdrelom, in which we generally with oil and made into an ointment, cannot suppose that there was any such which is applied with a fine smooth eye-pencil eminence as that of Gur. Moreover Jibleam or of the thickness of an ordinary goose-quill, Bileam (1 Chron. 6:55, see at Josh. 17:11) was made either of wood, metal, or ivory. The way probably to the south of Jenin, where the old to use it was to hold the central portion of the has been preserved in the well of pencil horizontally between the eyelids, and בִלְּׂעָ ם name Arab. bl’mh, Belameh, near Beled Sheik Manssûr, then draw it out between them, twisting it which is half an hour’s journey off. And it is round all the while, so that the edges of the quite possible to bring this situation of Jibleam eyelids were blackened all round; and the into harmony with the account before us. For object was to heighten the splendour of the instance, it is a priori probable that Ahaziah dark southern eye, and give it, so to speak, a would take the road to Samaria when he fled more deeply glowing fire, and to impart a from Jezreel, not only because his father’s youthful appearance to the whole of the brothers were there (2 Kings 10:13), but also eyelashes even in extreme old age. Rosellini because it was the most direct road to found jars with eye-paint of this kind in the Jerusalem; and he might easily be pursued by early Egyptian graves (vid., Hille, über den Jehu and his company to the height of Gur near Gebrauch u. die Zusammensetzung der oriental. Jibleam before they overtook him, since the Augenschminke: Deutsch. morg. Ztsch. v. p. distance from Jezreel (Zerîn) to Jenin is only 236ff.).—Jezebel did this that she might present two hours and a half (Rob. Pal. iii. p. 828), and an imposing appearance to Jehu and die as a the height of Gur might very well be an queen; not to allure him by her charms (Ewald, eminence which he would pass on the road to after Ephr. Syr.). For (v. 31) when Jehu entered Jibleam. But the wounded king may afterwards the palace gate, she cried out to him, “Is it have altered the direction of his flight for the peace, thou Zimri, murderer of his lord?” She purpose of escaping to Megiddo, probably addressed Jehu as Zimri the murderer of the because he thought that he should be in greater king, to point to the fate which Jehu would safety there than he would be in Samaria.20—In bring upon himself by the murder of the king, v. 29 we are told once more in which year of as Zimri had already done (vid., 1 Kings 16:10– Joram’s reign Ahaziah became king. The 18). discrepancy between “the eleventh year” here 2 Kings 9:32, 33. But Jehu did not deign to and “the twelfth year” in 2 Kings 8:25 may be answer the worthless woman; he simply looked most simply explained, on the supposition that up to the window and inquired: “Who is (holds) there was a difference in the way of reckoning with me? who?” Then two, three chamberlains the commencement of the years of Joram’s looked out (of the side windows), and by Jehu’s reign. command threw the proud queen out of the 2 Kings 9:30–37. Death of Jezebel.—V. 30. window, so that some of her blood spirted upon When Jehu came to Jezreel and Jezebel heard of the wall and the horses (of Jehu), and Jehu it, “she put her eyes into lead polish (i.e., trampled her down, driving over her with his painted them with it), and beautified her head horses and chariot.

2 KINGS Page 38 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

to the princes of Jezreel, the old“ ,יִזְּׂרְּׂ עֶ אלהַ זְּׂקֵ נִים Kings 9:34. Jehu thereupon entered the 2 palace, ate and drank, and then said to his men: men,” partly on account of the name Jezreel, and “Look for this cursed woman and bury her, for הַ זְּׂקֵ נִים partly on account of the combination of the woman ,הָאֲ רּורָ ה ”.she is a king’s daughter If we compare v. 5, it is evident that .שָרֵ י with smitten by the curse of God. cannot be the adjective to , but שָרֵ י יז׳ הַ זְּׂקֵ נִים Kings 9:35, 36. But when they went to bury 2 her, they found nothing but her skull, the two denotes the elders of the city, so that the .הזקנים has dropped out before אֶ ל feet, and the two hollow hands. The rest had preposition the princes or principal men of ,שָרֵ ייִזְּׂ רְּׂ עֶ אל .been eaten by the dogs and dragged away When this was reported to Jehu, he said: “This Jezreel, might certainly be the chief court- is the word of the Lord, which He spake by His officials of the royal house of Ahab, since Ahab servant Elijah,” etc. (1 Kings 21:23), i.e., this has frequently resided in Jezreel. But against this been done in fulfilment of the word of the Lord. supposition there is not only the circumstance V. 37 is also to be regarded as a continuation of that we cannot discover any reason why the the prophecy of Elijah quoted by Jehu (and not court-officials living in Samaria should be called as a closing remark of the historian, as Luther princes of Jezreel, but also v. 5, where, instead supposes), although what Jehu says here does of the princes of Jezreel, the governor of the city not occur verbatim in 1 Kings 21:23, but Jehu and the governor of the castle are mentioned. has simply expanded rather freely the meaning Consequently there is an error of the text in Chethîb) is the older) וְּׂהָ יָת .of that prophecy though it is ,הָעִ יר אֶ ל which ought to read ,יזרֹעאל form of the 3rd pers. fem. Kal, which is only older than the ancient versions, since the retained here and there (vid., Ewald, § 194, a.). and no doubt ,יזרֹעאל Chaldee has the reading is a conjunction (see Ewald, § 337, a.): “that אֲשֶ ר the Alexandrian translator read the same, as men may not be able to say, This is Jezebel,” i.e., the has sometimes τῆ όλ ω , like that they may no more be able to recognise the Vulgate, and sometimes Σ , both Jezebel. unquestionably from mere conjecture. The 2 Kings 10 “princes of the city” are, according to v. 5, the prefect of the palace and the captain of the city; ;elders,” the magistrates of Samaria“ ,זְּׂקֵ נִים Extermination of the Other Sons of Ahab, or the the Brethren of Ahaziah of Judah, and of the the foster-fathers and tutors ,אֹּמְּׂ נִים אַחְּׂאָ ב and Prophets of Baal. appointed by Ahab for his sons and grandsons. In v. 2 the .הָ אֹּמְּׂ נִים is governed freely by אַחְּׂאָ ב Kings 10:1–11. Extermination of the Seventy 2 Sons of Ahab in Samaria.—Vv. 1–3. As Ahab had form an explanatory הַ נֶשֶ ק to וְּׂאִֹּתְּׂ כֶ ם words from in the wider בָ נִים) seventy sons in Samaria circumstantial clause: “since the sons of your sense, viz., sons, including grandsons [see at v. lord are with you, and with you the war- chariots and horses, and a fortified city and ,אֹּמְּׂ נִים as is evident from the fact that ,[13 foster-fathers, are mentioned, whereas Ahab arms,” i.e., since you have everything in your had been dead fourteen years, and therefore his hands,—the royal princes and also the power to youngest sons could not have had foster-fathers make one of them king. It is perfectly evident any longer), Jehu sent a letter to the elders of from the words, “the sons of your lord,” i.e., of the city and to the foster-fathers of the princes, king Joram, that the seventy sons of Ahab to the effect that they were to place one of the included grandsons also. This challenge of Jehu sons of their lord upon the throne. There is was only a ruse, by which he hoped to discover the feelings of the leading men of the capital of אֶ ל־שָרֵ י something very strange in the words the kingdom, because he could not venture,

2 KINGS Page 39 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study without being well assured of them, to proceed done what He spake through His servant to Samaria to exterminate the remaining Elijah.” members of the royal family of Ahab who were 2 Kings 10:11. The effect of these words was, to fight concerning, i.e., for that the people looked quietly on when he ,נִלְּׂחַם עַ ל .living there a person, as in Judg. 9:17. proceeded to slay all the rest of the house of 2 Kings 10:4, 5. This ruse had the desired Ahab, i.e., all the more distant relatives in result. The recipients of the letter were in great Jezreel, and “all his great men,” i.e., the superior fear, and said, Two kings could not stand before officers of the fallen dynasty, and “all his him, how shall we? and sent messengers to acquaintances,” i.e., friends and adherents, and announce their submission, and to say that they “all his priests,” probably court priest, such as were willing to carry out his commands, and the heathen kings had; not secular counsellors had no desire to appoint a king. or nearest servants (Thenius), a meaning which never has, not even in 2 Sam. 8:18 and 1 כֹּהֲ נִים Kings 10:6, 7. Jehu then wrote them a second 2 letter, to say that if they would hearken to his Kings 4:5. voice, they were to send to him on the morrow 2 Kings 10:12–17. Extermination of the at this time, to Jezreel, the heads of the sons of Brothers of Ahaziah of Judah and of the Other their lord; which they willingly did, slaying the Members of Ahab’s Dynasty.—Vv. 12ff. Jehu seventy men, and sending him their heads in then set out to Samaria; and on the way, at the the heads of the men binding-house of the shepherds, he met with“ רָ ,אשֵי אַ נְּׂשֵ יבְּׂ נֵי אד׳ .baskets of sons of your lord,” i.e., of the male the brethren of Ahaziah, who were about to visit their royal relations, and when he learned may be אַ נְּׂשֵ י descendants of Ahab, in which who they were, had them all seized, viz., forty- has the two men, and put to death at the cistern of the בְּׂ נֵי־אֲ דֹּנֵיכֶ ם explained from the fact that ”,he came and went“ ,וַיָבֹּא וַיֵלֶ ְך .meaning “royal princes” (see the similar case in binding-house Judg. 19:22). In order to bring out still more appears pleonastic; the words are not to be clearly the magnitude of Jehu’s demand, the transposed, however, as Böttcher and Thenius number of the victims required is repeated in ,is added וַיֵלֶ ְך propose after the Syriac, but the circumstantial clause, “and there were because Jehu did not go at once to Samaria, but the (אֵ ת) seventy men of the king’s sons with did what follows on the way. By transposing the great men of the city, who had brought them words, the slaying of the relations of Ahaziah up.” would be transferred to Samaria, in הּוא Kings 10:8, 9. When the heads were brought, contradiction to vv. 15ff.—The words from 2 Jehu had them piled up in two heaps before the onwards, and from to , are מֶלֶ ְך יְּׂהּודָ ה וְּׂיֵהּוא בֵ ית וגו׳ city-gate, and spoke the next morning to the assembled people in front of them: “Ye are two circumstantial clauses, in which the subject is added in the second clause for the sake יֵהּוא righteous. Behold I have conspired against my lord, and have slain him, but who has slain all of greater clearness: “when he was at the these?” Jehu did not tell the people that the binding-house of the shepherds on the road, king’s sons had been slain by his command, but and Jehu (there) met with the brethren of ,Β ιθ κάθ) בֵ דית־עֵקֶ הָ רֹּעִ ים ”… spake as if this had been done without his Ahaziah, he said interfering by a higher decree, that he might LXX) is explained by , after the Chaldee thereby justify his conspiracy in the eyes of the , as signifying locus conventus בֵ ית כְּׂ נִישַ ת רָ עַ יָא people, and make them believe what he says still further in v. 10: “See then that of the word pastorum, the meeting-place of the shepherds; of the Lord nothing falls to the ground (i.e., and Gesenius adopts the same view. But the remains unfulfilled) which Jehovah has spoken rest of the earlier translators for the most part concerning the house of Ahab; and Jehovah has adopt the rendering, locus ligationis pastorum,

2 KINGS Page 40 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

to bind, and think of a house ubi shameless manner, and was able to announce ,עָקַ ד from pastores ligabant oves quando eas tondebant. In to the Rechabites that they would be exempted any case it was a house, or perhaps more from the Chaldaean judgment for their faithful correctly a place, where the shepherds were in observance of their father’s precept (Jer. 35). the habit of meeting, and that on the road from Rechab, from whom the descendants of Jezreel to Samaria; according to Eusebius on Jehonadab derived their tribe-name, was the the Onom. s.v. Β ιθ κάθ, a place fifteen Roman son of Hammath, and belonged to the tribe of miles from Legio (Lejun, Megiddo), in the great the Kenites (1 Chron. 2:55), to which Hobab the plain of Jezreel: a statement which may be father-in-law of Moses also belonged (Num. correct with the exception of the small number 10:29); so that the Rechabites were probably of miles, but which does not apply to the descendants of Hobab, since the Kenites the present village of Beit Kad to the east of Jenin sons of Hobab had gone with the Israelites from (Rob. Pal. iii. p. 157), with which, according to the Arabian desert to Canaan, and had there carried on their nomad life (Judg. 1:16; 4:11; 1 for ,אֲחֵי אֲחַ זְּׂיָהּו .Thenius, it exactly coincides Sam. 15:6; see Witsii Miscell. ss. ii. p. 223ff.). Ahaziah’s brothers’ This Jehonadab was therefore a man ,בְּׂ נֵי אֲחֵ י אח׳ which we have sons, in 2 Chron. 22:8, were not the actual distinguished for the strictness of his life, and brothers of Ahaziah, since they had been Jehu appears to have received him in this carried off by the Arabians and put to death friendly manner on account of the great before he ascended the throne (2 Chron. 21:17), distinction in which he was held, not only in his but partly step- brothers, i.e., sons of Joram by own tribe, but also in Israel generally, that he his concubines, and partly Ahaziah’s nephews might exalt himself in the eyes of the people is“ ,הֲ יֵש אֶ ת־לְּׂבָבְּׂ ָך ad salutandum, i.e., to through his friendship.21—In ,לִשְּׂ לום .and cousins inquire how they were, or to visit the sons of with regard to thy heart honourable or is used to subordinate the noun to אֵ ת ”?the king (Joram) and of the queen-mother, i.e., upright Jezebel, therefore Joram’s brothers. In v. 1 they the clause, in the sense of quoad (see Ewald, § are both included among the “sons” of Ahab. all that remained to“ ,כָ ל־הַ נִשְּׂאָרִ ים לְּׂ אַחְּׂאָ ב .(.a ,277 2 Kings 10:15ff. As Jehu proceeded on his way, Ahab,” i.e., all the remaining members of Ahab’s he met with Jehonadab the son of Rechab, and house. having saluted him, inquired, “Is they heart true as my heart towards thy heart?” and on his 2 Kings 10:18–27. Extermination of the Prophets and Priests of Baal and of the Baal- it is (honourable or true),” he bade“ ,יֵש replying Worship.—Vv. 28ff. Under the pretence of if it is wishing to serve Baal even more than Ahab had“ ,וָיֵש him come up into the chariot, saying (so), give me thy hand;” whereupon he said still done, Jehu appointed a great sacrificial festival further, “Come with me and see my zeal for for this idol, and had all the worshippers of Baal Jehovah,” and then drove with him to Samaria, throughout all the land summoned to attend it; and there exterminated all that remained of he then placed eighty of his guards around the Ahab’s family. Jehonadab the son of Rechab was temple of Baal in which they were assembled, the tribe-father of the Rechabites (Jer. 35:6). and after the sacrifice was offered, had the The rule which the latter laid down for his sons priests and worshippers of Baal cut down by and descendants for all time, was to lead a them with the sword. Objectively considered, simple nomad life, namely, to dwell in tents, the slaying of the worshippers of Baal was in follow no agricultural pursuits, and abstain accordance with the law, and, according to the from wine; which rule they observed so theocratical principle, was perfectly right; but sacredly, that the prophet held them the subjective motives which impelled Jehu, up as models before his own contemporaries, apart from the artifice, were thoroughly selfish, who broke the law of God in the most as Seb. Schmidt has correctly observed. For

2 KINGS Page 41 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study since the priests and prophets of Baal priests of Baal were preparing to offer sacrifice, throughout the Israelitish kingdom were bound Jehu had eighty men of his guards stationed up with the dynasty of Ahab, with all their before the temple, and laid this injunction upon interests and with their whole existence, they them: “Whoever lets one of the men escape might be very dangerous to Jehu, if on any whom I bring into your hands (we must read his life shall answer for his ,(יִמָ לֵ ט instead of יְּׂמַ לֵ ט political grounds he should happen not to promote their objects, whereas by their as in 1 ,נַֹפְּׂ שו תֹּתַחַ נַֹפְּׂ שו .the escaped man’s) life) extermination he might hope to draw to his side the whole of the very numerous Kings 20:39. when he (the sacrificing :כְּׂכַ ֹּלתו .supporters of the Jehovah-worship, which had 2 Kings 10:25 formerly been legally established in Israel, and priest, not Jehu) had finished the burnt-offering may also be taken as ֹּו thereby establish his throne more firmly. The (the singular suffix very fact that Jehu allowed the calf-worship to indefinite, when one had finished, vid., Ewald, § continue, is a proof that he simply used religion 294, b.), Jehu commanded the runners and as the means of securing his own ends (v. 29). aides-de-camp: Come and smite them (the (v. 20), “sanctify a festal assembly,” worshippers of Baal), without one coming out קַדְּׂ שּו עֲצָרָ ה i.e., proclaim in the land a festal assembly for (escaping); whereupon they smote them with the edge of the sword, i.e., slew them ,עֲצֶרֶ ת = עֲצָרָ ה Baal (compare Isa. 1:13; and for -and the runners and aides :וַיַשְּׂ לִ יכּו .and they proclaimed, unsparingly ,וַיִקְּׂרָ אּו .(see at Lev. 23:36 sc. the festal meeting. de-camp threw (those who had been slain) away, and went into the citadel of the temple of פֶ ה Kings 10:21. The temple of Baal was filled 2 cannot be the city of the עִ יר בֵ ית־הַבַעַ ל .Baal in פֶ ה ”.from one edge (end) to the other“ ,לָֹפֶ ה temple of Baal, i.e., that part of the city in which a the temple of Baal stood, for the runners were ,פֵאָ ה this sense is not to be derived from corner (Cler., Ges.), but signifies mouth, or the already in the court of the temple of Baal; but it upper rim of a vessel. Metaphora sumta a is no doubt the temple-citadel, the true temple- —(locus circumseptus ,ֹעּור from עִ יר) vasibus humore aliquo plenis: Vatabl. house is the keeper of templum Baalis magnifice exstructum instar אֲשֶ רעַ ל־הַמֶלְֹּּׂתָחָ ה .Kings 10:22 2 the wardrobe (Arab. praefectus vestium), for the arcis alicujus (Seb. Schm.). signifies vestiarium (Ges. Thes. p. 2 Kings 10:26. They then fetched the columns מֶ לְֹּּׂתָחָ ה . ἁ . λ out of the temple and burned them (the (מַצֵ בֹּת) The reference is not to the wardrobe of .(764 taken מַצְּׂ בֹּת refers to the plural יִשְּׂרְּׂ ֹפּוהָ the king’s palace, out of which Jehu had every suffix in one who took part in the feast supplied with a as an abstract noun, as in 2 Kings 3:3; cf. Ewald, festal dress or new caftan (Deres., Then., etc.), מַצְּׂבַ ת a.). They then broke in pieces the ,317 § but the wardrobe of the temple of Baal, since ,column of Baal, i.e., the real image of Baal ,הַבַעַ ל the priests of Baal had their own sacred dresses like the priests of almost all religions (as Silius probably a conical stone dedicated to Baal, which were burned, were ,מַצֵ בֹּת has expressly shown in his Ital. iii. 24–27, of the whereas the priests of the Gadetanic Hercules). These wooden columns as ά δ ι or ύ βω ι of dresses were only worn at the time of worship, Baal (see Movers, Phöniz. i. p. 674). and were kept in a wardrobe in the temple. 2 Kings 10:27. Lastly, they destroyed the 2 Kings 10:23, 24. Jehu then came with privies, for ,לְּׂמַחֲרָ אות temple itself and made it Jehonadab to the temple, and commanded the worshippers of Baal to be carefully examined, which the Masoretes have substituted the sinks, as a mark of the ,מוצָ אות that there might not be one of the worshippers euphemistic of Jehovah with (among) them. When the greatest insult, many examples of which are to

2 KINGS Page 42 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study be met with among Oriental tribes (vid., Ezra oppression of the poor began to prevail, as we 6:11, Dan. 2:5, and Haevernick in loc.).—Thus may see from the prophecies of Hosea and Jehu exterminated Baal from Israel. This Amos (Amos 5:10ff., 6:1–6; Hos. 6:7ff.); and in remark in v. 28 forms the introduction to the addition to the Jehovah-worship, which was history of Jehu’s reign, with which the last performed in an idolatrous manner (Hos. 8:13; epoch in the history of the ten tribes begins. 9:4, 5), the worship of Baal was carried on most vigorously (Hos. 2:13, 15; 10:1, 2), so that the From the Commencement of the Reigns of Jehu people made pilgrimages to Bethel, Gilgal, and in Israel, and Athaliah in Judah, to the even to Beersheba in the south of the kingdom Destruction of the Kingdom of Israel. of Judah (Hos. 4:15; Amos 4:4; 5:5; 8:14), and 2 Kings 10:28–17:41. In the 161 years which on account of the worship thus zealously this epoch embraces, from B.C. 883 to 722, the performed, relied in carnal security upon the fate of the kingdom of Israel was accomplished. protection of God, and scoffed at the judgments The first hundred years, which comprised the of the Lord which were threatened by the reigns of Jehu and his descendants, Jehoahaz, prophets (Amos 5:14, 18). This internal Jehoash, and Jeroboam II, were the last day of corruption increased with the death of grace for the rebellious ten tribes, at the Jeroboam, till all civil order was dissolved. expiration of which the judgment began to Anarchy, conflicts for the possession of the burst upon them. As the anointing of Jehu by throne, and repeated regicides, broke up the Elisha was performed by the command of God, kingdom and made it ripe for the judgment of so also was the religious reform, which Jehu destruction, which was gradually accomplished vigorously commenced with the extermination by the Assyrians, whom one party in the reign of the Baal-worship, a fruit of the labours of the of had called to their help, under Pul, prophets Elijah and Elisha within the sinful Tiglath-pileser, and Shalmanasar.—The kingdom; but this reform stood still half-way, kingdom of Judah, on the other hand, was since Jehu merely restored the idolatrous purified from the destructive consequence of Jehovah-worship introduced by Jeroboam, and the alliance with the dynasty of Ahab through neither he himself nor his successors desisted the overthrow by the high priest Jehoiada of the from that sin. In order, therefore, if possible, to godless Athaliah, who had murdered the royal complete the work begun by His prophets of children after the death of Ahaziah and seized converting Israel to its God, the Lord now began upon the government, and, with the renewal of to visit the rebellious tribes with severe the covenant and the extermination of the chastisements, giving them up into the power of worship of Baal under the young king whom the Syrians, who under Hazael not only Jehoiada had trained, was brought back to the conquered the whole of the land to the east of theocratic path; and notwithstanding the fact the Jordan, but almost annihilated the military that in the closing years of Joash and Amaziah force of the Israelites (2 Kings 10:32, 33; 13:3, idolatry found admission again, was preserved 7). This chastisement did not remain without in that path, in which it increased in strength fruit. Jehoahaz prayed to the Lord, and the Lord and stability, so that not only were the wounds had compassion upon the oppressed for the quickly healed which the war with Israel, sake of His covenant with the patriarchs, and occasioned by Amaziah’s pride, had inflicted sent them deliverers in Joash, who recovered upon it through the conquest and plunder of the conquered land from the Syrians after the Jerusalem (2 Kings 14:8ff.), but during the death of Hazael, and in Jeroboam, who even sixty-eight years comprised in the reigns of restored the ancient boundaries of the kingdom Uzziah and Jotham, the people rose to a state of (2 Kings 13:4, 5, and 23ff., 14:25, 26). But with great prosperity and wealth through the this renewal of external strength, luxuriance pursuit of agriculture and trade, and a and debauchery, partiality in judgment and thoughtful development of the resources of the

2 KINGS Page 43 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study land, and the kingdom acquired great external 2 Kings 10:30, 31. Jehu is promised the power through the humiliation of the possession of the throne to the fourth Philistines and the subjugation of the Edomites generation of his sons for having exterminated once more (2 Chron. 26). At the same time, the godless royal house of Ahab (vid., 2 Kings neither of these kings was able entirely to 15:12). The divine sentence, “because thou hast suppress the illegal worship of the high places, acted well to do right in mine eyes. (because although the temple-worship was regularly thou) hast done as it was in my heart to the sustained according to the law; and with the house of Ahab,” refers to the deed as such, and increase of wealth and power, not only did not to the subjective motives by which Jehu had luxuriance and pride set in, but also idolatry been actuated. For it is obvious that it had not and an inclination to heathen ways (Isa. 2:5–8 sprung from pure zeal for the honour of the and 16ff., 5:18ff.); so that even in the reigns of Lord, from the limitation added in v. 31: “but Uzziah and Jotham predicted the day of Jehu did not take heed to walk in the law of the Lord’s judgment, which was to fall upon Jehovah with all his heart, and did not depart everything lofty and proud (Isa. 2–4). This from the sins of Jeroboam.” prophecy began to be fulfilled, so far as its first 2 Kings 10:32, 33. Therefore (this link of beginnings were concerned, even in the time of connection follows from the actual fact, though Ahaz. Under this weak and idolatrous ruler it is not distinctly mentioned in the text) Hazael idolatry gained the upper hand, and the had now to inflict chastisement upon faithless worship of Jehovah was suppressed; and this Israel. In Jehu’s days Jehovah began “to cut off open apostasy from the Lord was followed by in Israel,” i.e., to rend away certain portions immediate punishment. The allied kings of from the kingdom. “Hazael smote them (the Israel and Syria forced their way victoriously Israelites) on the whole of the border of Israel,” into Judah, and even stood before the gates of i.e., of the kingdom, “from Jordan to the sun- Jerusalem, with the intention of destroying the rising (i.e., on the eastern side of the Jordan), is אֵ ת כָל־אֶרֶ ץ) kingdom of Judah, when Ahaz, despising the the whole of the land of Gilead help of the Lord, which was offered him by the which must be supplied יַכֶ ה prophet Isaiah, purchased the assistance of dependent upon namely, the territory of the tribes of ,(יַכֵ ם Tiglath-pileser the king of Assyria with silver from and gold, and was thereby delivered from his Gad, Reuben, and Half-Manasseh, from Aroer on foes. But this made him dependent upon the the brook Arnon (now Araayr, a ruin on the Assyrians, who would have conquered the northern border of the Mojeb (Arnon) valley; kingdom of Judah and destroyed it, as they had see at Num. 32:34), the southern border of the already destroyed the kingdom of Israel, had Israelitish land to the east of the Jordan (Deut. not the Lord hearkened to the prayer of the 2:36; 3:12), both Gilead and Bashan,” the two pious king and miraculously routed the countries into which Gilead in the broader powerful army of before the walls sense was divided (see at Deut. 3:8–17).— of Jerusalem. These conquests took place during the twenty- eight years’ reign of Jehu, since Hazael began to Reign of Jehu of Israel. reign before Jehu, viz., while Joram was king, 2 Kings 10:28, 29. Jehu exterminated the and had already fought successfully against the worship of Baal from Israel; but the sins of Israelites at Ramoth in Joram’s reign (2 Kings Jeroboam, the golden calves at Bethel and Dan, 8:28, 29), but not in the later part of Jehu’s that is to say, the idolatrous worship of Jehovah, reign, as Thenius supposes. he allowed to remain. “The golden calves, etc.:” 2 Kings 10:34–36. Conclusion of the history of this is a supplementary and explanatory Jehu’s reign. The length of his reign is not given apposition to “the sins of Jeroboam.” till the end in this instance (v. 36), contrary to

2 KINGS Page 44 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

,(Chethib) מְּׂ מותִ ים .the usual custom in our books, because his wife of the second rank ascent of the throne is not expressly mentioned generally a substantive, mortes (Jer. 16:4; Ezek. in what precedes; but the general character of 28:8), here an adjective: slain or set apart for his reign is given in immediate connection with ,is the participle Hophal מּומָתִ ים death. The Keri the account of his anointing and of the is to be taken in בַחֲדַ ר הם׳ .extermination of Ahab’s dynasty. as in 2 Chron. 22:11 she stole him (took him ֹּתִ :גְּׂ נֹּב Kings 11 connection with 2 away secretly) from the rest of the king’s sons, Tyranny and Overthrow of Athaliah, and who were about to be put to death, into the Coronation of Joash. chamber of the beds, i.e., not the children’s bed- room, but a room in the palace where the beds 2 Kings 11:1–3. The Government of Athaliah (mattresses and counterpanes) were kept, for (cf. 2 Chron. 22:10–12). After the death of which in the East there is a special room that is Ahaziah of Judah, his mother Athaliah, a not used as a dwelling-room (see Chardin in daughter of Ahab and Jezebel (see at 2 Kings Harm. Beobb. iii. p. 357). This was the place in 8:18 and 26), seized upon the government, by which at first it was easiest to conceal the child putting to death all the king’s descendants with they ( and the“ ,וַיַסְֹּּׂתִ רּו .the exception of Joash, a son of Ahaziah of only and its nurse a year old, who had been secretly carried off nurse) concealed him,” is not to be altered into after the Chronicles, as Thenius וַֹּתַסְֹּּׂתִ ירֵ הּו from the midst of the royal children, who were put to death, by Jehosheba, his father’s sister, maintains. The masculine is used in the place of the wife of the high priest Jehoiada, and was the feminine, as is frequently the case. first of all hidden with his nurse in the bed- Afterwards he was concealed with her (with chamber, and afterwards kept concealed from Jehosheba) in the house of Jehovah, i.e., in the Athaliah for six years in the high priest’s house. home of the high-priest in one of the buildings .is no doubt original, the of the court of the temple רָ אֲתָ ה before ו The subject, Athaliah the mother of Ahaziah, being 2 Kings 11:4–20. Dethronement of Athaliah placed at the head absolutely, and a and Coronation of Joash (compare the account in 2 Chron. 23, which is more elaborate in :וְּׂרָ אֲתָ ה circumstantial clause introduced with “Athaliah, when she saw that, etc., rose up.” several points).22 all the royal seed, i.e., all the 2 Kings 11:4. In the seventh year of Athaliah’s ,כָ ל־זֶרַ ֹעהַמַמְּׂ לָכָ ה sons and relations of Ahaziah, who could put in reign, Jehoiada sent for the captains of the any claim to succeed to the throne. At the same king’s body-guard to come to him into the time there were hardly any other direct temple, and concluded a covenant with them, descendants of the royal family in existence making them swear and showing them the beside the sons of Ahaziah, since the elder king’s son, namely, to dethrone the tyrant brothers of Ahaziah had been carried away by Athaliah and set the king’s son upon the throne. centuriones, military commanders of ,שָרֵ יהַמְּׂאָ יות the Arabs and put to death, and the rest of the closer blood-relations of the male sex had been the executioners and runners, i.e., of the royal may be מְּׂאָ יות slain by Jehu (see at 2 Kings 10:13).—Jehosheba body-guard. The Chethîb is abridged מֵאָ ה the wife of explained from the fact that ,(יְּׂהושַ בְּׂעַ ת in the Chronicles ,יְּׂהושֶ בַ ֹע) = כָרִ יוְּׂרָ צִ ים vid., Ewald, § 267, d.). On) מַאֲ יָה the high priest Jehoiada (2 Chron. 22:11), was a from daughter of king Joram and a sister of Ahaziah, Kings 1:38) see the Comm. on 2 1) הַכְּׂרֵתִ יוְּׂהַפְּׂלֵתִ י but she was most likely not a daughter of as a periphrasis of the לְּׂ Athaliah, as this worshipper of Baal would Sam. 8:18; and on hardly have allowed her own daughter to marry genitive, see Ewald, § 292, a. In 2 Chron. 23:1–3 the high priest, but had been born to Joram by a

2 KINGS Page 45 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study the chronicler not only gives the names of these understand the king’s halberdiers or the guard captains, but relates still more minutely that of the palace, is therefore proved to be they went about in the land and summoned the unfounded and untenable. And if there could be Levites and heads of families in Israel to any doubt on the matter, it would be removed Jerusalem, probably under the pretext of a by vv. 7 and 10. According to v. 7, two parts of festal celebration; whereupon Jehoiada those who went away (were relieved) on the concluded a covenant with the persons Sabbath were to undertake the guarding of the assembled, to ensure their assistance in the house of Jehovah about the king, i.e., to keep execution of his plan. guard over that room in the temple where the 2 Kings 11:5–8. Jehoiada then communicated king then was. Could Jehoiada have used the to those initiated into the plan the necessary royal body-guard, that was being relieved from instructions for carrying it out, assigning them guarding the palace, for such a purpose as this? the places which they were to occupy. “The Who can imagine that this is a credible thing? third part of you that come on the Sabbath (i.e., According to v. 10, Jehoiada gave to the mount guard) shall keep the guard of the king’s captains over a hundred the weapons of king and the David, which were in the house of Jehovah. Did ,(וְּׂשָמְּׂ רּו is a corruption of וְּׂ שֹּמְּׂרֵ י) house the palace-guard then return without weapons? third part shall be at the gate Sur, and the third In 2 Chron. 23:4, “those coming on the Sabbath” part at the gate behind the runners, and (ye) are correctly described as the priests and shall keep guard over the house for defence; Levites coming on the Sabbath, i.e., the priests and the two parts of you, (namely) all who and Levites who entered upon their week’s depart on the Sabbath, shall keep the guard of duty at the temple on the Sabbath. According to the house of Jehovah for the king; and ye shall this explanation of the words, which is the only surround the king round about, every one with one that can be grammatically sustained, the his weapons in his hand; and whoever presses facts were as follows: “When Jehoiada had into the ranks shall be slain, and shall be with initiated the captains of the royal halberdiers, the king when he goes out and in,” i.e., in all his and with their help the heads of families of the people generally, into his plan of raising the ,יֹּצְּׂאֵ י הַשַ בָ ת and בָאֵ י הַשַ בָ ת steps. The words “those coming and those going out on the youthful Joash to the throne and dethroning Sabbath,” denote the divisions of the watch, Athaliah, he determined to carry out the affair those who performed duty on the Sabbath and chiefly with the help of the priests and Levites those who were relieved on the Sabbath; not who entered upon their duty in the temple on the military guard at the palace however, but the Sabbath, and of those who left or were the temple-guard, which consisted of Levites. relived at the same time, and entrusted the For David had divided the priests and Levites command over these men to the captains of the into classes, every one of which had to perform royal halberdiers, that they might occupy the service for a week and was relieved on the approaches to the temple with the priests and Sabbath: compare 1 Chron. 23–26 with Levites under their command, so as to prevent (Ant. vii. 14, 7), who expressly says the approach of any military from the king’s that every one of the twenty-four classes of palace and protect the youthful king. These priests had to attend to the worship of God “for captains had come to the temple without eight days, from Sabbath to Sabbath,” also with weapons, to avoid attracting attention. Jehoiada :5. On the other hand, we do not know therefore gave them the weapons of king David that there was any similar division and that were kept in the temple. obligation to serve in connection with the royal With regard to the distribution of the different body-guard or with the army. The current posts, the fact that two-thirds are spoken of opinion, that by those who come on the Sabbath first of all in vv. 5, 6, and then two parts in v. 7, and those who go out on the Sabbath we are to occasions no difficulty. For the two-thirds

2 KINGS Page 46 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study mentioned in vv. 5, 6 were those who came on v. 19, the chief men were in the temple with the whole of the (assembled) people, and did not go שְֹּּׂתֵ י ) ”the Sabbath, whereas the “two divisions out of the house of Jehovah into the king’s referred to in v. 7 were all who went (הַ יָדות house till after the anointing of Joash and the away on the Sabbath. Consequently the priests death of Athaliah. The other third was to station and Levites, who came on the Sabbath and or, according to the ,(סּור) itself at the gate Sur entered upon the week’s service, were divided foundation-gate. There ,(יְּׂסוד) into three sections; and those who should have Chronicles, Yesod been relieved, but were detained, into two. is no doubt as to the identity of the gate Sur and Probably the number of those who came this the gate Yesod; only we cannot decide whether time to perform service at the temple was much one of these names has simply sprung from a larger than usual, as the priests were initiated copyist’s error, or whether the gate had two ,שַ עַ ריְּׂסוד into Jehoiada’s secret; so that it was possible to different names. The name make three divisions of those who arrived, foundation-gate, suggests a gate in the outer whereas those who were about to depart could court of the temple, at the hollow of either the only be formed into two. The three divisions of Tyropoeon or the Kedron; for the context those who were entering upon duty are also precludes our thinking of a palace gate. The distinctly mentioned in the Chronicles; third division was to be posted “at the gate whereas, instead of the two divisions of those behind the runners;” or, as it is stated in v. 19, who were relieved, “all the people” are spoken “at the gate of the runners.” It is very evident of. The description of the different posts which from v. 19 that this gate led from the temple- were assigned to these several companies court to the royal palace upon Zion, and was causes some difficulty. In general, so much is therefore on the western side of the court of the clearly indicated in vv. 7 and 8, that the two temple. This also follows from v. 4 of the divisions of those who were relieved on the Chronicles, according to which this division was Sabbath were to keep guard over the young לְּׂ שֹּעֲרֵ י ) ”to act as “doorkeepers of the thresholds king in the house of Jehovah, and therefore to i.e., to keep guard at the gate of the ,(הַסִפִ ים remain in the inner spaces of the temple-court for his protection; whereas the three divisions thresholds. For we may safely infer, from a were הַסִפִ ים of those who were entering upon duty were comparison with 1 Chron. 9:19, that charged with the occupation of the external the thresholds of the ascent to the temple. The approaches to the temple. One-third was to last clause, “and shall keep guard over the “keep watch over the king’s house,” i.e., to house for defence,” refers to all three divisions, observe whatever had to be observed in and serves to define with greater precision the relation to the king’s palace; not to occupy the מַסַ ח .object for which they were stationed there king’s palace, or to keep guard in the citadel at the palace gate (Thenius), but to keep watch is not a proper name (LXX, Luther, and others), towards the royal palace, i.e., to post but an appellative in the sense of defence or ,depellere. The meaning is ,נָסַ ח themselves so that no one could force a way resistance, from that they were to guard the house, to keep off בְּׂבֵ ית into the temple, with which the indefinite the people, and not to let any of the party of in the Chronicles harmonizes, if we only הַמֶ לֶ ְך Athaliah force a way into the temple.—In v. 7, translate it “against (at) the king’s house.” The ּושְֹּּׂתֵ י is an explanatory apposition to כֹּל יֹּצְּׂאֵ י הש׳ idea that the palace was guarded is precluded ”,and the two parts in (of) you“ ,הַ יָדות בָכֶ ם not only by v. 13, according to which Athaliah came out of the palace to the people to the namely, all who go out on the Sabbath, i.e., are house of Jehovah, which she would not have relieved from duty. Their task, to observe the been able to do if the palace had been guarded, watch of the house of Jehovah with regard to but also by the circumstance that, according to the king, is more precisely defined in v. 8 as

2 KINGS Page 47 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

had retained the general רָ צִ ים signifying, that they were to surround the king the fact that with weapons in their hands, and slay every meaning of royal halberdiers; and the priests one who attempted to force a way into their and Levites under the command of the captains i.e., in all his undertakings, of the royal body-guard by this very act ,בְּׂצֵ אתוּובְּׂ בֹּאו .ranks being applied to the discharged the duty of the royal body-guard צֵ את וָ בוא ;or in all his steps actions and pursuits of a man, as in Deut. 28:6; itself. The chronicler has used the indefinite the whole of the people ,כָ ל־הָעָ ם etc. (see the Comm. on Num. 27:17). expression ,31:2 Thenius has explained this incorrectly: “in his assembled in the temple-court. going out of the temple and entering into the 2 Kings 11:12. After the approaches to the palace.” temple had all been occupied in this manner, 2 Kings 11:9–11. The execution of these plans. Jehoiada brought out the king’s son from his The high priest gave the captains “the spears home in the temple; or, he brought him forth, see at 2 Sam. 8:7) which set the crown upon him, and handed him the :שְּׂ לָטִ ים) and shields (belonged) to king David, that were in the testimony, i.e., the book of the law, as the rule of house of Jehovah,” i.e., the weapons which his life and action as king, according to the is וְּׂאֶ ת־הָעֵ דּות .David had presented to the sanctuary as precept in Deut. 17:18, 19 יִֹּתֵן עָלָ יו because ,יִֹּתֵן עָלָיו אֶ ת־הַ נֵזֶ ר we ought connected with הַחֲ נִית dedicatory offerings. Instead of ,cf. Mic. 4:3, Isa. 2:4), has the general meaning “delivered to him) הַחֲ נִיתֹּת probably to read handed him,” and does not specially affirm the of the Chronicles, since the הַחֲ נִיתִ ים after the they made him ,יַמְּׂ לִ יכּו .putting on of the crown is very improbable in חֲ נִית collective force of king. The subject is the persons present, might easily drop out through a through, as a matter of course, the anointing ת prose, and a copyist’s error. Jehoiada gave the captains was performed by Jehoiada and the priests, as weapons from the temple, because, as has been the Chronicles expressly affirm. Clapping the already observed, they had come unarmed, and hands was a sign of joyful acclamation, like the not, as Thenius imagines, to provide them with cry, “Long live the king” (cf. 1 Kings 1:39). old and sacred weapons instead of their 2 Kings 11:13–16. Death of Athaliah.—Vv. 13, ordinary ones. In v. 11 the position of all the 14. As soon as Athaliah heard the loud rejoicing divisions is given in a comprehensive manner, of the people, she came to the people into the for the purpose of appending the further course temple, and when she saw the youthful king in of the affair, namely, the coronation of the king. his standing-place surrounded by the princes, “Thus the halberdiers stood, every one with his the trumpeters, and the whole of the people, weapons in his hand, from the right wing of the rejoicing and blowing the trumpets, she rent house to the left wing, towards the altar (of her clothes with horror, and cried out, does not הָרָ צִ ין הָעָ ם !burnt-offering) and the (temple-) house, round Conspiracy, conspiracy about the king,” i.e., to cover the king on all mean the people running together, but the sides. For it is evident that we are not to הָרָ צִ ין original reading in the text was probably as signifying the עַ ל־הַמֶ לְֶך סָבִ יב understand the people and the halberdiers, and the ,וְּׂהָעָ ם .encircling of the king, from the statement in v 12, according to which Jehoiada did not bring Vav dropped out through an oversight of the we are to understand the הָרָ צִ ין out the king’s son till after the men had taken copyist. By to signify captains of the halberdiers with the armed ,הָרָ צִ ים up their positions. The use of is the people who הָעָ ם the captains with the armed priests and Levites Levites, as in v. 11; and put under their command for this purpose, is an had assembled besides (cf. v. 19). In the is in apposition הָרָצִ ים וְּׂהַמְּׂהַ לְּׂלִ ים הַמֶ לֶ ְך uncommon one, but it may be explained from Chronicles

2 KINGS Page 48 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

the noise of the people, the halberdiers, horse-gate. The entrance for the horses, i.e., the :הָעָ ם to way which led to the royal mews, is not to be upon ,עַ מּוד and those who praised the king. The identified with the horse-gate mentioned in which the king stood, was not a pillar, but an Neh. 3:28; for this was a gate in the city wall, elevated standing-place (suggestus) for the king whereas the road from the temple to the royal ,mews, which were no doubt near the palace 2 ,בַמָ בוא) at the eastern gate of the inner court Chron. 23:13 compared with Ezek. 46:2), when was inside the wall. he visited the temple on festive occasions (cf. 2 2 Kings 11:17–20. Renewal of the covenant, Kings 23:3), and it was most probably identical extermination of the worship of Baal, and .mentioned in 2 entrance of the king into the palace.—V. 17 (כִ יור) with the brazen scaffold Chron. 6:13, which would serve to explain After Jehoash was crowned and Athaliah put to (according to the right” (Angl. V. “as the death, Jehoiada concluded the covenant (1“ ,כַמִשְּׂ פָ ט between Jehovah on the one hand and the king manner was”). are not merely the and people on the other, and (2) between the הַשָרִ ים captains mentioned in vv. 4, 9, and 10, but these king and the people. The former was simply a together with the rest of the assembled heads renewal of the covenant which the Lord had ,(Chron. 13:2). made with Israel through Moses (Ex. 24 2 ,רָ אשֵ י הָאָ בות) of the nation the trumpets, the trumpeters. The whereby the king and the people bound ,הַחֲ צֹּצְּׂ רות i.e., to live as the ,לִהְּׂ יות לְּׂעַ ם לַ יהוָ ה reference is to the Levitical musicians themselves mentioned in 1 Chron. 13:8; 15:24, etc.; for they people of the Lord, or to keep His law (cf. Deut. all the 4:20; 27:9, 10), and was based upon the“ ,כָ ל־הָעָ ם וגו׳ are distinguished from “testimony” handed to the king. This covenant people of the land rejoicing and blowing the naturally led to the covenant between the king trumpets,” i.e., not all the military men of the and the people, whereby the king bound land who were present in Jerusalem (Thenius), himself to rule his people according to the law but the mass of the people present in the of the Lord, and the people vowed that they temple (Bertheau). would be obedient and subject to the king as 2 Kings 11:15. Jehoiada then commanded the the ruler appointed by the Lord (cf. 2 Sam. 5:3). those placed over the army, The renewal of the covenant with the Lord was ,פְּׂקֻדֵ י הַחַ יִל captains i.e., the armed men of the Levites, to lead out necessary, because under the former kings the Athaliah between the ranks, and to slay every people had fallen away from the Lord and one who followed her, i.e., who took her part served Baal. The immediate consequence of the inf. abs. instead of imperative); for, as is renewal of the covenant, therefore, was the ,הָמֵ ת) added supplementarily in explanation of this extermination of the worship of Baal, which is command, the priest had (previously) said: “Let mentioned at once in v. 18, although its proper her not be slain in the house of Jehovah.” The place in order of time is after v. 18. All the as in v. 14) went to the ,כָ ל־עַ ם הָאָרֶ ץ) temple was not to be defiled with the blood of people the usurper and murderess. temple of Baal, threw down his altars, broke his 2 Kings 11:16. Thus they made way for her on images (the columns of Baal and Astarte) ,(as in Deut. 9:21 הֵיטֵ ב) both sides, or, according to the correct rightly, i.e., completely and slew the priest Mattan, probably the chief ,יָשִ ימּו לָ ּה יָדַ יִם ,explanation given by the Chaldee they formed lines (Spalier, fences) and escorted priest of Baal, before his altars. That the temple her back, and she came by the way of the of Baal stood within the limits of the sanctuary, horses’ entrance into the palace, and was there i.e., of the temple of Jehovah (Thenius), cannot .is explained in the be shown to be probable either from 2 Chron מְּׂ בוא הַסּוסִ ים .put to death 24:7 or from the last clause of this verse. (For 2 entrance of the Chron. 24:7 see the fuller remarks on 2 Kings ,מְּׂ בוא שַ רעַ הַסּוסִ ים Chronicles by

2 KINGS Page 49 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

12:5.) The words “and the priest set overseers with the general remark that all the people over the house of Jehovah” do not affirm that rejoiced, sc. at the coronation of Joash, and the Jehoiada created the office of overseer over the city was quiet, when they slew Athaliah with temple for the purpose of guarding against a the sword. This is the way, so far as the sense is fresh desecration of the temple by idolatry concerned, in which the last two clauses are to (Thenius), but simply that he appointed be connected. overseers over the temple, namely, priests and Levites entrusted with the duty of watching 2 Kings 12 over the performance of worship according to Reign of King Joash of Judah, and Repairing of the precepts of the law, as is more minutely the Temple. described in vv. 18 and 19. 2 Kings 11:19. And he took the captains, and 2 Kings 12. All that is recorded of the forty they brought the king down out of the house of years’ reign of Joash, in addition to the general characteristics of the reign (vv. 1–4), is the ,is not to be pressed יִקַ ח Jehovah, etc. The word repairing of the temple which was effected by but simply affirms that Jehoiada entrusted the him (vv. 5–17), and the purchased retreat of the persons named with the duty of conducting the Syrians from their invasion of Judah (vv. 18 and king into his palace. Beside the captains over a 19), and finally his violent death in consequence of a conspiracy formed against הַכָרִ י hundred (see at v. 4) there are mentioned .i.e., the royal halberdiers (the body- him, of which we have only a brief notice in vv ,וְּׂהָרָ צִ ים guard), who had passed over to the new king 20–22. The parallel account in 2 Chron. 24 immediately after the fall of Athaliah and now supplies several additions to this: viz., concerning the wives of Joash, the distribution all the ,כָ ל־עַ ם הָאָרֶ ץ followed their captains, and of the Levites at the repairing of the temple, the rest of the people assembled. Instead of the death of Jehoiada, and the seduction of Joash to halberdiers there are mentioned in the idolatry by the chief men of Judah, and the the nobles and stoning of the prophet Zechariah, who ,הָאַדִ ירִ יםהַ מושְּׂ לִ ים בָעָ ם Chronicles lords in the nation,—a completion implied in condemned this rebellion,—all of which can the facts themselves, since Jehoiada had drawn easily be fitted into our account. the heads of the nation into his plan, and on the 2 Kings 12:1–4 (1–5). Reign of Joash.—V. 1 (1, other hand the express allusion to the body- 2). His age on ascending the throne, viz., seven guard might be omitted as of inferior years (cf. 2 Kings 11:4).—Commencement and that the length of his reign. His mother’s name was יֹּרִ ידּו importance. We cannot infer from bridge between Moriah and Zion was not yet in Zibiah of Beersheba. existence, as Thenius supposes, but simply that 2 Kings 12:2 (3). Joash did that which was all“ ,כָ ל־יָמָיו אֲשֶ ר וגו׳ the bridge was lower than the temple-courts. right in the eyes of the Lord the gate of the runners his days that,” etc., i.e., during the whole period ,שַ עַ ר הָרָ צִ ים Instead of אֲשֶ ר i.e., of the halberdiers), we find in the of his life that Jehoiada instructed him (for) the upper gate, which after substantives indicating time, place, and ,שַ עַ רהָעֶלְּׂ יון Chronicles appears to have been a gate of the temple, mode, see Ewald, § 331, c., 3; and for the use of אֲשֶ ר according to 2 Kings 15:35 and 2 Chron. 27:3. the suffix attached to the noun defined by The statement that they came by the way of the compare 2 Kings 13:14); not “all his life ,וגו׳ runners’ gate into the house of the king is not at variance with this, for it may be understood as long, because Jehoiada had instructed him,” favours this יָמָ יו meaning that it was by the halberdiers’ gate of although the Athnach under the temple that the entry into the palace was view. For Jehoiada had not instructed him carried out.—In v. 20 this account is concluded before he began to reign, but he instructed him

2 KINGS Page 50 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study after he had been raised to the throne at the age raised by Thenius, that the explanation adopted of seven years, that is to say, so long as Jehoiada would be without any parallel, would, if it could of the Chronicles be sustained, also apply to his own explanation כָ יל־יְּׂמֵ יְּׂהויָדָ ֹע himself lived. The is also taken as ֹעובֵ ר is therefore a correct explanation. But after “current money,” in which .in Gen. 23:16 רֹעֹּבֵ לַסֹּחֵ ר Jehoiada’s death, Joash yielded to the petitions an abbreviation of of the princes of Judah that he would assent to There is still less ground for the other objection, their worshipping idols, and at length went so -denoted one kind of temple ףכֶסֶ ֹעובֵ ר that if far as to stone the son of his benefactor, the would necessarily have been אִ יש or כֹּל ,prophet Zechariah, on account of his candid revenue ’every kind of souls“ ,עֶרְּׂ כו … אִ יש (reproof of this apostasy (2 Chron. 24:17–22). used. (2 is more precisely defined אִ יש ”;Kings 12:3 (4). But the worship on the high valuation money 2 places was not entirely suppressed, by , and the position in which it stands עֶרְּׂ כו notwithstanding the fact that Jehoiada —in Gen. 15:10 בִתְּׂ רו resembles the כֶסֶ ף instructed him (on this standing formula see before the Comm. on :14). literally, soul money of each one’s valuation. 2 Kings 12:4–16 (5–17). Repairing of the Thenius is wrong in his interpretation, “every temple (cf. 2 Chron. 24:5–14).—Vv. 4, 5. That kind of money of the souls according to their the temple, which had fallen into ruins, might valuation,” to which he appends the erroneous is also used in Zech. 10:1 and אִ יש be restored, Joash ordered the priests to collect remark, that all the money of the consecrated gifts, that was Joel 2:7 in connection with inanimate objects as every kind of ,עֶרְּׂ כו … אִ יש .כֹּל generally brought into the house of the Lord, equivalent to and to effect therewith all the repairs that were valuation, because both in the redemption of needed in the temple. The general expression the male first-born (Num. 18:15, 16) and also in money of the holy gifts, i.e., money the case of persons under a vow a payment had , ףכֶסֶ הַקֳּדָשִ ים derived from holy gifts, is more specifically to be made according to the valuation of the according to which it priest. (3) “All the money that cometh into any ,כֶסֶ ף ֹעובֵ ר וגו׳ defined by consisted of three kinds of payments to the one’s mind to bring into the house of the Lord,” -i.e., money of persons i.e., all the money which was offered as a free , ףכֶסֶ ֹעובֵ ר (temple: viz., (1 will offering to the sanctuary. This money the is priests were to take to themselves, every one ֹעובֵ ר ;(mustered (or numbered in the census he from his acquaintance, and therewith repair all“ ,הָ ֹעובֵ רהַפְּׂקֻדִ ים an abbreviated expression for who passes over to those who are numbered” the dilapidations that were to be found in the (Ex. 30:13), as it has been correctly interpreted temple. In the Chronicles the different kinds of by the Chald., Rashi, Abarb., and others; money to be collected for this purpose are not whereas the explanation “money that passes” specified; but the whole is embraced under the (Luther), or current coin, which Thenius still general expression “the taxes of Moses the defends, yields not suitable sense, since it is servant of God, and of the congregation of impossible to see why only current coin should Israel, to the tent of the testimony,” which be accepted, and not silver in bars of vessels, included not only the contribution of half a inasmuch as Moses had accepted gold, silver, shekel for the building of the temple, which is copper, and other objects of value in natura, for prescribed in Ex. 30:12ff., but also the other the building of the tabernacle (Ex. 24:2, 3; 35:5; two taxes mentioned in this account.23 Again, 36:5, 6). The brevity of the expression may be according to v. 7 of the Chronicles, Joash gave had the following reason for his command: “For ףכֶסֶ ֹעובֵ ר explained from the fact, that Athaliah, the wicked woman, and her sons have become a technical term on the ground of the demolished the house of God, and all the passage in the law already cited. The objection dedicated gifts of the house of Jehovah have

2 KINGS Page 51 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study they used for the Baals.” We are not told in house of Jehovah, that the priests keeping the (threshold might put thither (i.e., into the chest (פָרַ ץ) what the violent treatment of demolition of the temple by Athaliah had her sons all the money that was brought into the house consisted. The circumstance that considerable of Jehovah.” repairs even of the stonework of the temple 2 Kings 12:10. “And when they saw that there were required in the time of Joash, about 130 or was much money in the chest, the king’s writer 140 years after it was built, is quite conceivable and the high priest came, and bound up and without any intentional demolition. And in no reckoned the money that was found in the to bind up the money in ,צּור ”.case can we infer from these words, as Thenius house of Jehovah has done, that Athaliah or her sons had erected bags (cf. 2 Kings 5:23). The binding is a temple of Baal within the limits of the mentioned before the reckoning, because the sanctuary. The application of all the dedicatory pieces of money were not counted singly, but offerings of the house of Jehovah to the Baals, packed at once into bags, which were then involves nothing more than that the gifts which weighed for the purpose of estimating the were absolutely necessary for the preservation amount received. of the temple and temple-service were 2 Kings 12:11, 12. “They gave the money withdrawn from the sanctuary of Jehovah and weighed into the hands of those who did the applied to the worship of Baal, and therefore work, who were placed over the house of that the decay of the sanctuary would Jehovah,” i.e., the appointed overlookers of the necessarily follow upon the neglect of the work; “and they paid it (as it was required) to worship. the carpenters and builders, who worked at the 2 Kings 12:6ff. But when the twenty-third year house, and to the masons and hewers of stone, of the reign of Joash arrived, and the and for the purchase of wood and hewn stones, dilapidations had not been repaired, the king to repair the dilapidations of the house, and for (i.e., be given out ,יֵצֵ א) laid the matter before the high priest Jehoiada all that might be spent and the priests, and directed them not to take for the house for repairing it.” It is quite clear the money any more from their acquaintance, from this, that the assertion of J. D. Michaelis, but to give it for the dilapidations of the temple; De Wette, and others, that the priests had “and the priests consented to take no money, embezzled the money collected, is perfectly and not to repair the dilapidations of the imaginary. For if the king had cherished any house,” i.e., not to take charge of the repairs. We such suspicion against the priests, he would not may see from this consent how the command of have asked for their consent to an alteration of the king is to be understood. Hitherto the the first arrangement or to the new measure; priests had collected the money to pay for the and still less would he have commanded that repairing of the temple; but inasmuch as they the priests who kept the door should put the had not executed the repairs, the king took money into the chest, for this would have been away from them both the collection of the no safeguard against embezzlement. For if the money and the obligation to repair the temple. door-keepers wished to embezzle, all that they The reason for the failure of the first measure is would need to do would be to put only a part of not mentioned in our text, and can only be the money into the chest. The simple reason inferred from the new arrangement made by and occasion for giving up the first the king (v. 9): “Jehoiada took a chest,—of arrangement and introducing the new course by the command of the king, as is arrangement with the chest, was that the first expressly mentioned in 2 Chron. 24:8, —bored measure had proved to be insufficient fore the a hole in the door (the lid) thereof, and placed it accomplishment of the purpose expected by the by the side of the altar (of burnt-offering) on king. For inasmuch as the king had not assigned the right by the entrance of every one into the any definite amount for the repairing of the

2 KINGS Page 52 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study temple, but had left it to the priests to pay for Chronicles, he did not content himself with the cost of the repairs out of the money that placing the chest at the entrance, but had a was to be collected, one portion of which at proclamation made at the same time in Judah least came to themselves, according to the law, and Jerusalem, to offer the tax of Moses for the for their own maintenance and to provide for repair of the temple (v. 9)—evidently with no the expenses of worship, it might easily happen, other intention than to procure more liberal without the least embezzlement on the part of contributions. For, according to v. 10, all the the priests, that the money collected was paid chief men and all the people rejoiced thereat, out again for the immediate necessities of and cast their gifts into the chest, i.e., they worship and their own maintenance, and that offered their gifts with joy for the purpose that nothing remained to pay for the building had been proclaimed.—The other points of expenses. For this reason the king himself now difference between the Chronicles and our text undertook the execution of the requisite are unimportant. For instance, that they placed repairs. The reason why the chest was provided the chest “at the gate of the house of Jehovah on merely defines the הּוצָ ה for the money to be collected was, first of all, the outside.” The that the money to be collected for the building to“ ,בְּׂ יָמִ ין בְּׂ בוא־אִ יש בֵ ית יי׳ ,expression in our text might be separated from the rest of the money that came in and was intended for the priests; the right at the entrance into the temple,” more and secondly, that the contributions to be minutely, by showing that the ark was not gathered for the building might be increased, placed on the inner side of the entrance into the since it might be expected that the people court of the priests, but against the outer wall .in v אֵצֶ להַמִ זְּׂבֵחַ would give more if the collections were made of it. This is not at variance with for the express purpose of restoring the temple, 10; for even apart from the account in the than if only the legal and free-will offerings Chronicles, and according to our own text, this were simply given to the priests, without any cannot be understood as signifying that the ark one knowing how much would be applied to the had been placed in the middle of the court, as ,בְּׂ בוא־אִ יש וגו׳ building.—And because the king had taken the Thenius explains in opposition to building into his own hand, as often as the chest but can only mean at the entrance which was was full he sent his secretary to reckon the on the right side of the altar, i.e., at the southern money along with the high priest, and hand it entrance into the inner court. Again, the further over to the superintendents of the building. variation, that according to the Chronicles (v. If we compare with this the account in the 11), when the chest was full, an officer of the Chronicles, it helps to confirm the view which high priest came with the scribe (not the high we have obtained from an unprejudiced priest himself), furnishes simply a more exact examination of the text as to the affair in definition of our account, in which the high question. According to v. 5 of the Chronicles, priest is named; just as, according to v. 10, the Joash had commanded the priests and Levites high priest took the chest and bored a hole in to accelerate the repairs; “but the Levites did the lid, which no intelligent commentator not hurry.” This may be understood as would understand as signifying that the high signifying that they were dilatory both in the priest did it with his own hand. But there is a collection of the money and in the devotion of a real difference between vv. 14 and 15 of our portion of their revenues to the repairing of the text and v. 14 of the Chronicles, though the temple. But that the king took the matter in solution of this suggests itself at once on a hand himself, not so much because of the closer inspection of the words. According to our dilatoriness or negligence of the priests as account, there were no golden or silver vessels, because his first measure, regarded as an basons, knives, bowls, etc., made with the expedient, did not answer the purpose, is money that was brought in, but it was given for evident from the fact that, according to the the repairing of the house. In the Chronicles, on

2 KINGS Page 53 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study the contrary, it is stated that “when they had gone down along the coast after defeating Israel finished the repairs, they brought the remnant (see 2 Kings 13:3), for the purpose of making of the money to the king and Jehoiada, and he war upon Judah also, and had taken Gath, which (the king) used it for vessels for the house of Rehoboam had fortified (2 Chron. 11:8). He the Lord, for vessels of the service,” etc. But if then set his face, i.e., determined, to advance to ,here, there is Jerusalem; and Joash took the temple treasures כְּׂכַ לותָ ם we take proper notice of no ground for saying that there is any etc. According to the Chronicles, he sent an contradiction, since the words of our text affirm army against Judah and Jerusalem, which nothing more than that none of the money that destroyed all the princes of the nation and sent came in was applied to the making of vessels of much booty to the king to Damascus, as the worship so long as the repairing of the building small army of the Syrians had smitten the very went on. What took place afterwards is not large army of Judah. To protect Jerusalem, after stated in our account, which is limited to the this defeat, from being taken by the Syrians, main fact; this we learn from the Chronicles. Joash sent all the treasures of the temple and palace to Hazael, and so purchased the 2 Kings 12:15. No return was required of the withdrawal of the Syrians. In this way the two inspectors as to the money handed over to brief accounts of the war may be both them, because they were convinced of their reconciled and explained; whereas the opinion, honesty. still repeated by Thenius, that the two passages 2 Kings 12:16. The money obtained from treat of different wars, has no tenable ground to trespass-offerings and sin-offerings was not rest upon. The Philistian city of Gath (see the brought into the house of Jehovah, i.e., was not Comm. on Josh. 13:3) appears to have belonged applied to the repairing of the temple, but was at that time to the kingdom of Judah, so that the left for the priests. In the case of the trespass- Gathites were not among the Philistines who offering compensation had to be made for the made an incursion into Judah in the reign of earthly debt according to the valuation of the Joram along with the Arabian tribes of the priest, with the addition of a fifth in money; and south (2 Chron. 21:16). And it is impossible to this was assigned to the priests not only in the determine when Gath was wrested from the committed against Jehovah, but Syrians again; probably in the time of Joash the מַעַ ל case of a also when a neighbour had been injured in his son of Jehoahaz of Israel, as he recovered from property, if he had died in the meantime (see at the Syrians all the cities which they had taken Lev. 5:16 and Num. 5:9). On the other hand, in from the Israelites under Jehoahaz (2 Kings the case of the sin-offerings the priests received 13:25), and even smote Amaziah the king of no money according to the law. Most of the Judaea at Bethshemesh and took him prisoner commentators therefore assume, that those (2 Kings 14:13; 2 Chron. 25:21ff.). “All the who lived at a distance had sent money to the consecrated things, which Jehoshaphat, Joram, priests, that they might offer sin-offerings with and Ahaziah had consecrated, and his own it, and what money as over they had retained consecrated things,” i.e., what he (Joash) for themselves. But there is not the slightest himself had consecrated. The existence of such trace of any such custom, which is quite at temple treasures is not at variance either with variance with the idea of the sin-offering. It may the previous account of the repairing of the probably have become a customary thing in the temple, for Joash would not use the consecrated course of time, for those who presented these offerings for the restoration of the temple, as offerings to compensate the officiating priest the current revenue of the temple was for his trouble by a free-will gift. sufficient for the purpose, or with 2 Chron. 2 Kings 12:17, 18. The brief account of 24:7, where it is stated that Athaliah and her to the קָדְּׂשֵ יבֵ ית יְּׂהוָ ה Hazael’s campaign against Jerusalem is sons had applied all the completed by 2 Chron. 24:23, 24. Hazael had Baals (see at 2 Kings 12:5, p. 261); for even if

2 KINGS Page 54 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study we are to understand by the sons of Athaliah is also possible that Shomer may be the name of not bastard sons (Ewald, Gesch. iii. p. 582), but the grandfather. Joash was buried with his the brethren of Joram whom the Philistines and father sin the city of David; but according to v. Arabians had carried off, Ahaziah and Joram, 25 of the Chronicles he was not buried in the although they both of them served Baal, may, graves of the kings. The two statements are not from political considerations, have now and irreconcilable; and there may be good historical then made consecrated gifts to the temple, if ground for the account in the Chronicles, as only in a passing fit of religious fear. Bertheau acknowledges with perfect justice, in 2 Kings 12:19–21. Conspiracy against Joash.— spite of the suspicion which has been cast upon Not long after the departure of the Syrians, who it by Thenius. had left Joash, according to 2 Chron. 24:25, with 2 Kings 13 many wounds, his servants formed a conspiracy against him and slew him upon his Reigns of Jehoahaz and Joash, Kings of Israel. bed in the house Millo, which goeth down to Death of Elisha. Silla. This description of the locality is perfectly 2 Kings 13:1–9. Reign of Jehoahaz.—Jehu was was בֵ ית־מִ לֹּא obscure for us. The conjecture that followed by Jehoahaz his son, “in the twenty- the house in the castle of Millo which is so third year of Joash of Judah.” This synchronistic frequently mentioned (see at 1 Kings 9:15 and statement is not only at variance with v. 10, but 2 Sam. 5:9), is precluded by the fact that this cannot be very well reconciled with 2 Kings -with the article). 12:1. If Jehoahaz began to reign in the twenty) הַמִ לֹּא castle is always called is regarded by many as an abbreviation of third year of Joash king of Judah, and reigned סִ לָ א seventeen years, his son cannot have followed which goes down by the road;” and“ ,מְּׂסִ לָ ה him after his death in the thirty-seventh year of Thenius supposes that the reference is to the Joash of Judah, as is stated in v. 10, for there are road which ran diagonally through the city only fourteen years and possibly a few months from the Joppa gate to the Haram-area, between the twenty-third and thirty-seventh corresponding to the present David’s road. years of Joash; and even if he ascended the -as the proper name of a throne at the commencement of the twenty סִ לָ א Others regard place in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. It is third year of the reign of Joash and died at the impossible to get any certain meaning out of it, end of the thirty-seventh, they could only be unless we alter the text according to arbitrary reckoned as fifteen and not as seventeen years. assumptions, as Thenius has done. The Moreover, according to 2 Kings 12:1, Joash of conspirators were Jozachar the son of Shimeath, Judah began to reign in the seventh year of and Jehozabad the son of Shomer, according to Jehu, and therefore Athaliah, who ascended the v. 21; but according to the Chronicles (v. 26), throne at the same time as Jehu, reigned fully they were Zabad the son of Shimeath the six years. If, therefore, the first year of Joash of Ammonitess, and Jehozabad the son of Shimrith Judah coincides with the seventh year of Jehu, the Moabitess. The identity of the first names is the twenty-eighth year of Jehu must correspond ;to the twenty-second year of Joash of Judah ,זָכָ ר is a copyist’s error for זָבָ ד .perfectly obvious and in this year of Joash not only did Jehu die, The .יוזָכָ ר and this is the contracted form of but his son Jehoahaz ascended the throne. difference in the second: son of Shomer Consequently we must substitute the twenty- according to our text, and son of the Shimrith second year of Joash, or perhaps, still more according to the Chronicles, has probably also correctly, the twenty-first year (Josephus), for might the twenty-third.24 If Jehu died in the earliest שמר arisen from a slip of the pen, since easily be occasioned by the dropping out of the months of the twenty-eighth year of his reign, although it so that he only reigned twenty-seven years and ,שמרת from the defectively written ת

2 KINGS Page 55 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study one or two months, his death and his son’s to vv. 22–25, the oppression by the Syrians ascent of the throne might fall even in the lasted as long as Jehoahaz lived; but after his closing months of the twenty-first year of the death the Lord had compassion upon Israel, reign of Joash of Judah. And from the twenty- and after the death of Hazael, when his son first to the thirty-seventh year of Joash, Benhadad had become king, Jehoash recovered Jehoahaz may have reigned sixteen years and a from Benhadad all the Israelitish cities that had few months, and his reign be described as been taken by the Syrians. It is obvious from lasting seventeen years. this, that the oppression which Benhadad the 2 Kings 13:2, 3. As Jehoahaz trod in the son of Hazael inflicted upon Israel, according to footsteps of his forefathers and continued the v. 3, falls within the period of his father’s reign, sin of Jeroboam (the worship of the calves), the so that it was not as king, but as commander-in- Lord punished Israel during his reign even chief under his father, that he oppressed Israel, more than in that of his predecessor. The longer and therefore he is not even called king in v. 3. and the more obstinately the sin was continued, 2 Kings 13:6. “Only they departed not,” etc., is the more severe did the punishment become. inserted as a parenthesis and must be He gave them (the Israelites) into the power of expressed thus: “although they departed not the Syrian king Hazael and his son Benhadad from the sin of Jeroboam.” ,.he had not left,” etc (כִ י) the whole time,” sc. of the reign of 2 Kings 13:7. “For“ ,כָ ל־הַ יָמִ ים Jehoahaz (vid., v. 22); not of the reigns of Hazael furnishes the ground for v. 5: God gave them a and Benhadad, as Thenius supposes in direct saviour, … although they did not desist from the opposition to vv. 24 and 25. According to v. 7, sin of Jeroboam, … for Israel had been brought the Syrians so far destroyed the Israelitish to the last extremity; He (Jehovah) had left to people of war), only fifty ,עָ ם) army, that only fifty horsemen, ten war- Jehoahaz people chariots, and ten thousand foot soldiers were ,(v. 6) הֶחֱטִ יא instead of הֶחֱטִ י left. horsemen, etc. For in v. 6 refers בָ ּה Kings 13:4ff. In this oppression Jehoahaz see at 1 Kings 21:21. The suffix 2 in v. 2 (see at 2 מִמֶ נָ ה just as that in ,חַטְּׂ אֹּת as in 1 Kings to חִ הלָ ֹפְּׂ נֵי יי׳) prayed to the Lord 13:6); and the Lord heard this prayer, because Kings 3:3). “And even the Asherah was (still) He saw their oppression at the hands of the standing at Samaria,” probably from the time of Syrians, and gave Israel a saviour, so that they Ahab downwards (1 Kings 16:33), since Jehu is came out from the power of the Syrians and not said to have destroyed it (2 Kings 10:26ff.). and had made them like dust for“ וַיְּׂשִמֵ ם וגו׳ dwelt in their booths again, as before, i.e., were able to live peaceably again in their houses, trampling upon,”—an expression denoting without being driven off and led away by the utter destruction. foe. The saviour, , was neither an angel, .Kings 13:8, 9. Close of the reign of Jehoahaz 2 מושִיעַ nor the prophet Elisha, nor quidam e ducibus Jehoahaz had probably shown his might in the Joasi, as some of the earlier commentators war with the Syrians, although he had been supposed, nor a victory obtained by Jehoahaz overcome. over the Syrians, nor merely Jeroboam 2 Kings 13:10–13. Reign of Jehoash or Joash of (Thenius); but the Lord gave them the saviour Israel.—On the commencement of his reign see in the two successors of Jehoahaz, in the kings at v. 1. He also walked in the sins of Jeroboam Jehoash and Jeroboam, the former of whom (compare v. 11 with vv. 2 and 6). The war with wrested from the Syrians all the cities that had Amaziah referred to in v. 12 is related in the been conquered by them under his father (v. history of this king in 2 Kings 14:8–14; and the 25), while the latter restored the ancient close of the reign of Joash is also recorded there boundaries of Israel (2 Kings 14:25). According (vv. 15 and 16) with the standing formula. And

2 KINGS Page 56 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

,הִכָ ה even here it ought not to be introduced till the admits of a grammatical vindication; for end of the chapter, instead of in vv. 12 and 13, when used of an arrow, signifies to shoot and to inasmuch as the verses which follow relate strike with the arrow shot off, i.e., to wound or several things belonging to the reign of Joash. to kill (cf. 2 Kings 9:24, 1 Kings 22:34). The But as they are connected with the termination shooting of the arrows to the earth was of Elisha’s life, it was quite admissible to wind intended to symbolize the overthrow of the up the reign of Joash with v. 13. Syrians. “And the king shot three times, and 2 Kings 13:14–21. Illness and Death of the then stood (still),” i.e., left off shooting. Prophet Elisha.—V. 14. When Elisha was taken 2 Kings 13:19. Elisha was angry at this, and ill with the sickness of which he was to die, king said: “Thou shouldst shoot five or six times, Joash visited him and wept over his face, i.e., thou wouldst then have smitten the Syrians to bending over the sick man as he lay, and destruction; but now thou wilt smite them exclaimed, “My father, my father! the chariot of it was to shoot, i.e., thou :לְּׂהַ כות ”.three times Israel and horsemen thereof!” just as Elisha had mourned over the departure of Elijah (2 Kings shouldst shoot; compare Ewald, § 237, c.; and ,then hadst thou smitten, vid., Ewald ,אָ ז הִכִ יתָ This lamentation of the king at the for .(2:12 approaching death of the prophet shows that § 358, a. As the king was told that the arrow Joash knew how to value his labours. And on shot off signified a victory over the Syrians, he account of this faith which was manifested in ought to have shot off all the arrows, to secure a his recognition of the prophet’s worth, the Lord complete victory over them. When, therefore, gave the king another gracious assurance he left off after shooting only three times, this through the dying Elisha, which was confirmed was a sign that he was wanting in the proper by means of a symbolical action. zeal for obtaining the divine promise, i.e., in 2 Kings 13:15ff. “Take—said Elisha to Joash— true faith in the omnipotence of God to fulfil His bow and arrows, … and let thy hand pass over promise.25 Elisha was angry at this weakness of i.e., stretch the bow. He then the king’s faith, and told him that by leaving off ,(הַרְּׂ כֵ ב) ”the bow so soon he had deprived himself of a perfect placed his hands upon the king’s hands, as a victory over the Syrians. sign that the power which was to be given to the bow-shot came from the Lord through the 2 Kings 13:20, 21. Elisha then died at a great mediation of the prophet. He then directed him age. As he had been called by Elijah to be a to open the window towards the east and shoot, prophet in the reign of Ahab and did not die till adding as he shot off the arrow: “An arrow of that of Joash, and forty-one years elapsed salvation from the Lord, and an arrow of between the year that Ahab died and the salvation against the Syrians; and thou wilt commencement of the reign of Joash, he must smite the Syrians at Aphek (see at 1 Kings have held his prophetical office for at least fifty 20:26) to destruction.” The arrow that was shot years, and have attained the age of eighty. “And off was to be a symbol of the help of the Lord they buried him must as marauding bands of against the Syrians to their destruction. This Moabites entered the land. And it came to pass, promise the king was then to appropriate to that at the burial of a man they saw the himself through an act of his own. Elisha marauding bands coming, and placed the dead therefore directed him (v. 18) to “take the man in the greatest haste in the grave of Elisha,” for the purpose of escaping from the הַ ְך :arrows;” and when he had taken them, said enemy. But when the (dead) man touched the strike to the earth,” i.e., shoot the arrows bones of Elisha, he came to life again, and rose“ ,אַרְּׂ צָ ה is a ּוגְּׂדּודֵ י מואָ ב וגו׳ .to the ground, not “smite the earth with the up upon his feet bundle of arrows” (Thenius), which neither circumstantial clause. The difficult expression agrees with the shooting of the first arrow, nor a year had come,” can only have the“ ,בָא שָ נָ ה

2 KINGS Page 57 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study meaning given by the LXX and Chald.: “when a immediately by the account of its fulfilment, year had come,” and evidently indicates that the and to this end the oppression of the Israelites burial of Elisha occurred at the time when the by Hazael is mentioned once more, together yearly returning bands of Moabitish marauders with that turn of affairs which took place invaded the land. Ewald (Krit. Gramm. p. 528) through the compassion of God after the death .a coming of the year, of Hazael and in the reign of his son Benhadad ,בוא would therefore read is a pluperfect: “Hazael had oppressed” (for לָחַ ץ in which case the words would be grammatically subordinate to the main clause. the fact itself compare vv. 4 and 7). For the sake Luther renders it “the same year,” in ipso anno, of the covenant made with the patriarchs the after the Vulgate and Syriac, as if the reading Lord turned again to the Israelites, and would they, the people who had not destroy them, and did not cast them away ,הֵ ם .בָּה שָ נָ ה had been till now”), as was the“) עַדעַֹּתָ ה not threw, but placed from His face ,יַשְּׂ לִ יכּו .just buried a man case afterwards, but delivered them from the .and the man went and touched :וַיֵלֶ ְך וַיִגַֹע .hastily threatening destruction through the death of serves as a pictorial delineation of the Hazael. For in the reign of his son and successor וַיֵלֶ ְך thought, that as soon as the dead man touched Benhadad, Joash the son of Jehoahaz took from the (וַיִקַ ח is to be connected with וַיָשָ ב) is not him again הָ לַ ְך .the bones of Elisha he came to life only applied to the motion of inanimate objects, cities which he (Hazael) had taken from but also to the gradual progress of any Jehoahaz in the war. These cities which Hazael transaction. The conjecture of Thenius and had wrested from Jehoahaz were on this side of and they went away,” is quite the Jordan, for Hazael had conquered all Gilead“ ,וַיֵלְּׂ כּו ,Hitzig unsuitable. The earlier Israelites did not bury in the time of Jehu (2 Kings 10:32, 33). Joash their dead in coffins, but wrapped them in linen recovered the former from Benhadad, whilst cloths and laid them in tombs hewn out of the his son Jeroboam reconquered Gilead also (see rock. The tomb was then covered with a stone, at 2 Kings 14:25). which could easily be removed. The dead man, 2 Kings 14 who was placed thus hurriedly in the tomb which had been opened, might therefore easily Reigns of Amaziah of Judah, and Jeroboam II of come into contact with the bones of Elisha. The Israel. design of this miracle of the restoration of the 2 Kings 14:1–22. Reign of Amaziah of Judah dead man to life was not to show how even in (cf. 2 Chron. 25).—Vv. 1–7. Length and spirit of the grave Elisha surpassed his master Elijah in his reign, and his victory over the Edomites.—V. miraculous power (Ephr. Syr. and others), but 1. Amaziah began to reign in the second year of to impress the seal of divine attestation upon Joash of Israel. Now as Joash of Israel ascended the prophecy of the dying prophet concerning the throne, according to 2 Kings 13:10, in the the victory of Joash over the Syrians (Wisd. thirty-seventh year of Joash of Judah, the latter 48:13, 14), since the Lord thereby bore witness cannot have reigned thirty-nine full years, that He was not the God of the dead, but of the which might be reckoned as forty (2 Kings living, and that His spirit was raised above 12:1), according to the principle mentioned at death and corruptibility.—The opinion that the p. 130f. of reckoning the current years as dead man was restored to life again in a natural complete years, if the commencement of his manner, through the violent shaking reign took place a month or two before Nisan, occasioned by the fall, or through the coolness and his death occurred a month or two after, of the tomb, needs no refutation. without its being necessary to assume a 2 Kings 13:22–25. The prophecy which Elisha regency. uttered before his death is here followed

2 KINGS Page 58 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 Kings 14:2, 3. Amaziah reigned twenty-nine founded upon the peculiar nature of the city, years in the same theocratical spirit as his was probably the capital of the Edomites, called father Joash, only not like his ancestor David, by the Greeks ἡ Πέτ , and bore this name from i.e., according to the correct explanation in 2 its situation and the mode in which it was built, see at 1 Kings since it was erected in a valley surrounded by) לֵבָב שָ לֵ ם Chron. 25:2, not with 11:4), since Amaziah, like his father Joash (see rocks, and that in such a manner that the at 2 Kings 12:3), fell into idolatry in the closing houses were partly hewn in the natural rock. Of years of his reign (cf. 2 Chron. 25:14ff.).—Only this commercial city, which was still flourishing the high places were not taken away, etc. in the first centuries of the Christian era, splendid ruins have been preserved in a valley 2 Kings 14:5, 6. After establishing his own on the eastern side of the ghor which runs government, he punished the murderers of his down to the Elanitic Gulf, about two days’ father with death; but, according to the law in journey from the southern extremity of the Deut. 24:16, he did not slay their children also, Dead Sea, on the east of Mount Hor, to which as was commonly the custom in the East in the Crusaders gave the name of vallis Moysi, and ancient times, and may very frequently have which the Arabs still call Wady Musa (see is Robinson, Pal. ii. pp. 512ff., and for the history יָמּות been done in Israel as well. The Chethîb .is an unnecessary of this city, pp. 574ff., and Ritter’s Erdkunde, xiv יֻמָ ת correct, and the Keri alteration made after Deuteronomy. pp. 1103ff.). 2 Kings 14:7. The brief account of the defeat of 2 Kings 14:8–14. War with Joash of Israel.—V. the Edomites in the Salt Valley and of the taking 8. Amaziah then sent a challenge to the of the city of Sela is completed by 2 Chron. Israelitish king Joash to go to war with him. The 25:6–16. According to the latter, Amaziah outward reason for this was no doubt the sought to strengthen his own considerable hostile acts that had been performed by the army by the addition of 100,000 Israelitish Israelitish troops, which had been hired for the mercenaries; but at the exhortation of a war with Edom and then sent back again (2 prophet he sent the hired Israelites away again, Chron. 25:13). But the inward ground was the at which they were so enraged, that on their pride which had crept upon Amaziah in way home they plundered several of the cities consequence of his victory over the Edomites, of Judah and put many men to death. The and had so far carried him away, that he not Edomites had revolted from Judah in the reign only forgot the Lord his God, to whom he was of Joram (2 Kings 8:20ff.); Amaziah now sought indebted for this victory, and brought to to re-establish his rule over them, in which he Jerusalem the gods of the Edomites which he was so far successful, that he completely had taken in the war and worshipped them, and defeated them, slaying 10,000 in the battle and silenced with threats the prophet who then taking their capital, so that his successor condemned this idolatry (2 Chron. 25:14ff.), but Uzziah was also able to incorporate the in his proud reliance upon his own power Edomitish port of Elath in his own kingdom challenged the Israelitish king to war. Kings 14:9, 10. Jehoash (Joash) answered his 2 גֵ י־הַמֶ לַ ח) once more (v. 22). On the Salt Valley insolent challenge, “Come, we will see one in the Chronicles), a marshy salt גֵיא־הַמֶ לַ ח for another face to face,” i.e., measure swords with plain in the south of the Dead Sea, see at 2 Sam. one another in war, with a similar fable to that 8:13. According to v. 12 of the Chronicles, in with which Jotham had once instructed his addition to the 10,000 who were slain in battle, fellow-citizens (Judg. 9:8ff.). “The thorn-bush 10,000 Edomites were taken prisoners and cast on Lebanon asked the cedar on Lebanon for its the daughter as a wife for his son, and beasts of the) הַסֶ לַ ֹע .headlong alive from the top of a rock rock) with the article, because the epithet is field went by and trampled down the thorn-

2 KINGS Page 59 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study bush.” This fable is, of course, not to be came to Jerusalem, he no doubt brought his interpreted literally, as though Amaziah were prisoner with him, for Amaziah remained king the thorn-bush, and Jehoash the cedar, and the and reigned for fifteen years after the death of wild beasts the warriors; but the thorn-bush Jehoash (v. 17). The Ephraim gate, which is putting itself upon an equality with the cedar is generally supposed to be the same as the gate a figurative representation of a proud man of Benjamin (Jer. 37:13; 38:7; Zech. 14:10; overrating his strength, and the desire compare Neh. 8:16; 12:39), stood in the middle expressed to the cedar of a wish surpassing the of the north wall of Jerusalem, through which bounds of one’s condition; so that Thenius is the road to Benjamin and Ephraim ran; and the not warranted in inferring from this that corner gate was at the north-western corner of Amaziah had in his mind the subjugation of the same wall, as we may see from Jer. 31:38 Israel to Judah again. The trampling down of and Zech. 14:10. If, then, Jehoash had four the thorn-bush by a wild beast is only meant to hundred cubits of the wall thrown down at the set forth the sudden overthrow and destruction gate Ephraim to the corner gate, the distance which may come unexpectedly upon the proud between the two gates was not more than four man in the midst of his daring plans. V. 10 hundred cubits, which applies to the northern contains the application of the parable. The wall of Zion, but not to the second wall, which victory over Edom has made thee high-minded. defended the lower city towards the north, and thy heart has lifted thee up, must have been longer, and which, according to :נְּׂשָאֲ ָך לִבֶ ָך equivalent to, thou hast become high-minded. 2 Chron. 32:5, was probably built for the first time by (vid., Krafft, Topographie v. be honoured,” i.e., be content with the“ ,הִכָבֵ ד Jerus. pp. 117ff.). Jehoash destroyed this portion fame thou hast acquired at Edom, “and stay at of the Zion wall, that the city might be left home.” Wherefore shouldst thou meddle with defenceless, as Jerusalem could be most easily to engage in conflict or war. taken on the level northern side.26—The ,הִתְּׂ גָרֶ ה ?misfortune Misfortune is thought of as an enemy, with treasures of the temple and palace, which whom he wanted to fight. Jehoash took away, cannot, according to 2 Kings בְּׂ נֵי .Kings 14:11, 12. But Amaziah paid not 12:19, have been very considerable 2 sons of the citizenships, i.e., hostages ,הַֹּתַעֲרֻ בות attention to this warning. A battle was fought at Beth-shemesh (Ain-Shems, on the border of (obsides, Vulg.). He took hostages in return for Judah and Dan, see at Josh. 15:10); Judah was the release of Amaziah, as pledges that he smitten by Israel, so that every one fled to his would keep the peace. home. 2 Kings 14:15–17. The repetition of the notice 2 Kings 14:13. Jehoash took king Amaziah concerning the end of the reign of Joash, prisoner, and then came to Jerusalem, and had together with the formula from 2 Kings 13:12 four hundred cubits of the wall broken down at and 13, may probably be explained from the the gate of Ephraim to the corner gate, and then fact, that in the annals of the kings of Israel it returned to Samaria with the treasures of the stood after the account of the war between palace and temple, and with hostages. the Jehoash and Amaziah. This may be inferred from the circumstance that the name of Joash is ֹּו the vowel ,וַיָבאו is to be pointed ויבאו Chethîb here, whereas in the יְּׂהואָ ש as in several other cases spelt invariably ,א being placed after (see Ewald, § 18, b.). There is no ground for closing notices in 2 Kings 13:12 and 13 we have the one which was no doubt ,יואָ ש after the Chronicles (Thenius), the later form יְּׂבִיאֵ הּו altering although the reading in the Chronicles adopted by the author of our books. But he elucidates the thought. For if Jehoash took might be induced to give these notices once Amaziah prisoner at Beth-shemesh and then more as he found them in his original sources,

2 KINGS Page 60 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study from the statement in v. 17, that Amaziah (Thenius), thereupon made his son Azariah outlived Jehoash fifteen years, seeing therein a (Uzziah) king, who was only sixteen years old. is the name given to this king עֲ זַרְּׂ יָהּו or עֲ זַרְּׂ יָה manifestation of the grace of God, who would not destroy Amaziah notwithstanding his pride, here and 2 Kings 15:1, 6, 8, 17, 23, and 27, and but delivered him, through the death of his 1 Chron. 3:12; whereas in 2 Kings 15:13, 30, 32, victor, from further injuries at his hands. As 34, 2 Chron. 26:1, 3, 11, etc., and also Isa. 1:1; Amaziah ascended the throne in the second 6:1, Hos. 1:1, Amos 1:1, and Zech. 14:5, he is year of the sixteen years’ reign of Jehoash, and Uzziah). This variation in) עֻ זִיָ הּו or עֻ זִיָה called before his war with Israel made war upon the Edomites and overcame them, the war with the name is too constant to be attributable to a Israel can only fall in the closing years of copyist’s error. Even the conjecture that Jehoash, and this king cannot very long have Azariah adopted the name Uzziah as king, or survived his triumph over the king of Judah. that it was given to him by the soldiers after a successful campaign (Thenius), does not 2 Kings 14:18–22. Conspiracy against explain the use of the two names in our Amaziah.—V. 19. Amaziah, like his father Joash, historical books. We must rather assume that did not die a natural death. They made a the two names, which are related in meaning, conspiracy against him at Jerusalem, and he were used promiscuously. signifies “in עֲ זַרְּׂ יָה fled to Lachish, whither murderers were sent whose strength is“ ,עֻ זִיָה ”;after him, who slew him there. The earlier Jehovah is help commentators sought for the cause of this Jehovah.” This is favoured by the circumstance conspiracy in the unfortunate result of the war adduced by Bertheau, that among the with Jehoash; but this conjecture is at variance descendants of Kohath we also find an Uzziah with the circumstance that the conspiracy did who bears the name Azariah (1 Chron. 6:9 and not break out till fifteen years or more after 21), and similarly among the descendants of that event. It is true that in 2 Chron. 25:27 we Heman an Uzziel with the name Azarel (1 read “from the time that Amaziah departed Chron. 25:4 and 18). from the Lord, they formed a conspiracy against 2 Kings 14:22. Immediately after his ascent of him;” but even this statement cannot be the throne, Uzziah built, i.e., fortified, Elath, the understood in any other way than that Idumaean port (see at 1 Kings 9:26), and Amaziah’s apostasy gave occasion for restored it to Judah again. It is evident from this discontent, which eventually led to a that Uzziah completed the renewed subjugation conspiracy. For his apostasy began with the of Edom which his father had begun. The introduction of Edomitish deities into position in which this notice stands, Jerusalem after the defeat of the Edomites, and immediately after his ascent of the throne and therefore before the war with Jehoash, in the before the account of the duration and first part of his reign, whereas the conspiracy character of his reign, may be explained in all cannot possibly have lasted fifteen years or probability from the importance of the work more before it came to a head. Lachish, in the itself, which not only distinguished the lowlands of Judah, has probably been preserved commencement of his reign, but also gave in the ruins of Um Lakis (see at Josh. 10:3). evident of its power. 2 Kings 14:20. “They lifted him upon the 2 Kings 14:23–29. Reign of Jeroboam II of horses,” i.e., upon the hearse to which the king’s Israel.—V. 23. The statement that Jeroboam the horses had been harnessed, and brought him to son of Joash (Jehoash) ascended the throne in Jerusalem, where he was buried with his the fifteenth year of Amaziah, agrees with v. 17, fathers, i.e., in the royal tomb. according to which Amaziah outlived Jehoash 2 Kings 14:21. All the people of Judah, i.e., the fifteen years, since Amaziah reigned twenty- whole nation, not the whole of the men of war nine years. On the other hand, the forty-one

2 KINGS Page 61 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

having taken the מָרָ ה ,years’ duration of his reign does not agree with signifies very bitter the statement in 2 Kings 15:8, that his son This is the explanation adopted .מָרַ ר meaning of Zachariah did not become king till the thirty- eighth year of Azariah (Uzziah); and therefore in all the ancient versions, and also by Dietrich .verbatim from Deut ,וְּׂאֶֹפֶס עָ צּור וגו׳ .Thenius proposes to alter the number 41 into in Ges. Lex 51, Ewald into 53. For further remarks, see 2 32:36, to show that the kingdom of Israel had Kings 15:8. Jeroboam also adhered firmly to the been brought to the utmost extremity of image-worship of his ancestors, but he raised distress predicted there by Moses, and it was his kingdom again to great power. necessary that the Lord should interpose with i.e., His help, if His people were not utterly to ,(הֵשִ יב) Kings 14:25. He brought back 2 perish. : He had not yet spoken, i.e., had לֹּא דִבֶ ר restored, the boundary of Israel from towards Hamath in the north, to the point to which the not yet uttered the decree of rejection through kingdom extended in the time of (1 the mouth of a prophet. To blot out the name Kings 8:65), to the sea of the Arabah (the under the heavens is an abbreviated expression present Ghor), i.e., to the Dead Sea (compare for: among the nations who dwelt under the Deut. 3:17, and 4:49, from which this heavens. designation of the southern border of the 2 Kings 14:28, 29. Of the rest of the history of kingdom of the ten tribes arose), “according to Jeroboam we have nothing more than an the word of the Lord, which He had spoken intimation that he brought back Damascus and through the prophet ,” who had probably Hamath of Judah to Israel, i.e., subjugated it is a לִיהּודָ ה .used this designation of the southern boundary, again to the kingdom of Israel which was borrowed from the Pentateuch, in periphrastic form for the genitive, as proper the announcement which he made. The extent names do not admit of any form of the of the kingdom of Israel in the reign of construct state, and in this case the simple Jeroboam is defined in the same manner in genitive would not have answered so well to the fact. For the meaning is: “whatever in the נַחַ ל the יָם הָעֲרָ בָ ה Amos 6:14, but instead of is mentioned, i.e., in all probability the two kingdoms of Damascus and Hamath had הָעֲרָ בָ ה Wady el Ashy, which formed the boundary formerly belonged to Judah in the times of between Moab and Edom; from which we may David and Solomon.” By Damascus and Hamath see that Jeroboam had also subjugated the we are not to understand the cities, but the Moabites to his kingdom, which is not only kingdoms; for not only did the city of Hamath rendered probable by 2 Kings 3:6ff., but is also never belong to the kingdom of Israel, but it implied in the words that he restored the was situated outside the boundaries laid down former boundary of the kingdom of Israel,—On by Moses for Israel (see at Num. 34:8). It the prophet Jonah, the son of Amittai, see the cannot, therefore, have been re-conquered by Jeroboam. It was different with the (הֵשִ יב) Comm. on Jon. 1:1. Gath-Hepher, in the tribe of Zebulun, is the present village of Meshed, to the city of Damascus, which David had conquered north of Nazareth (see at Josh. 19:13). and even Solomon had not permanently lost 2 Kings 14:26, 27. The higher ground for this (see at 1 Kings 11:24). Consequently in the case strengthening of Israel in the time of Jeroboam of Damascus the capital is included in the was to be found in the compassion of God. The kingdom. Lord saw the great oppression and helpless 2 Kings 14:29. As Jeroboam reigned forty-one condition of Israel, and had not yet pronounced years, his death occurred in the twenty-seventh the decree of rejection. He therefore sent help year of Uzziah. If, then, his son did not begin to without the article, reign till the thirty-eight year of Uzziah, as is המֹּרֶ מְּׂ אֹּד .through Jeroboam stated in 2 Kings 15:8, he cannot have come to ,(.see Ewald, § 293, a) עֳּ נִי יש׳ and governed by

2 KINGS Page 62 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study the throne immediately after his father’s death time he carried on successful wars against the (see at 2 Kings 15:8). Philistines and Arabians, fortified the walls of Jerusalem with strong towers, built watch- 2 Kings 15 towers in the desert, and constructed cisterns Reigns of Azariah of Judah, Zachariah, Shallum, for the protection and supply of his numerous Menahem, , and of Israel, and flocks, promoted agriculture and vine-growing, . and organized a numerous and well- furnished army (2 Chron. 26:5–15). But the great power 2 Kings 15:1–7. Reign of Azariah (Uzziah) or to which he thereby attained produced such Judah (cf. 2 Chron. 26).—The statement that “in haughtiness, that he wanted to make himself the twenty-seventh year of Jeroboam Azariah high priest in his kingdom after the manner of began to reign” is at variance with 2 Kings 14:2, the heathen kings, and usurping the sacred 16, 17, and 23. If, for example, Azariah functions, which belonged according to the law ascended the throne in the fifteenth year of to the Levitical priests alone, to offer incense in Joash of Israel, and with his twenty-nine years’ the temple, for which he was punished with reign outlived Joash fifteen years (2 Kings 14:2, leprosy upon the spot (v. 5 compared with 2 17); if, moreover, Jeroboam followed his father Chron. 26:16ff.). The king’s leprosy is described Joash in the fifteenth year of Amaziah (2 Kings in our account also as a punishment from God. Jehovah smote him, and he became :וַיְּׂנַנַֹע יי׳ and Amaziah died in the fifteenth year ,(14:23 of Jeroboam; Azariah (Uzziah) must have leprous. This presupposes an act of guilt, and become king in the fifteenth year of Jeroboam, confirms the fuller account of this guilt given in since, according to 2 Kings 14:21, the people the Chronicles, which Thenius, following the made him king after the murder of his father, example of De Wette and Winer, could only call which precludes the supposition of an in question on the erroneous assumption “that interregnum. Consequently the datum “in the the powerful king wanted to restore the regal twenty-seventh year” can only have crept into high-priesthood exercised by David and the text through the confounding of the Solomon” Oehler (Herzog’s Cycl.) has already and we must shown that such an opinion is perfectly ,(27) כז with (15) טו numerals therefore read “in the fifteenth year.” “groundless,” since it is nowhere stated that 2 Kings 15:2ff. Beside the general David and Solomon performed with their own characteristics of Uzziah’s fifty-two years’ reign, hands the functions assigned in the law to the which are given in the standing formula, not a priests in connection with the offering of single special act is mentioned, although, sacrifice, as the co-operation of the priests is according to 2 Chron. 26, he raised his kingdom not precluded in connection with the sacrifices to great earthly power and prosperity; presented by these kings (2 Sam. 6:17, and 1 probably for no other reason than because his Kings 3:4, etc.).—Uzziah being afflicted with enterprises had exerted no permanent leprosy, was obliged to live in a separate house, influence upon the development of the kingdom and appoint his son Jotham as president of the of Judah, but all the useful fruits of his reign royal house to judge the people, i.e., to conduct were destroyed again by the ungodly Ahaz. the administration of the kingdom.—The time Uzziah did what was right in the eyes of the when this event occurred is not stated either in Lord, as his father Amaziah had done. For as the our account or in the Chronicles. But this latter was unfaithful to the Lord in the closing punishment from God cannot have fallen upon years of his reign, so did Uzziah seek God only him before the last ten years of his fifty-two so long as Zechariah, who was experienced in years’ reign, because his son, who was only divine visions, remained alive, and God gave twenty-five years old when his father died (v. success to his enterprises, so that during this 33, and 2 Chron. 27:1), undertook the administration of the affairs of the kingdom at

2 KINGS Page 63 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study once, and therefore must have been at least Zachariah, when taken in connection with ,is taken by Winer, various allusions in the prophecies of Hosea בֵ יתהַחָ ֹפְּׂשִ ית .fifteen years old Gesenius, and others, after the example of Iken, rather favours the idea that the anarchy broke to signify nosocomium, an infirmary or lazar- out immediately after the death of Jeroboam, house, in accordance with the verb Arab. fs , we regard the assumption of an interregnum as fecit, II debilis, imbecillis fuit. But this meaning resting on a better foundation than the removal of the chronological discrepancy by an is used חָ ֹפְּׂשִ י cannot be traced in Hebrew, where alteration of the text. in no other sense than free, set at liberty, 2 Kings 15:9ff. Zechariah also persevered in manumissus. Consequently the rendering adopted by Aquila is correct, ἶκ ἐλ θ ; the sin of his fathers in connection with the calf- worship therefore the word of the Lord and the explanation given by Kimchi of this pronounced upon Jehu (2 Kings 10:30) was epithet is, that the persons who lived there fulfilled in him.—Shallum the son of Jabesh were those who were sent away from human formed a conspiracy and put him to death society, or perhaps more correctly, those who before people, i.e., openly before the ,קָ בָ ל־עַ ם were released from the world and its privileges and duties, or cut off from intercourse with God eyes of all.27 As Israel would not suffer itself to and man. be brought to repentance and to return to the 2 Kings 15:7. When Uzziah died, he was buried Lord, its God and King, by the manifestations of with his fathers in the city of David, but because divine grace in the times of Joash and Jeroboam, he died of leprosy, not in the royal family tomb, any more than by the severe judgments that but, as the Chronicles (v. 23) add to complete preceded them, and the earnest admonitions of the account, “in the burial-field of the kings;” so the prophets Hosea and Amos; the judgment of that he was probably buried in the earth rejection could not fail eventually to burst forth according to our mode. His son Jotham did not upon the nation, which so basely despised the become king till after Uzziah’s death, as he had grace, long-suffering, and covenant- faithfulness not been regent, but only the administrator of of God. We therefore see the kingdom hasten the affairs of the kingdom during his father’s with rapid steps towards its destruction after leprosy. the death of Jeroboam. In the sixty-two years between the death of Jeroboam and the 2 Kings 15:8–12. Reign of Zachariah of conquest of Samaria by Shalmaneser anarchy Israel.—V. 8. “In the thirty-eighth year of prevailed twice, in all for the space of twenty Uzziah, Zachariah the son of Jeroboam became years, and six kings followed one another, only king over Israel six months.” As Jeroboam died one of whom, viz., Menahem, died a natural in the twenty-seventh year of Uzziah, according death, so as to be succeeded by his son upon the to our remarks on 2 Kings 14:29, there is an throne. The other five were dethroned and interregnum of eleven years between his death murdered by rebels, so that, as Witsius has and the ascent of the throne by his son, as truly said, with the murder of Zachariah not almost all the chronologists since the time of only was the declaration of Hosea (Hos. 1:4) Usher have assumed. It is true that this fulfilled, “I visit the blood-guiltiness of Jezreel interregnum may be set aside by assuming that upon the house of Jehu,” but also the parallel Jeroboam reigned fifty-one or fifty-three years utterance, “and I destroy the kingdom of the instead of forty-one, without the synchronism house of Israel,” since the monarchy in Israel being altered in consequence. but as it is not really ceased with Zachariah. “For the successors of Zachariah were not so much kings נג or נב very probable that the numeral letters and as the as robbers and tyrants, unworthy of the august ,מא should be confounded with conflict for the possession of the throne, which name of kings, who lost with ignominy the we meet with after the very brief reign of tyranny which they had wickedly acquired, and

2 KINGS Page 64 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study as wickedly exercised.”—Witsius, Δ κ φ λ. p. small body of men to overthrow Shallum, the 320. murderer of Zachariah and usurper of the 2 Kings 15:13–16. Reign of Shallum.—Shallum throne, and to make himself king. It is possible as in Deut. that the army commanded by Menahem had ,יֶרַ ח־יָמִ ים) reigned only a full month already been collected in Tirzah to march 21:13; see at Gen. 29:14). Menahem the son of against the city of Tiphsach, which had revolted Gadi then made war upon him from Tirzah; and from Israel when Shallum seized upon the by him he was smitten and slain. Menahem throne by the murder of Zachariah; so that after must have been a general or the commander- Menahem had removed the usurper, he carried in-chief, as Josephus affirms. As soon as he out at once the campaign already resolved became king he smote Tiphsach,— i.e., upon, and having taken Tiphsach, punished it Thapsacus on the Euphrates, which has long most cruelly for its revolt. On the cruel custom since entirely disappeared, probably to be of ripping up the women with child, i.e., of sought for in the neighbourhood of the present cutting open their wombs, see 2 Kings 8:12, Rakka, by the ford of el Hamman, the north- Amos 1:13, and Hos. 14:1. Tiphsach, Thapsacus, eastern border city of the Israelitish kingdom in appears to have been a strong fortress; and the time of Solomon (1 Kings 5:4), which came from its situation on the western bank of the into the possession of the kingdom of Israel Euphrates, at the termination of the great again when the ancient boundaries were trade-road from Egypt, Phoenicia, and Syria to restored by Jeroboam II (2 Kings 14:25 and 28), Mesopotamia and the kingdoms of Inner Asia but which had probably revolted again during (Movers, Phöniz. ii. 2, pp. 164, 165; and Ritter, the anarchy which arose after the death of Erdkunde, x. pp. 1114–15), the possession of it Jeroboam,—“and all that were therein, and the was of great importance to the kingdom of territory thereof, from Tirzah; because they Israel.28 opened not (to him), therefore he smote it, and had them that were with child ripped up.” 2 Kings 15:17–22. Reign of Menahem.— Menahem’s reign lasted ten full years (see at v. does not mean that Menahem laid the מִֹּתִרְּׂ צָ ה 23), and resembled that of his predecessors in land or district waste from Tirzah to Tiphsach, its attitude towards God. In v. 18, the all his days) is a very strange) כָ ל־יָמָ יו in this expression יַכֶ ה but is to be taken in connection with sense: he smote Tiphsach proceeding from one, inasmuch as no such definition of time Tirzah, etc. The position of this notice, namely, occurs in connection with the usual formula, immediately after the account of the usurpation either in this chapter (cf. vv. 24 and 28) or of the throne by Menahem and before the elsewhere (cf. 2 Kings 3:3; 10:31; 13:2, 11, etc.). history of his reign, is analogous to that The LXX have instead of this, ἐν τ ἡ έ ι concerning Elath in the case of Uzziah (2 Kings בִ ימֵ י ,ὐτ ῦ (in his days). If we compare v. 29 14:22), and, like the latter, is to be accounted בְּׂ יָמָ יו בָ א ,(.in the days of Pekah came, etc) פֶקַ ח בָ א for from the fact that the expedition of Menahem against Tiphsach formed the might possibly be regarded as the original כָ ל־יָמָ יו בָ א commencement of his reign, and, as we may reading, from which a copyist’s error infer from v. 19, became very eventful not only was connected with כָ ל־יָמָ יו arose, after which for his own reign, but also for the kingdom of Israel generally. The reason why he proceeded the preceding clause. from Tirzah against Tiphsach, was no doubt 2 Kings 15:19. In the time of Menahem, Pul that it was in Tirzah, the present Tallusa, which king of Assyria invaded the land, and Menahem was only three hours to the east of Samaria (see gave him 1000 talents of silver—more than two at :17), that the army of which and a half millions of thalers (£375,000)—“that Menahem was commander was posted, so that his hands might be with him, to confirm the he had probably gone to Samaria with only a kingdom in his hand.” These words are

2 KINGS Page 65 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study understood by the majority of commentators the last king of Nineveh of the family of the from the time of Ephraem Syrus, when taken in Derketades, who still ruled over connection with Hos. 5:13, as signifying that according to Berosus, and the last king but one Menahem invited Pul, that he might establish of this dynasty.29 his government with his assistance. But the 2 Kings 15:23–26. Reign of Pekahiah.— words of Hosea, “Ephraim goes to the Pekahiah the son of Menahem began to reign Assyrian,” sc. to seek for help (Hos. 5:13, cf. “in the fiftieth year of Uzziah.” As Menahem had 7:11 and 8:9), are far too general to be taken as begun to reign in the thirty-ninth year of Uzziah referring specially to Menahem; and the and reigned ten years, he must have died in the assumption that Menahem invited Pul into the forty-ninth year of Uzziah; and therefore, if his land is opposed by the words in the verse son did not become king till the fiftieth year, before us, “Pul came over the land.” Even the some months must have elapsed between the further statement that Menahem gave to Pul death of Menahem and Pekahiah’s ascent of the 1000 talents of silver when he came into the throne, probably cause, in the existing land, that he might help him to establish his disorganization of the kingdom, the possession government, presupposes at the most that a of the throne by the latter was opposed. party opposed to Menahem had invited the Pekahiah reigned in the spirit of his Assyrians, to overthrow the usurper. At any predecessors, but only for two years, as his see at 2 Sam. 23:8) Pekah ,שָ לִ יש) rate, we may imagine, in perfect harmony with aide-de-camp the words of our account, that Pul marched conspired against him and slew him in the against Israel of his own accord, possibly see at 1 Kings 16:8) of the king’s ,אַרְּׂ מון) induced to do so by Menahem’s expedition citadel against Thapsacus, and that his coming was palace, with Argob and Aryeh. Argob and Aryeh simply turned to account as a good opportunity were not fellow-conspirators of Pekah, who for disputing Menahem’s possession of the helped to slay the king, but principes Pekachijae, throne he had usurped, so that Menahem, by as Seb. Schmidt expresses it, probably aides-de- paying the tribute mentioned, persuaded the camp of Pekahiah, who were slain by the Assyrian to withdraw, that he might deprive the conspirators when defending their king. We opposing party of the Assyrian support, and must take the words in this sense on account of and with him“ ,וְּׂעִ מו חֲמִשִ ים וגו׳ :thereby establish his own rule. what follows 2 Kings 15:20. To collect the requisite amount, (Pekah) were fifty men of the Gileadites” (i.e., Menahem imposed upon all persons of they helped him). The Gileadites probably belonged to the king’s body-guard, and were ,עַ ל with יֹּצֵ א .property a tax of fifty shekels each under the command of the aides-de-camp of in הֹּצִ יא .he caused to arise, i.e., made a collection Pekah. a causative sense, from , to arise, to be paid Kings 15:27–31. Reign of Pekah.—Pekah the 2 יָצָ א not warriors, but men son of Remaliah reigned twenty years.30 During :גִ בורֵ י חַ יִל .(Kings 12:13 2) ,his reign the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser came ,לְּׂאִ יש אֶחָ ד .of property, as in Ruth 2:1, 1 Sam. 9:1 and after conquering the fortified cities round for the individual. Pul was the first king of Lake Merom took possession of Gilead and Assyria who invaded the kingdom of Israel and , namely the whole land of Naphtali, and prepared the way for the conquest of this led the inhabitants captive to Assyria. Tiglath- kingdom by his successors, and for the ;Kings 16:7 2 ,ֹּתִ גְּׂלַ תפְּׂלֶסֶ ר or ֹּתִ גְּׂלַ תפִלְּׂאֶסֶ ר) extension of the Assyrian power as far as Egypt. pileser Chron. 5:26, and 2 1 ,ֹּתִ לְּׂגַ תפִלְּׂנֶסֶ ר or פִלְּׂנֶ אסֶ ר According to the thorough investigation made by Marc. v. Niebuhr (Gesch. Assurs u. Babels, pp. Chron. 28:20; Θ λ θφ λ ά or 128ff.), Pul, whose name has not yet been Θ λ θφ λλ ά , LXX; written Tiglat-palatsira discovered upon the Assyrian monuments, was or Tiglat-palatsar on the Assyrian monuments,

2 KINGS Page 66 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study and interpreted by Gesenius and others “ruler 5:26. For further remarks on this point see at 2 of the Tigris,” although the reading of the name Kings 17:6. upon the monuments is still uncertain, and the 2 Kings 15:30. Pekah met with his death in a explanation given a very uncertain one, since conspiracy organized by Hosea the son of Elah, Tiglat or Tilgat is hardly identical with Diglath = who made himself king “in the twentieth year Tigris, but is probably a name of the goddess of Jotham.” There is something very strange in Derketo, Atergatis), was, according to M. v. this chronological datum, as Jotham only Niebuhr (pp. 156, 157), the last king of the reigned sixteen years (v. 33), and Ahaz began to Derketade dynasty, who, when the and reign in the seventeenth year of Pekah (2 Kings Babylonians threw off the Assyrian supremacy 16:1); so that Pekah’s death would fall in the after the death of Pul, attempted to restore and fourth year of Ahaz. The reason for this striking extend the ancient dominion.31 His expedition statement can only be found, as Usher has against Israel falls, according to v. 29 and 2 shown (Chronol. sacr. p. 80), in the fact that Kings 16:9, in the closing years of Pekah, when nothing has yet been said about Jotham’s Ahaz had come to the throne in Judah. The successor Ahaz, because the reign of Jotham enumeration of his conquests in the kingdom of himself is not mentioned till vv. 32ff.32 Israel commences with the most important 2 Kings 15:32–38. Reign of Jotham of Judah (cf. cities, probably the leading fortifications. Then 2 Chron. 27).—V. 32. “In the second year of follow the districts of which he took possession, Pekah Jotham began to reign.” This agrees with and the inhabitants of which he led into the statement in v. 27, that Pekah became king captivity. The cities mentioned are Ijon, in the last year of Uzziah, supposing that it probably the present Ayun on the north-eastern occurred at the commencement of the year. edge of the Merj Ayun; Abel-Beth-, the Jotham’s sixteen years therefore came to a close present Abil el Kamh, on the north-west of Lake in the seventeenth year of Pekah’s reign (2 Huleh (see at 1 Kings 15:20); Janoach, which Kings 16:1). His reign was like that of his father must not be confounded with the Janocha Uzziah (compare vv. 34, 35 with vv. 3, 4), mentioned in Josh. 16:6, 7, on the border of except, as is added in Chron. v. 2, that he did not Ephraim and Manasseh, but is to be sought for force himself into the temple of the Lord, as in Galilee or the tribe-territory of Naphtali, and Uzziah had done (2 Chron. 16:16). All that is has not yet been discovered; Kedesh, on the mentioned of his enterprises in the account mountains to the west of Lake Huleh, which has before us is that he built the upper gate of the been preserved as an insignificant village under house of Jehovah, that is to say, that he restored the ancient name (see at Josh. 12:22); Hazor, in it, or perhaps added to its beauty. The upper the same region, but not yet traced with gate, according to Ezek. 9:2 compared with 2 certainty (see at Josh. 11:1). Gilead is the whole Kings 8:3, 5, 14 and 16, is the gate at the north of the land to the east of the Jordan, the side of the inner or upper court, where all the territory of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half- sacrifices were slaughtered, according to Ezek. Manasseh (1 Chron. 5:26), which had only been 40:38–43. We also find from 2 Chron. 27:3ff. wrested from the Syrians again a short time that he built against the wall of Ophel, and before by Jeroboam II, and restored to Israel (2 several cities in the mountains of Judah, and Kings 14:25, compared with 2 Kings 20:33). castles and towers in the forests, and subdued see Ewald, § the Ammonites, so that they paid him tribute ,הַ גָלִ יל the feminine form of) הַ גָלִ ילָ ה 173, h.) is more precisely defined by the for three years. Jotham carried on with great apposition “all the land of Naphtali” (see at 1 vigour, therefore, the work which his father had to the land began, to increase the material prosperity of his“ ,אַ שּורָ ה Kings 9:11).—In the place of of Assyria,” the different regions to which the subjects. captives were transported are given in 1 Chron.

2 KINGS Page 67 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 Kings 15:37. In those days the Lord began to went so far in his ungodliness as to shut up the send against Judah , etc. It is evident from doors of the porch of the temple and suspend the position of this verse at the close of the the temple-worship prescribed by the law account of Jotham, that the incursions of the altogether. The punishment followed this allied Syrians and Israelites into Judah under apostasy without delay. The allied Syrians and the command of Rezin and Pekah commenced Israelites completely defeated the Judaeans, in the closing years of Jotham, so that these foes slew more than a hundred thousand men and appeared before Jerusalem at the very led away a much larger number of prisoners, beginning of the reign of Ahaz.—It is true that and then advanced to Jerusalem to put an end the Syrians had been subjugated by Jeroboam II to the kingdom of Judah by the conquest of the (2 Kings 14:28); but in the anarchical condition capital. In this distress, instead of seeking help of the Israelitish kingdom after his death, they from the Lord, who promised him deliverance had no doubt recovered their independence. through the prophet Isaiah, Ahaz sought help They must also have been overcome by the from Tiglat-pileser the king of Assyria, who Assyrians under Pul, for he could never have came and delivered him from the oppression of marched against Israel without having first of Rezin and Pekah by the conquest of Damascus, all conquered Syria. But as the power of the Galilee, and the Israelitish land to the east of the Assyrians was greatly weakened for a time by Jordan, but who then oppressed him himself, so the falling away of the Medes and Babylonians, that Ahaz was obliged to purchase the the Syrians had taken advantage of this friendship of this conqueror by sending him all weakness to refuse the payment of tribute to the treasures of the temple and palace.—In the Assyria, and had formed an alliance with Pekah chapter before us we have first of all the of Israel to conquer Judah, and thereby to general characteristics of the idolatry of Ahaz strengthen their power so as to be able to offer (vv. 2–4), then a summary account of his a successful resistance to any attack from the oppression by Rezin and Pekah, and his seeking side of the Euphrates.—But as 2 Kings 16:6ff. help from the king of Assyria (vv. 5–9), and and 2 Kings 17 show, it was otherwise decreed lastly a description of the erection of a heathen in the counsels of the Lord. altar in the court of the temple on the site of the brazen altar of burnt-offering, and of other acts 2 Kings 16 of demolition performed upon the older sacred Reign of King Ahaz of Judah. objects in the temple-court (vv. 10–18). The parallel account in 2 Chron. 28 supplies many 2 Kings 16. With the reign of Ahaz a most additions to the facts recorded here. eventful change took place in the development 2 Kings 16:1–4. On the time mentioned, “in the of the kingdom of Judah. Under the vigorous seventeenth year of Pekah Ahaz became king” reigns of Uzziah and Jotham, by whom the see at 2 Kings 15:32. The datum “twenty years earthly prosperity of the kingdom had been old” is a striking one, even if we compare with it studiously advanced, there had been, as we may 2 Kings 18:2. As Ahaz reigned only sixteen see from the prophecies of Isaiah, chs. 2–6, years, and at his death his son Hezekiah became which date from this time, a prevalence of king at the age of twenty-five years (2 Kings luxury and self-security, of unrighteousness 18:2), Ahaz must have begotten him in the and forgetfulness of God, among the upper eleventh year of his age. It is true that in classes, in consequence of the increase of their southern lands this is neither impossible nor wealth. Under Ahaz these sins grew into open unknown,33 but in the case of the kings of Judah apostasy from the Lord; for this weak and it would be without analogy. The reading found unprincipled ruler trod in the steps of the kings in the LXX, Syr., and Arab. at 2 Chron. 28:1, and of Israel, and introduced image-worship and also in certain codd., viz., five and twenty idolatrous practices of every kind, and at length instead of twenty, may therefore be a

2 KINGS Page 68 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study preferable one. According to this, Hezekiah, like heard of before in Judah and Israel, was Ahaz, was born in his father’s sixteenth year. introduced by Ahaz.35 In the Chronicles, ,וַיַבְּׂעֵ ר is correctly explained by הֶעֱבִ יר Kings 16:3. “Ahaz walked in the way of the therefore 2 kings of Israel,” to which there is added by way “he burned;” though we cannot infer from this ,הִבְּׂעִ יר is always a mere conjecture for הֶעֱבִ יר of explanation in 2 Chron. 28:2, “and also made that molten images to the Baals.” This refers, as Geiger does (Urschrift u. Uebers, der Bibel, p. primarily, simply to the worship of Jehovah 305). The offering of his son for took under the image of a calf, which they had place, in all probability, during the severe invented; for this was the way in which all the oppression of Ahaz by the Syrians, and was kings of Israel walked. At the same time, in 2 intended to appease the wrath of the gods, as Kings 8:18 the same formula is so used of Joram was done by the king of the Moabites in similar king of Judah as to include the worship of Baal circumstances (2 Kings 3:27).—In v. 4 the by the dynasty of Ahab. Consequently in the idolatry is described in the standing formulae verse before us also the way of the kings of as sacrificing upon high places and hills, etc., as Israel includes the worship of Baal, which is in 1 Kings 14:23. The temple-worship especially mentioned in the Chronicles.—“He prescribed by the law could easily be continued even made his son pass through the fire,” i.e., along with this idolatry, since polytheism did offered him in sacrifice to Moloch in the valley not exclude the worship of Jehovah. It was not of Benhinnom (see at 2 Kings 23:10), after the till the closing years of his reign that Ahaz went abominations of the nations, whom Jehovah so far as to close the temple-hall, and thereby ;(we suspend the temple-worship (2 Chron. 28:24 בְּׂ נו had cast out before Israel. Instead of in 2 Chron. 28:3, and in v. 16 in any case it was not till after the alterations בָ נָיו have the plural described in vv. 11ff. as having been made in ,מֶ לְֶך אַ שּור kings of Asshur, instead of ,מַ לְּׂכֵי אַ שּור the temple. although only one, viz., Tiglath-pileser, is spoken of. This repeated use of the plural 2 Kings 16:5–9. Of the war which the allied shows very plainly that it is to be understood Syrians and Israelites waged upon Ahaz, only rhetorically, as expressing the thought in the the principal fact is mentioned in v. 5, namely, most general manner, since the number was of that the enemy marched to Jerusalem to war, less importance than the fact.34 So far as the fact but were not able to make war upon the city, is concerned, we have here the first instance of i.e., to conquer it; and in v. 6 we have a brief an actual Moloch-sacrifice among the Israelites, notice of the capture of the port of Elath by the i.e., of one performed by slaying and burning. Syrians. We find v. 5 again, with very trifling alterations, in Isa. 7:1 at the head of the does לַ מֹּלֶ ְך or הֶעֱבִ יר בָאֵ ש For although the phrase prophecy, in which the prophet promises the not in itself denote the slaying and burning of king the help of God and predicts that the plans the children as Moloch-sacrifices, but primarily of his enemies will fail. According to this, the affirms nothing more than the simple passing allied kings intended to take Judah, to dethrone through fire, a kind of februation or baptism of Ahaz, and to install a vassal king, viz., the son of fire (see at Lev. 18:21); such passages as Ezek. Tabeel. We learn still more concerning this war, 16:21 and Jer. 7:31, where sacrificing in the which had already begun, according to 2 Kings valley of Benhinnom is called slaying and 15:37, in the closing years of Jotham, from 2 burning the children, show most distinctly that Chron. 28:5–15; namely, that the two kings is to be taken inflicted great defeats upon Ahaz, and carried הֶעֱבִ יר בָאֵ ש in the verse before us as signifying actual sacrificing, i.e., the burning off many prisoners and a large amount of booty, of the children slain in sacrifice to Moloch, and, but that the Israelites set their prisoners at indicates, that this kind of liberty again, by the direction of the prophet וְּׂגַ ם as the emphatic idolatrous worship, which had never been Oded, and after feeding and clothing them, sent

2 KINGS Page 69 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study them back to their brethren. It is now generally mentions the last and principal event of the admitted that these statements are not at war, and that the enemy was compelled to variance with our account (as Ges., Winer, and retreat from Jerusalem by the fact that the king others maintain), but can be easily reconciled of Assyria, Tiglath-pileser, whom Ahaz had with it, and simply serve to complete it.36 The called to his help, marched against Syria and only questions in dispute are, whether the two compelled Rezin to hurry back to the defence of accounts refer to two different campaigns, or his kingdom.—It is more difficult to arrange in merely to two different events in the same the account of the capture of Elath by the campaign, and whether the battles to which the Syrians (v. 6) among the events of this war. The merely assigns it in a בָעֵ ת הַהִ יא Chronicles allude are to be placed before or expression after the siege of Jerusalem mentioned in our perfectly general manner to the period of the text. The first question cannot be absolutely war. The supposition of Thenius, that it did not decided, since there are no decisive arguments take place till after the siege of Jerusalem had to be found in favour of either the one been relinquished, and that Rezin, after the supposition or the other; and even “the one failure of his attempt to take Jerusalem, that he strong argument” which Caspari finds in Isa. 7:6 might not have come altogether in vain, against the idea of two campaigns is not marched away from Jerusalem round the conclusive. For if the design which the prophet southern point of the Dead Sea and conquered there attributes to the allied kings, “we will Elath, is impossible, because he would never make a breach in Judah,” i.e., storm his have left his own kingdom in such a defenceless fortresses and his passes and conquer them, state to the advancing Assyrians. We must does obviously presuppose, that at the time therefore place the taking of Elath by Rezin when the enemy spake or thought in this before his march against Jerusalem, though we manner, Judah was still standing uninjured and still leave it undecided how Rezin conducted unconquered, and therefore the battles the war against Ahaz: whether by advancing mentioned in 2 Chron. 28:5, 6 cannot yet have along the country to the east of the Jordan, been fought; it by no means follows from the defeating the Judaeans there (2 Chron. 28:5), connection between Isa. 7:6 and v. 1 (of the and then pressing forward to Elath and same chapter) that v. 6 refers to plans which conquering that city, while Pekah made a the enemy had only just formed at the time simultaneous incursion into Judah from the when Isaiah spoke (Is. 7:4ff.). On the contrary, north and smote Ahaz, so that it was not till Isaiah is simply describing the plans which the after the conquest of Elath that Rezin entered enemy devised and pursued, and which they the land from the south, and there joined Pekah had no doubt formed from the very for a common attack upon Jerusalem, as Caspari commencement of the war, and now that they supposes; or whether by advancing into Judah were marching against Jerusalem, hoped to along with Pekah at the very outset, and after attain by the conquest of the capital. All that we he had defeated the army of Ahaz in a great can assume as certain is, that the war lasted battle, sending a detachment of his own army to longer than a year, since the invasion of Judah Idumaea, to wrest that land from Judah and by these foes had already commenced before conquer Elath, while he marched with the rest the death of Jotham, and that the greater battles of his forces in combination with Pekah against (2 Chron. 28:5, 6) were not fought till the time Jerusalem. of Ahaz, and it was not till his reign that the “Rezin brought Elath to Aram and drove the enemy advanced to the siege of Jerusalem.— Jews out of Elath, and Aramaeans came to Elath With regard to the second question, it cannot be does not הֵשִ יב ”.at all doubtful that the battles mentioned and dwelt therein to this day preceded the advance of the enemy to the front mean “to lead back” here, but literally to turn, of Jerusalem, and therefore our account merely to bring to a person; for Elath had never

2 KINGS Page 70 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study belonged to Aram before this, but was an again (2 Chron. 28:17); and even the Philistines Edomitish city, so that even if we were to read took possession of several cities in the lowland, could not mean to bring back. to avenge themselves for the humiliation they הֵשִ יב ,אֲרָ ם for אֱ דום But there is no ground whatever for altering had sustained at the hand of Uzziah (2 Chron. 28:18). Cler., Mich., Ew., Then., and) לֶאֱ דום into לַאֲרָ ם 2 Kings 16:7. In this distress Ahaz turned to others), whereas the form is at variance Tiglath-pileser, without regarding either the ארם with such an alteration through the assumption word of Isaiah in Is. 7:4ff., which promised is never salvation, or the prophet’s warning against an אֱ דום because ,ד and ר of an exchange of except in Ezek. 25:14. alliance with Assyria, and by sending the gold אֱ דֹּם written defective and silver which were found in the treasures of There are also no sufficient reasons for altering the temple and palace, purchased his assistance into (Keri); is merely a against Rezin and Pekah. Whether this occurred אֲ רומִ ים וַאֲ דומִ ים וַאֲ רומִ ים with the dull Syriac u - immediately after the invasion of the land by אֲרַ מִ ים Syriac form for sound, several examples of which form occur in the allied kings, or not till after they had v. 7, defeated the Judaean army and advanced הַקָמִ ים for הַ קומִ ים ,.this very chapter,—e.g against Jerusalem, it is impossible to discover for v. 10, and for v. 6, — ;either from this verse or from 2 Chron. 28:16 אֶ ילַ ת אֵ ילות דַמֶשֶ ק דּומֶשֶ ק with additions, is only written but probably it was after the first great victory ,אֱ דום whereas plene twice in the ancient books, and that in the gained by the foe, with which Isa. 7 and 8 .see Ewald, § 151, b קָמִ ים for קומִ ים Chronicles, where the scriptio plena is generally agree.—On preferred (2 Chron. 25:14 and 28:17), but is 2 Kings 16:9. Tiglath-pileser then marched Moreover the against Damascus, took the city, slew Rezin, and .(אדמים) always written defective Edomites, not the led the inhabitants away to Kir, as Amos had) אדומים“ statement that ,Kir, from which ,קִ יר .(Edomites) came thither,” etc., would be very prophesied (Amos 1:3–5 inappropriate, since Edomites certainly lived in according to Amos 9:7, the Aramaeans had this Idumaean city in perfect security, even emigrated to Syria, is no doubt a district by the while it was under Judaean government. And river Kur ( ῦ ύ ), which taking its rise there would be no sense in the expression “the in Armenia, unites with the Araxes and flows Edomites dwelt there to this day,” since the into the Caspian Sea, although from the length Edomites remained in their own land to the of the river Kur it is impossible to define time of the captivity. All this is applicable to precisely the locality in which they were placed; Aramaeans alone. As soon as Rezin had and the statement of Josephus (Ant. ix. 13, 3), conquered this important seaport town, it was that the Damascenes were transported ἰ τὴν a very natural thing to establish an Aramaean ἄνω Μηδ ν, is somewhat indefinite, and colony there, which obtained possession of the moreover has hardly been derived from early trade of the town, and remained there till the historical sources (see M. v. Niebuhr, Gesch. time when the annals of the kings were Assurs, p. 158). Nothing is said here concerning composed (for it is to this that the expression Tiglath-pileser’s invasion of the kingdom of refers), even after the kingdom of Israel, because this has already been mentioned עַ ד־הַ יום הַ זֶ ה Rezin had long been destroyed by the at 2 Kings 15:29 in the history of Pekah. Assyrians, since Elath and the Aramaeans 2 Kings 16:10–18. Ahaz paid Tiglath-pileser a settled there were not affected by that blow.37 visit in Damascus, “to present to him his thanks As soon as the Edomites had been released by and congratulations, and possibly also to Rezin from the control of Judah, to which they prevent a visit from Tiglath-pileser to himself, had been brought back by Amaziah and Uzziah which would not have been very welcome” (2 Kings 14:7, 22), they began plundering Judah

2 KINGS Page 71 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

-is not merely the meat מִ נְּׂחַ ת הָעֶרֶ ב .is neither to be sacrifices דּומֶשֶ ק Thenius). The form) nor regarded as a copyist’s offering offered in the evening, but the whole of דַמֶשֶ ק altered into the evening sacrifice, consisting of a burnt- as we have several words in ,דַרְּׂ מֶשֶ ק error for offering and a meat-offering, as in 1 Kings this chapter that are formed with dull Syriac u - the brazen altar “will be ,יִהְּׂ יֶה־לִ ילְּׂבַקֵ ר .36 ,18:29 sound. The visit of Ahaz to Damascus is simply mentioned on account of what follows, namely, to me for deliberation,” i.e., I will reflect upon it, in בִקֵ ר that Ahaz saw an altar there, which pleased him and then make further arrangements. On so much that he sent a picture and model of it this sense see Prov. 20:25. In the opinion of “according to all the workmanship thereof,” i.e., Ahaz, the altar which had been built after the its style of architecture, to Urijah the priest (see model of that of Damascus was not to be an Isa. 8:2), and had an altar made like it for the idolatrous altar, but an altar of Jehovah. The temple, upon which, on his return to Jerusalem, reason for this arbitrary removal of the altar of he ordered all the burnt-offerings, meat- Solomon, which had been sanctified by the Lord offerings, and drink-offerings to be presented. Himself at the dedication of the temple by fire The allusion here is to the offerings which he from heaven, was, in all probability, chiefly that commanded to be presented for his prosperous the Damascene altar pleased Ahaz better; and return to Jerusalem. the innovation was a sin against Jehovah, 2 Kings 16:14ff. Soon after this Ahaz went still inasmuch as God Himself had prescribed the further, and had “the copper altar before form for His sanctuary (cf. Ex. 25:40; 26:30; 2 Jehovah,” i.e., the altar of burnt-offering in the Chron. 28:19), so that any altar planned by man midst of the court before the entrance into the and built according to a heathen model was Holy Place, removed “from the front of the practically the same as an idolatrous altar.— (temple-) house, from (the spot) between the The account of this altar is omitted from the altar (the new one built by Urijah) and the Chronicles; but in v. 23 we have this statement house of Jehovah (i.e., the temple-house (, and instead: “Ahaz offered sacrifice to the gods of does Damascus, who smote him, saying, The gods of הִקְּׂרִ יב ”.placed at the north side of the altar the kings of Aram helped them; I will sacrifice not mean removit, caused to be taken away, but to them that they may help me: and they were admovit, and is properly to be connected with the ruin of him and of all Israel.” Thenius and Bertheau find in this account an alteration of ןוַיִֹּתֵ אֹּתו notwithstanding the fact that ,עַ ל־יֶרֶ ְך הם׳ is inserted between for the sake of greater our account of the copying of the Damascene clearness, as Maurer has already pointed out.38 altar introduced by the chronicler as favouring in the his design, namely, to give as glaring a הַמִ זְּׂבַ ח On the use of the article with construct state, see Ewald, § 290, d. description as possible of the ungodliness of Ahaz. But they are mistaken. For even if the 2 Kings 16:15. He also commanded that the notice in the Chronicles had really sprung from daily morning and evening sacrifice, and the this alone, the chronicler would have been able special offerings of the king and the people, from the standpoint of the Mosaic law to should be presented upon the new altar, and designate the offering of sacrifice upon the altar thereby put a stop to the use of the Solomonian built after the model of an idolatrous Syrian altar, “about which he would consider.” The altar as sacrificing to these gods. But it is a is not to be altered; the pron. suff. question whether the chronicler had in his וַיְּׂצַּוֵ הּו Chethîb stands before the noun, as is frequently the case mind merely the sacrifices offered upon that in the more diffuse popular speech. The new altar in the temple-court, and not rather altar is called “the great altar,” probably sacrifices which Ahaz offered upon some because it was somewhat larger than that of bamah to the gods of Syria, when he was used for the burning of the defeated and oppressed by the Syrians, for the :הַקְּׂטֵ ר .Solomon

2 KINGS Page 72 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study purpose of procuring their assistance. As Ahaz would hardly have adopted the measures offered his son in sacrifice to Moloch according described in the next verse. to v. 3, he might just as well have offered 2 Kings 16:18. “The covered Sabbath-stand, sacrifice to the gods of the Syrians. which they had built in the house (temple), and 2 Kings 16:17, 18. Ahaz also laid his hand the outer entrance of the king he turned (i.e., upon the other costly vessels of the court of the removed) into the house of Jehovah before the ,סָכַ ְך from ,מּוסַ ְך Keri) מֵיסַ ְך הַשַ בָ ת ”.temple. He broke off the panels of the king of Assyria Solomonian stands, which were ornamented to cover) is no doubt a covered place, stand or with artistic carving, and removed the basins hall in the court of the temple, to be used by the from the stands, and took the brazen sea from king whenever he visited the temple with his the brazen oxen upon which they stood, and retinue on the Sabbath or on feast-days; and before “the outer entrance of the king” is probably the וְּׂ placed it upon a stone pavement. The can only have crept into the text special ascent into the temple for the king אֶ ת־הַכִ יֹּר through a copyist’s error, and the singular must mentioned in 1 Kings 10:5. In what the removal be taken distributively: he removed from them of it consisted it is impossible to determine, from the want of information as to its original מַרְּׂ צֶֹפֶ ת אֲבָ נִים .the stands) every single basin) character. According to Ewald (Gesch. iii. p. (without the article) is not the stone pavement means, “he הֵסֵ בבֵ ית יְּׂהוָ ה ,and Thenius (621 of the court of the temple, but a pedestal made of stones (βά ι λιθ νη, LXX) for the brazen sea. altered (these places), i.e., he robbed them of The reason why, or the object with which Ahaz their ornaments, in the house of Jehovah.” This could בֵ ית יְּׂהוָ ה mutilated these sacred vessels, is not given. The is quite arbitrary. For even if opinion expressed by Ewald, Thenius, and mean “in the house of Jehovah” in this does not mean to disfigure, and הֵסֵ ב ,others, that Ahaz made a present to Tiglath- connection pileser with the artistically wrought panels of still less “to deprive of ornaments.” In 2 Kings the stands, the basins, and the oxen of the 23:34 and 24:17 it signifies to alter the name, brazen sea, is not only improbable in itself, for fear“ ,מִפְּׂ נֵי מֶ לֶ ְך אַ שּור ,not to disfigure it. Again since you would naturally suppose that if Ahaz had wished to make a “valuable and very of the king of Assyria,” cannot mean, in this welcome present” to the Assyrian king, he connection, “to make presents to the king of would have chosen some perfect stands with Assyria.” And with this explanation, which is their basins for this purpose, and not merely grammatically impossible, the inference drawn the panels and basins; but it has not the from it, namely, that Ahaz sent the ornaments smallest support in the biblical text,—on the of the king’s stand and king’s ascent to the king contrary, it has the context against it. For, in the of Assyria along with the vessels mentioned in first place, if the objects named had been sent v. 17, also falls to the ground. If the alterations to Tiglath-pileser, this would certainly have which Ahaz made in the stands and the brazen been mentioned, as well as the sending of the sea had any close connection with his relation temple and palace treasures. And, again, the to Tiglath-pileser, which cannot be proved, mutilation of these vessels is placed between Ahaz must have been impelled by fear to make the erection of the new altar which was them, not that he might send them as presents constructed after the Damascene model, and to him, but that he might hide them from him if other measures which Ahaz adopted as a he came to Jerusalem, to which 2 Chron. 28:20, protection against the king of Assyria (v. 18). 21 seems to refer. It is also perfectly Now if Ahaz, on his return from visiting Tiglath- conceivable, as Züllich (Die Cherubimwagen, p. pileser at Damascus, had thought it necessary 56) conjectures, that Ahaz merely broke off the to send another valuable present to that king in panels from the stands and removed the oxen order to secure his permanent friendship, he from the brazen sea, that he might use these

2 KINGS Page 73 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study artistic works to decorate some other place, in the eyes of Jehovah, though not like the kings possibly his palace.—Whether these artistic of Israel before him” (v. 2). We are not told in works were restored or not at the time of what was better than his predecessors, Hezekiah’s reformation or in that of , we nor can it be determined with any certainty, have no accounts to show. All that can be although the assumption that he allowed his gathered from 2 Kings 25:13, 14, Jer. 52:17, and subjects to visit the temple at Jerusalem is a 27:19, is, that the stands and the brazen sea very probable one, inasmuch as, according to 2 were still in existence in the time of Chron. 30:10ff., Hezekiah invited to the feast of Nebuchadnezzar, and that on the destruction of the Passover, held at Jerusalem, the Israelites Jerusalem by the Chaldaeans they were broken from Ephraim and Manasseh as far as to in pieces and carried away to as Zebulun, and some individuals from these brass. The brazen oxen are also specially tribes accepted his invitation. But although mentioned in Jer. 52:20, which is not the case in Hoshea was better than his predecessors, the the parallel passage 2 Kings 25:13; though this judgment of destruction burst upon the sinful does not warrant the conclusion that they were kingdom and people in his reign, because he no longer in existence at that time. had not truly turned to the Lord; a fact which 2 Kings 16:19, 20. Conclusion of the reign of has been frequently repeated in the history of Ahaz. According to 2 Chron. 28:27, he was the world, namely, that the last rulers of a buried in the city of David, but not in the decaying kingdom have not been so bad as their sepulchres of the kings. forefathers. “God is accustomed to defer the punishment of the elders in the greatness of His 2 Kings 17 long-suffering, to see whether their descendants will come to repentance; but if this Reign of Hoshea and Destruction of the Kingdom be not the case, although they may not be so of Israel. The People Carried Away to Assyria and bad, the anger of God proceeds at length to visit Media. Transportation of the Heathen Colonists iniquity (cf. Ex. 20:5).” Seb. Schmidt. to Samaria. 2 Kings 17:3. “Against him came up 2 Kings 17:1–6. Reign of Hoshea King of Salmanasar king of Assyria, and Hoshea became ,מִ נְּׂחָ ה) ”Israel.—V. 1. In the twelfth year of Ahaz began subject to him and rendered him tribute Hoshea to reign. As Hoshea conspired against Σ λ ν ά ,שַ לְּׂמַ נְּׂאֶסֶ ר .(as in 1 Kings 5:1 Pekah, according to 2 Kings 15:30, in the fourth year of Ahaz, and after murdering him made (LXX), Salmanasar, according to the more himself king, whereas according to the verse recent researches respecting Assyria, is not before us it was not till the twelfth year of Ahaz only the same person as the Shalman that he really became king, his possession of the mentioned in Hos. 10:14, but the same as the throne must have been contested for eight Sargon of Isa. 20:1, whose name is spelt Sargina years. The earlier commentators and almost all upon the monuments, and who is described in the chronologists have therefore justly the inscriptions on his palace at Khorsabad as assumed that there was en eight years’ anarchy ruler over many subjugated lands, among between the death of Pekah and the which Samirina (Samaria?) also occurs (vid., commencement of Hoshea’s reign. This Brandis üb. d. Gewinn, pp. 48ff. and 53; M. v. assumption merits the preference above all the Niebuhr, Gesch. Ass. pp. 129, 130; and M. attempts made to remove the discrepancy by Duncker, Gesch. des Alterth. i. pp. 687ff.). The alterations of the text, since there is nothing at occasion of this expedition of Salmanasar all surprising in the existence of anarchy at a appears to have been simply the endeavour to time when the kingdom was in a state of the continue the conquests of his predecessor greatest inward disturbance and decay. Hoshea Tiglath-pileser. There is no ground whatever reigned nine years, and “did that which was evil for Maurer’s assumption, that he had been

2 KINGS Page 74 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study asked to come to the help of a rival of Hoshea; impossible to see how Salmanasar could have and the opinion that he came because Hoshea obtained possession of his person.40 We must had refused the tribute which had been paid to rather assume, as many commentators have Assyria from the time of Menahem downwards, done, from R. Levi ben Gersom down to Maurer is at variance with the fact that in 2 Kings 15:29 and Thenius, that it was not till the conquest of Tiglath-pileser is simply said to have taken a his capital Samaria that Hoshea fell into the portion of the territory of Israel; but there is no hands of the Assyrians and was cast into a allusion to any payment of tribute or feudal prison; so that the explanation to be given to obligation on the part of Pekah. Salmanasar was the introduction of this circumstance before the the first to make king Hoshea subject and siege and conquest of Samaria must be, that the tributary. This took place at the commencement historian first of all related the eventual result of Hoshea’s reign, as is evident from the fact of Hoshea’s rebellion against Salmanasar so far that Hoshea paid the tribute for several years, as Hoshea himself was concerned, and then and in the sixth year of his reign refused any proceeded to describe in greater detail the further payment. course of the affair in relation to his kingdom 2 Kings 17:4. The king of Assyria found a and capital. This does not necessitate our giving the meaning “he assigned וַיַעַ צְּׂרֵ הּו conspiracy in Hoshea; for he had sent to the word messengers to So the king of Egypt, and did not him a limit” (Thenius); but we may adhere to pay the tribute to the king of Assyria, as year by the meaning which has been philologically .So, possibly to be established, namely, arrest or incarcerate (Jer ,סוא year. The Egyptian king may be given thus: “he וַיַעַ ל .(.Seveh, is no doubt one of the 33:1; 36:5, etc ,סֵ וֶ ה pronounced two Shebeks of the twenty-fifth dynasty, overran, that is to say, the entire land.” The belonging to the Ethiopian tribe; but whether three years of the siege of Samaria were not full he was the second king of this dynasty, years, for, according to 2 Kings 18:9, 10, it Såbåtåkå (Brugsch, hist. d’Egypte, i. p. 244), the began in the seventh year of Hoshea, and the Sevechus of Manetho, who is said to have city was taken in the ninth year, although it is ascended the throne, according to Wilkinson, in also given there as three years. the year 728, as Vitringa (Isa. ii. p. 318), 2 Kings 17:6. The ninth year of Hoshea Gesenius, Ewald, and others suppose, or the corresponds to the sixth year of Hezekiah and first king of this Ethiopian dynasty, Sabako the the year 722 or 721 B.C., in which the kingdom father of Sevechus, which is the opinion of of the ten tribes was destroyed. Usher and Marsham, whom M. v. Niebuhr 2 Kings 17:6b. The Israelites carried into (Gesch. pp. 458ff. and 463) and M. Duncker (i. p. exile.—After the taking of Samaria, Salmanasar 693) have followed in recent times, cannot led Israel into captivity to Assyria, and assigned possibly be decided in the present state of to those who were led away dwelling-places in Egyptological research.39—As soon as Chalach and on the Chabor, or the river Gozan, Salmanasar received intelligence of the conduct and in cities of Media. According to these clear conspiracy, as words of the text, the places to which the ten ,קֶשֶ ר of Hoshea, which is called being rebellion against his acknowledged tribes were banished are not to be sought for in superior, he had him arrested and put into Mesopotamia, but in provinces of Assyria and built by כֶלַ ח is neither the city of חֲ לַ ח .prison in chains, and then overran the whole Media land, advanced against Samaria and besieged Nimrod (Gen. 10:11), nor the Cholwan of that city for three years, and captured it in the Abulfeda and the Syriac writers, a city five days’ ninth year of Hoshea. These words are not to be journey to the north of Bagdad, from which the understood as signifying that Hoshea had been district bordering on the Zagrus probably taken prisoner before the siege of Samaria and received the name of Χ λων τι or λων τι , thrown into prison, because in that case it is

2 KINGS Page 75 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study but the province λ χηνή of Strabo (xi. 8, 4; peculiar district “by the river Gozan.” Now, and even of ,בְּׂ .and xvi. 1, 1), called λ κινή by however the absence of the prep ,12 ,14 Ptolemaeus (vi. 1), on the eastern side of the on the one hand, and the words of ,ו the copula Tigris near Adiabene, to the north of Nineveh Yakut, “Khabur, a river of Chasania,” on the in כְּׂבָ ר is not the חָ בור .on the border of Armenia other, may seem to favour the former view, we Upper Mesopotamia (Ezek. 1:3; 3:15, etc.), must decide in favour of the latter, for the which flows into the Euphrates near Kirkesion is נְּׂהַ ר גוזָ ן simple reason that in 1 Chron. 5:26 (Carchemish), and is called Chebar (kbr) or The absence of the .וְּׂהָרָ א by חָ בור Chabur (kbwr) by the Syriac writers, Chabûr separated from in נְּׂהַ ר ג׳ before ו or of the copula ב xâbûr) by Abulfeda and Edrisi, Χ βώ by preposition) Ptolemaeus, Αβό (Aboras) by Strabo and the passage before us may be accounted for others, as Michaelis, Gesenius, Winer, and even from the assumption that the first two names, Ritter assume; for the epithet “river of Gozan” is in Chalah and on the Khabur, are more closely not decisive in favour of this, since Gozan is not connected, and also the two which follow, “on necessarily to be identified with the district of the river Gozan and in the cities of Media.” The Gauzanitis, now Kaushan, situated between the river Gozan or of Gozan is therefore distinct rivers of Chaboras and Saokoras, and Khabur), and to be sought for in the) חָ בור from mentioned in Ptol. v. 18, 4, inasmuch as Strabo (xvi. 1, 1, p. 736) also mentions a province district in which Γ ζ ν , the city of Media called Χ ζηνή above Nineveh towards Armenia, mentioned by Ptol. (vi. 2), was situated. In all between Calachene and Adiabene. Here in probability it is the river which is called Kisil northern Assyria we also find both a mountain (the red) Ozan at the present day, the Mardos of called Χ βώ , according to Ptol. vi. 1, on the the Greeks, which takes its rise to the south- boundary of Assyria and Media, and the river east of the Lake Urumiah and flows into the Chabor, called by Yakut in the Moshtarik }l- Caspian Sea, and which is supposed to have 41 ḥsnîh (Khabur Chasaniae), to distinguish it from formed the northern boundary of Media. The the Mesopotamian Chaboras or Chebar. last locality mentioned agrees with this, viz., According to Marasz. i. pp. 333f., and Yakut, “and in the cities of Media,” in which Thenius ,mountains, after the LXX ,הָרֵ י Mosht. p. 150, this Khabur springs from the proposes to read cities, though without the least ,עָרֵ י mountains of the land of Zauzan, zawzan, i.e., of instead of the land between the mountains of Armenia, necessity. Adserbeidjan, Diarbekr, and Mosul (Marasz. i. p. 2 Kings 17:7–23. The causes which occasioned 522), and is frequently mentioned in Assemani this catastrophe.—To the account of the as a tributary of the Tigris. It still bears the destruction of the kingdom of the ten tribes, ancient name Khabûr, taking its rise in the and of the transportation of its inhabitants into neighbourhood of the upper Zab near Amadîjeh, exile in Assyria, the prophetic historian and emptying itself into the Tigris a few hours appends a review of the causes which led to below Jezirah (cf. Wichelhaus, pp. 471, 472; this termination of the greater portion of the Asah. Grant, Die Nestorianer, v. Preiswerk, pp. covenant-nation, and finds them in the 110ff.; and Ritter, Erdk. ix. pp. 716 and 1030). obstinate apostasy of Israel from the Lord its This is the river that we are to understand by God, and in its incorrigible adherence to .חָ בור ”and it came to pass when“ ,וַיְּׂהִ י כִ י .idolatry. V. 7 It is a question in dispute, whether the (not because, or that): compare Gen. 6:1; 26:8; are in apposition to 27:1; 44:24, Ex. 1:21, Judg. 1:28; 6:7, etc. The נְּׂהַ ר גוזָ ן following words by the Chabor the river of Gozan,” or are apodosis does not follow till v. 18, as vv. 7–17“ :בְּׂחָ בור to be taken by themselves as indicating a simply contain a further explanation of Israel’s sin. To show the magnitude of the sin, the

2 KINGS Page 76 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study writer recalls to mind the great benefit Chron. 26:10), and is mentioned here as the conferred in the redemption from Egypt, smallest and most solitary place of human whereby the Lord had laid His people under abode in antithesis to the large and fortified strong obligation to adhere faithfully to Him. city. Such bamoth were the houses of high The words refer to the first commandment (Ex. places and altars built for the golden calves at 20:2, 3; Deut. 5:6, 7). It is from this that the Bethel and Dan, beside which no others are mentioned by name in the history of the מִֹּתַחַ ת fearing of other gods” is taken, whereas“ kingdom of the ten tribes, which restricts itself .recall Ex. 18:10 יַד פַרְּׂ ֹעֹּה to the principal facts, although there certainly 2 Kings 17:8. The apostasy of Israel manifested must have been others. itself in two directions: 1. in their walking in the 2 Kings 17:10. They set up for themselves statutes of the nations who were cut off from monuments and asherim on every high hill, before them, instead of in the statutes of etc.,—a practice condemned in 1 Kings 14:16, Jehovah, as God had commanded (cf. Lev. 18:4, 23, as early as the time of Jeroboam. In this 5, and 26, 20:22, 23, etc.; and for the formula description of their idolatry, the historian, which occurs repeatedly in however, had in his mind not only the ten ,הַ גויִם אֲשֶ ר הורִ יש וגו׳ our books—e.g., 2 Kings 16:3; 21:2, and 1 Kings tribes, but also Judah, as is evident from v. 13, 14:24 and 21:26—compare Deut. 11:23 and “Jehovah testified against Israel and Judah 18:12); and 2. in their walking in the statutes through His prophets,” and also from v. 19. which the kings of Israel had made, i.e., the 2 Kings 17:11. “And burned incense there it is evident upon all the high places, like the nations which : ראֲשֶ עָ שּו .worship of the calves lit., to ,הִ גְּׂלָ ה ”.from the parallel passage, v. 19b, that the Jehovah drove out before them subject here stands before the relative. lead into exile, is applied here to the expulsion they covered words and destruction of the Canaanites, with special“ :וַיְּׂחַ פְּׂאּו דְּׂבָרִ ים .Kings 17:9 2 which were not right concerning Jehovah their reference to the banishment of the Israelites. God,” i.e., they sought to conceal the true nature 2 Kings 17:12. They served the clods, i.e., of Jehovah their God,” i.e., they sought to worshipped clods or masses of stone as gods see at 1 Kings 15:12), notwithstanding ,גִלֻלִ ים) conceal the true nature of Jehovah by arbitrary perversions of the word of God. This is the the command of God in Ex. 20:3ff., 23:13, Lev. explanation correctly given by Hengstenberg 26:1, etc. (Dissert. vol. i. p. 210, transl.); whereas the 2 Kings 17:13ff. And the Lord was not satisfied interpretation proposed by Thenius, “they with the prohibitions of the law, but bore trifled with things which were not right against witness against the idolatry and image-worship Jehovah,” is as much at variance with the usage of Israel and Judah through all His prophets, of the language as that of Gesenius (thes. p. who exhorted them to turn from their evil way 5050, perfide egerunt res … in Jehovam, since and obey His commandments. But it was all in .simply means to cover over a thing vain; they were stiff-necked like their fathers עַ ל with חִ פָ א (cf. Isa. 4:5). This covering of words over Judah is mentioned as well as Israel, although Jehovah showed itself in the fact that they built the historian is simply describing the causes of altars on high places), and by Israel’s rejection to indicate beforehand that) בָ מות worshipping God in ways of their own Judah was already preparing the same fate for invention concealed the nature of the revealed itself, as is still more plainly expressed in vv. 19, God, and made Jehovah like the idols. “In all 20; not, as Thenius supposes, because he is their cities, from the tower of the watchmen to speaking here of that which took place before is a tower built for the division of the kingdom. The Chethîb מִ גְּׂדַ לנוצְּׂרִ ים ”.the fortified city כָ ל־נָבִ יאוְּׂכָ ל־חֹּזֶה is not to be read כָ ל־נביאו כָ ל־חֹּזֶ ה the protection of the flocks in the steppes (2

2 KINGS Page 77 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

(Houbig., Then., Ew. § 156, e.), but after the LXX worship, and has borrowed the expression through all His prophets, every from Deut. 4:19 and 17:3, to show the character“ ,כָ ול־נְּׂבִיאָ כָ ל־חֹּזֶ ה of this worship, since both Baal and Astarte כָ ,ל־נְּׂבִיאָ ו is in apposition to כָ ל־חֹּזֶ ה seer,” so that were deities of a sidereal nature. The first half and serves to bring out the meaning with of v. 17 rests upon Deut. 18:10, where the greater force, so as to express the idea, worship of Moloch is forbidden along with “prophets of every kind, that the Lord had soothsaying and augury. There is no allusion to sent.” This reading is more rhetorical than the this worship in the history of the kingdom of other, and is recommended by the fact that in the ten tribes, although it certainly existed in is omitted before the time of Ahab. The second half of v. 17 also ו what follows the copula refers to the conduct of Ahab (see at 1 Kings : וַאֲשֶרשָ לַחְֹּּׂתִ י וגו׳ .also on rhetorical grounds חֻ קותַ י “and according to what I demanded of you 21:20). through my servants the prophets.” To the law 2 Kings 17:18ff. This conduct excited the anger of Moses there was added the divine warning of God, so that He removed them from His face, has sprung and only left the tribe (i.e., the kingdom) of יַקְּׂשּואֶ ת־עָרְּׂ פָ ם .through the prophets Judah (see above, p. 179), although Judah also from Deut. 10:16. The stiff-necked fathers are did not keep the commandments of the Lord the Israelites in the time of Moses. and walked in the statutes of Israel, and 2 Kings 17:15. “They followed vanity and therefore had deserved rejection. V. 19 contains became vain:” verbatim as in Jer. 2:5. A .(v. 18b) רַק שֵ בֶ ט וגו׳ a parenthesis occasioned by description of the worthlessness of their whole life and aim with regard to the most important The statutes of Israel in which Judah walked are thing, namely, their relation to God. Whatever not merely the worship of Baal under the Ahab man sets before him as the object of his life dynasty, so as to refer only to Joram, Ahaziah, and Ahaz (according to 2 Kings 8:18, 27, and cf. Deut. 32:21) and) הֶבֶ ל apart from God is 16:3), but also the worship on the high places idolatry, and leads to worthlessness, to spiritual and worship of idols, which were practised and moral corruption (Rom. 1:21). “And under many of the kings of Judah. (walked) after the nations who surrounded וַיִתְּׂאַ נֵ ף is a continuation of וַיִמְּׂאַ ס .them,” i.e., the heathen living near them. The 2 Kings 17:20 in v. 18, but so that what follows also refers יְּׂהוָ ה concluding words of the verse have the ring of Lev. 18:3. to the parenthesis in v. 19. “Then the Lord 2 Kings 17:16, 17. The climax of their rejected all the seed of Israel,” not merely the apostasy: “They made themselves molten ten tribes, but all the nation, and humbled them differs מָאַ ס .images, two (golden) calves” (1 Kings 12:28), till He thrust them from His face The latter denotes driving into .הִשְּׂ לִ יְך מִפָ נָיו after Ex. 32:4, 8, and from מַסֵכָ ה which are called Deut. 9:12, 16, “and Asherah,” i.e., idols of exile; the former, simply that kind of rejection Astarte (for the fact, see 1 Kings 16:33), “and which consisted in chastisement and worshipped all the host of heaven (sun, moon, deliverance into the hand of plunderers, that is and stars), and served Baal”—in the time of to say, penal judgments by which the Lord Ahab and his family (1 Kings 16:32). The sought to lead Israel and Judah to turn to Him worshipping of all the host of heaven is not and to His commandments, and to preserve specially mentioned in the history of the נָתַ ן .them from being driven among the heathen kingdom of the ten tribes, but occurs first of all .as in Judg. 2:14 בְּׂ יַד שֹּסִ ים .(in Judah in the time of Manasseh (2 Kings 21:3 (for He (Jehovah“ : יכִ קָרַ ֹע וגו׳ .The fact that the host of heaven is mentioned 2 Kings 17:21 between Asherah and Baal shows that the rent Israel from the house of David.” This view historian refers to the Baal and Astarte is apparently more correct than that Israel rent

2 KINGS Page 78 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study the kingdom from the house of David, not only heathen settlers to Samaria. It is true that the because it presupposes too harsh an ellipsis to attempt has been made to reconcile this with but also because we never the assumption that the king of Assyria ,אֶ ת־הַמַמְּׂ לָכָ ה supply meet with the thought that Israel rent the mentioned in our verse is Salmanasar, by the kingdom from the house of David, and in 1 conjecture that one portion of these colonists Kings 11:31 it is simply stated that Jehovah rent was settled there by Salmanasar, another by the kingdom from Solomon; and to this our ; and it has also been assumed that in this expedition Esarhaddon carried away the וַיַמְּׂ לִ יכּו verse refers, whilst the following words last remnant of the ten tribes, namely, all who is explanatory: had fled into the mountains and inaccessible כִ י recall 1 Kings 12:20. The וגו׳ the Lord delivered up His people to the corners of the land, and to some extent also in plunderers, for He rent Israel from the house of Judaea, during Salmanasar’s invasion, and had David as a punishment for the idolatry of then collected together in the land again after Solomon, and the Israelites made Jeroboam the Assyrians had withdrawn. But there is not king, who turned Israel away from Jehovah, etc. the smallest intimation anywhere of a second ,the Hiphil of transplantation of heathen colonists to Samaria ,וַיַדֵ א is to be read וידא The Chethîb any more than of a second removal of the he caused to depart away from the“ ,נָדָ ה = נָדָ א remnant of the Israelites who were left behind he drove in the land after the time of Salmanasar. The ,נָדַ ח Hiphil of ,וַיַדָ ח Lord.” The Keri away, turned from the Lord (cf. Deut. 13:11), is prediction in Isa. 7:8, that in sixty-five years not unusual, but it is an unnecessary gloss. more Ephraim was to be destroyed, so that it 2 Kings 17:22, 23. The sons of Israel (the ten would be no longer a people, even if it referred tribes) walked in all the sins of Jeroboam, till to the transplantation of the heathen colonists the Lord removed them from His face, thrust to Samaria by Esarhaddon, as Usher, them out of the land of the Lord, as He had Hengstenberg, and others suppose, would by no threatened them through all His prophets, means necessitate the carrying away of the last namely, from the time of Jeroboam onwards remnant of the Israelites by this king, but (compare 1 Kings 14:15, 16, and also Hos. 1:6; simply the occupation of the land by heathen 9:16, Amos 3:11, 12; 5:27, Isa. 28 etc.). The settlers, with whom the last remains of the banishment to Assyria (see v. 6) lasted “unto Ephraimites intermingled, so that Ephraim this day,” i.e., till the time when our books were ceased to be a people. As long as the land of written.42 Israel was merely laid waste and deprived of the greater portion of its Israelitish population, 2 Kings 17:24–41. The Samaritans and Their there always remained the possibility that the Worship.—After the transportation of the exiles might one day return to their native land Israelites, the king of Assyria brought colonists and once more form one people with those who from different provinces of his kingdom into were left behind, and so long might Israel be the cities of Samaria. The king of Assyria is not still regarded as a nation; just as the Judaeans, Salmanasar, for it is evident from v. 25 that a when in exile in Babylon, did not cease to be a considerable period intervened between the people, because they looked forward with carrying away of the Israelites and the sending certain hope to a return to their fatherland after of colonists into the depopulated land. It is true a banishment of seventy years. But after that Salmanasar only is mentioned in what heathen colonists had been transplanted into precedes, but the section vv. 24–41 is not so the land, with whom the remainder of the closely connected with the first portion of the Israelites who were left in the land became chapter, that the same king of Assyria must fused, so that there arose a mixed Samaritan necessarily be spoken of in both. According to people of a predominantly heathen character, it Ezra 4:2, it was Esarhaddon who removed the was impossible to speak any longer of a people

2 KINGS Page 79 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study of Ephraim in the land of Israel. This to have come from Cutha, because the .by the Rabbins כותיים transplantation of colonists out of Babel, Cutha, Samaritans are called etc., into the cities of Samaria might therefore Avva, is almost always, and probably with ,עַּוָ א be regarded as the point of time at which the nation of Ephraim was entirely dissolved, correctness, regarded as being the same place Ivvah) mentioned in 2 Kings 18:34) עִּוָ ה without any removal of the last remnant of the as the Israelites having taken place. We must indeed and 19:13, as the conjecture naturally suggests assume this if the ten tribes were deported to itself to every one that the Avvaeans removed to the very last man, and the Samaritans were in Samaria by Esarhaddon were inhabitants of the their origin a purely heathen people without kingdom of Avva destroyed by the Assyrian is probably simply עִּוָ ה any admixture of Israelitish blood, as king, and the form Hengstenberg assumes and has endeavoured to connected with the appellative explanation prove. But the very opposite of this is given to the word by the Masoretes. As Ivvâh is unmistakeably apparent from 2 Chron. 34:6, 9, placed by the side of Henah in 2 Kings 18:34 according to which there were not a few and 19:13, Avva can hardly by any other than Israelites left in the depopulated land in the time of Josiah. (Compare Kalkar, δι the country of Hebeh, situated on the Euphrates ιτ ν ιν ι ξην λκ, in Pelt’s theol. between Anah and the Chabur (M. v. Niebuhr, p. 167). Hamath is Epiphania on the Orontes: see Mitarbeiten, iii. 3, pp. 24ff.).—We therefore at :65 and Num. 13:21. Sepharvaim is regard Esarhaddon as the Assyrian king who no doubt the Sippara (Σι φά ) of Ptolem. (v. brought the colonists to Samaria. The object to 18, 7), the southernmost city of Mesopotamia may be supplied from the context, more on the Euphrates, above the Nahr Malca, the וַיָבֵ א , which follows. He brought Ηλι ύ λι ἐν Σι ά ι ιν or Σι ηνῶν όλι ,וַ יֹּשֶ ב especially from inhabitants from Babel, i.e., from the country, which Berosus and Abydenus mention (in not the city of Babylon, from Cuthah, etc. The Euseb. Praepar, evang. ix. 12 and 41, and situation of Cuthah or Cuth (v. 30) cannot be Chronic. Armen. i. pp. 33, 36, 49, 55) as this :שֹּמְּׂ רון—.determined with certainty. M. v. Niebuhr belonging to the time of the flood (Gesch. p. 166) follows Josephus, who speaks of is the first time in which the name is evidently the Cuthaeans in Ant. ix. 14, 3, and x. 9, 7, as a applied to the kingdom of Samaria. people dwelling in Persia and Media, and 2 Kings 17:25–28. In the earliest period of identifies them with the Kossaeans, Kissians, their settlement in the cities of Samaria the new Khushiya, Chuzi, who lived to the north-east of settlers were visited by lions, which may have Susa, in the north-eastern portion of the multiplied greatly during the time that the land present Khusistan; whereas Gesenius (thes. p. was lying waste. The settlers regarded this as a 674), Rosenmüller (bibl. Althk. 1, 2, p. 29), and J. punishment from Jehovah, i.e., from the deity of D. Michaelis (Supplem. ad Lex. hebr. p. 1255) the land, whom they did not worship, and have decided in favour of the Cutha (Arabic therefore asked the king of Assyria for a priest kûtˊ or kûtˊa) in the Babylonian Irak, in the to teach them the right, i.e., the proper, worship neighbourhood of the Nahr Malca, in support of of God of the land; whereupon the king sent which the fact may also be adduced, that, them one of the priests who had been carried according to a communication from Spiegel (in away, and he took up his abode in Bethel, and the Auslande, 1864, No. 46, p. 1089), Cutha, a instructed the people in the worship of Jehovah. town not mentioned elsewhere, was situated by The author of our books also looked upon the the wall in the north-east of Babylon, probably lions as sent by Jehovah as a punishment, on the spot where the hill Ohaimir with its ruins according to Lev. 26:22, because the new stands. The greater number of colonists appear the lions which :הָאֲרָ יות .settlers did not fear Him

2 KINGS Page 80 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

—,clucking-hen” (Gluckhenne), the Pleiades :וְּׂיֵלְּׂ כּווְּׂיֵשְּׂבּו שָ ם .had taken up their abode there that they (the priest with his companions) went simulacrum gallinae coelestis in signo Tauri away and dwelt there. There is no need nidulantis, as a symbolum Veneris coelestis, as therefore to alter the plural into the singular. the other idols are all connected with animal symbolism. In any case the explanation given The priest sent by the Assyrian king was of by Movers, involucra seu secreta mulierum, course an Israelitish priest of the calves, for he female lingams, which were handed by the was one of those who had been carried away hierodulae to their paramours instead of the and settled in Bethel, the chief seat of Mylitta-money (Phöniz. i. p. 596), is to be Jeroboam’s image-worship, and he also taught rejected, because it is at variance with the the colonists to fear or worship Jehovah after usage of speech and the context, and because the manner of the land. This explains the state the existence of female lingams has first of all to of divine worship in the land as described in vv. be proved. For the different views, see Ges. thes. see Ewald, § p. 952, and Leyrer in Herzog’s Cycl.—The :גוי גוי) 29ff. “Every separate nation ,נֵרְּׂ גָל ,a.) made itself its own gods, and set them Cuthaeans made themselves as a god ,313 ,Nergal, i.e., according to Winer, Gesenius, Stuhr :בֵ ית הַבָ מות) up in the houses of the high places and others, the planet Mars, which the Zabians ,בֵ ית see at 1 Kings 12:31, and for the singular Ewald, § 270, c.) which the Samaritans call nerîg, Nerig, as the god of war (Codex Nasar, not the colonists sent thither by i. 212, 224), the Arabs mrrîx, Mirrig; whereas ,הַ שֹּמְּׂ רֹּנִים) older commentators identified Nergal with the Esarhaddon, but the former inhabitants of the sun-god Bel, deriving the name from , light, נִיר kingdom of Israel, who are so called from the .a fountain = fountain of light (Selden, ii ,גַל capital Samaria) had made (built); every nation and in the cities where they dwelt.” 8, and Beyer, Add. pp. 301ff.). But these views 2 Kings 17:30. The people of Babel made are both of them very uncertain. According to daughters’ booths. Selden the Rabbins (Rashi, R. Salomo, Kimchi), Nergal סֻ ,כות בְּׂ נות themselves was represented as a cock. This statement, (de Diis Syr. ii. 7), Münter (Relig. der Babyl. pp. which is ridiculed by Gesenius, Winer, and 74, 75), and others understand by these the Thenius, is proved to be correct by the Assyrian temples consecrated to Mylitta or Astarte, the monuments, which contain a number of animal κ ά ι, or covered little carriages, or tents for deities, and among them the cock standing prostitution (Herod. i. 199); but Beyer (Addit. upon an altar, and also upon a gem a priest ad Seld. p. 297) has very properly objected to praying in front of a cock (see Layard’s this, that according to the context the reference Nineveh). The pugnacious cock is found is to idols or objects of idolatrous worship, generally in the ancient ethnical religions in .It is more frequent connection with the gods of war (cf. J .בֵ ית בָ מות which were set up in the Ashima, the ,אֲשִ ימָ א .(.natural to suppose that small tent-temples are G. Müller in Herzog’s Cycl meant, which were set up as idols in the houses god of the people of Hamath, was worshipped, of the high places along with the images which according to rabbinical statements, under the they contained, since according to 2 Kings 23:7 figure of a bald he-goat (see Selden, ii. 9). The little temples, for the suggested combination of the name with the ,בָֹּתִ ים women wove Asherah, and Ezekiel speaks of patch-work Phoenician deity Esmun, the Persian Asuman, Bamoth, i.e., of small temples made of cloth. It is and the Zendic a•mano, i.e., heaven, is very possible, however, that there is more truth than uncertain. is generally supposed in the view held by the 2 Kings 17:31. Of the idols of the Avvaeans, ,.signifies an image of the according to rabbinical accounts in Selden, l.c סֻ כות בְּׂ נות Rabbins, that ,latrator ,נִבְּׂחַ ז) hen,” or rather the constellation of “the Nibchaz had the form of a dog“

2 KINGS Page 81 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

and Tartak that of an ass. Gesenius Monatsnamen, pp. 187, 188) are extremely ,(נָבַ ח from regards Tartak as a demon of the lower regions, doubtful. because in Pehlwi tar—thakh signifies deep 2 Kings 17:32. In addition to these idols, darkness or hero of darkness, and Nibchaz as Jehovah also was worshipped in temples of the of the Zabians, whom high places, according to the instructions of the נבאז an evil demon, the וַיִהְּׂ יּו .Norberg in his Onomast. cod. Nasar. p. 100, Israelitish priest sent by the king of Assyria and they were (also) worshipping“ :יְּׂרֵ אִ ים describes as horrendus rex infernalis: posito ipsius throno ad telluris, i.e., lucis et caliginis Jehovah, and made themselves priests of the as in 1 Kings מִקְּׂ צותָ ם) ”confinium, sed imo acherontis fundo pedibus mass of the people substrato, according to Codex Adami, ii. 50, lin. (and they (the priests“ :וַיִהְּׂ יּו ֹעֹּשִ ים לָהֶ ם .(With regard to the gods of the 12:31—.12 Sepharvites, and Anammelech, it were preparing them (sacrifices) in the houses is evident from the offering of children in of the high places.” sacrifice to them that they were related to 2 Kings 17:33. Verse 33 sums up by way of which occurs as a conclusion the description of the various kinds אַדְּׂרַ מֶ לֶ ְך Moloch. The name personal name in 2 Kings 19:37 and Isa. 37:38, of worship. ,Kings 17:34–41. This mixed cultus 2 אדר has been explained either from the Semitic as meaning “glorious king,” or from the Persian composed of the worship of idols and the ḍr, ‘zr, in which case it means “fire-king,” and is worship of Jehovah, they retained till the time supposed to refer to the sun (see Ges. on Isaiah, when the books of the Kings were written. “Unto this day they do after the former is supposed to be Hyde (de עֲ נַמֶ לֶ ְך .(ii. p. 347 can only be the הַמִשְּׂ פָטִ ים הָרִ אשֹּנִים ”.customs relig. vett. Persarum, p. 131) to be the group of stars called Cepheus, which goes by the name of religious usages and ordinances which were “the shepherd and flock” and “the herd-stars” in introduced at the settlement of the new inhabitants, and which are described in vv. 28– ֹענם the Oriental astrognosis, and in this case 33. The prophetic historian observes still Movers, further, that “they fear not Jehovah, and do not .צֹּאן = might answer to the Arabic génm on the other hand (Phöniz. i. pp. 410, 411), according to their statutes and their rights, nor regards them as two names of the same deity, a according to the law and commandment which double-shaped Moloch, and reads the Chethîb the Lord had laid down for the sons of Jacob, to the god of whom He gave the name of Israel” (see 1 Kings ,אֵל הַסְֹּׂפַרְּׂ וִ ם as the singular אלה סכרים חֻ קֹּתָ ם .Sepharvaim. This double god, according to his 18:31), i.e., according to the Mosaic law ”,their statutes and their right“ מִשְּׂ פָטָ ם explanation, was a sun-being, because and Sepharvaim, of which he was λι ῦχ , is which הַ ֹּתורָ ה וְּׂהַמִצְּׂוָ ה stands in antithesis to designated by Berosus as a city of the sun. This may be correct; but there is something very Jehovah gave to the children of Israel. If, then, precarious in the further assumption, that the clause, “they do not according to their “Adar-Melech is to be regarded as the sun’s fire, statutes and their right,” is not to contain a and indeed, since Adar is Mars, that he is so far glaring contradiction to the previous assertion, to be thought of as a destructive being,” and “unto this day they do after their first (former) חֻ קֹּתָ ם ּומִשְּׂ פָטָ ם rights,” we must understand by ,ֹעין מלְך that Anammelech is a contraction of oculus Molechi, signifying the ever-watchful eye the statutes and the right of the ten tribes, i.e., of Saturn; according to which Adrammelech is the worship of Jehovah under the symbols of to be regarded as the solar Mars, Anammelech the calves, and must explain the inexactness of as the solar Saturn. The explanations given by the expression “their statutes and their right” Hitzig (on Isa. p. 437) and Benfey (die from the fact that the historian was thinking of

2 KINGS Page 82 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study the Israelites who had been left behind in the Guil. Joh. Juynboll, commentarii in historiam land, or of the remnant of the Israelitish gentis Samaritanae, Lugd. Bat. 1846, 4, and H. population that had become mixed up with the Petermann, Samaria and the Samaritans, in heathen settlers (2 Kings 23:19, 20; 2 Chron. Herzog’s Cycl. 34:6, 9, 33). The meaning of the verse is therefore evidently the following: The 2 Kings 18 inhabitants of Samaria retain to this day the History of the Kingdom of Judah from the cultus composed of the worship of idols and of Destruction of the Kingdom of the Ten Tribes to Jehovah under the form of an image, and do not the . worship Jehovah either after the manner of the 2 Kings 18–25. At the time when the kingdom ten tribes or according to the precepts of the of the ten tribes was destroyed, Judah found Mosaic law. Their worship is an amalgamation itself in a state of dependence upon the of the Jehovah image-worship and of heathen imperial power of Assyria, into which it had idolatry (cf. v. 41).—To indicate the character been brought by the ungodly policy of Ahaz. But of this worship still more clearly, and hold it up three years before the expedition of Salmanasar as a complete breach of the covenant and as against Samaria, the pious Hezekiah had utter apostasy from Jehovah, the historian ascended the throne of his ancestor David in describes still more fully, in vv. 35–39, how Jerusalem, and had set on foot with strength earnestly and emphatically the people of Israel and zeal the healing of Judah’s wounds, by had been prohibited from worshipping other exterminating idolatry and by restoring the gods, and urged to worship Jehovah alone, who legal worship of Jehovah. As Hezekiah was had redeemed Israel out of Egypt and exalted it devoted to the Lord his God with undivided into His own nation. For v. 35 compare Ex. 20:5; heart and trusted firmly in Him, the Lord also for v. 36, the exposition of v. 7, also Ex. 32:11; acknowledged him and his undertakings. When 6:6; 20:23; Deut. 4:34; 5:15, etc. In v. 37 the Sennacherib had overrun Judah with a committal of the thorah to writing is powerful army after the revolt of Hezekiah, and presupposed. For v. 39, see Deut. 13:5; 23:15, had summoned the capital to surrender, the etc. Lord heard the prayer of His faithful servant 2 Kings 17:40. They did not hearken, however Hezekiah and saved Judah and Jerusalem from (the subject is, of course, the ten tribes), but the threatening destruction by the miraculous they (the descendants of the Israelites who destruction of the forces of the proud remained in the land) do after their former Sennacherib (2 Kings 18 and 19), whereby the is their manner of power of Assyria was so weakened that Judah מִשְּׂ פָטָ ם הָרִ אשון .manner worshipping God, which was a mixture of had no longer much more to fear from it, idolatry and of the image-worship of Jehovah, although it did chastise Manasseh (2 Chron. as in v. 34.—In v. 41 this is repeated once more, 33:11ff.). Nevertheless this deliverance, and the whole of these reflections are brought through and in the time of Hezekiah, was to a close with the additional statement, that merely a postponement of the judgment with their children and grandchildren do the same to which Judah had been threatened by the this day.—In the period following the prophets (Isaiah and Micah), of the destruction Babylonian captivity the Samaritans of the kingdom and the banishment of its relinquished actual idolatry, and by the inhabitants. Apostasy from the living God and adoption of the Mosaic book of the law were moral corruption had struck such deep and converted to monotheism. For the later history firm roots in the nation, that the idolatry, of the Samaritans, of whom a small handful outwardly suppressed by Hezekiah, broke out have been preserved to the present day in the again openly immediately after his death; and ancient Sichem, the present Nablus, see Theod. that in a still stronger degree, since his son and

2 KINGS Page 83 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study successor Manasseh not only restored all the sway to the Euphrates and overthrow the abominations of idolatry which his father had Assyrian empire. Josiah marched to meet him, rooted out, but even built altars to idols in the for the purpose of preventing the extension of courts of the temple of Jehovah, and filled his power into Syria. A battle was fought at Jerusalem with innocent blood from one end to Megiddo, the Judaean army was defeated, the other (2 Kings 21), and thereby filled up the Josiah fell in the battle, and with him the last measure of sins, so that the Lord had to hope of the sinking state (2 Kings 23:29, 30; 2 announce through His prophets to the godless Chron. 35:23, 24). In Jerusalem Jehoahaz was king and people His decree to destroy made king by the people; but after a reign of Jerusalem and cast out the remaining portion of three months he was taken prisoner by Necho the people of His inheritance among the at in the land of Hamath, and led away to heathen, and to show the severity of His Egypt, where he died. Eliakim, the elder son of judgments in the fact that Manasseh was led Josiah, was appointed by Necho as Egyptian away captive by the officers of the Assyrian vassal-king in Jerusalem, under the name of king. And even though Manasseh himself . He was devoted to idolatry, and renounced all gross idolatry and restored the through his love of show (Jer. 22:13ff.) still legal worship in the temple after his release and further ruined the kingdom, which was already return to Jerusalem, as the result of this exhausted by the tribute to be paid to Egypt. In chastisement, this alteration in the king’s mind the fourth year of his reign Pharaoh-Necho exerted no lasting influence upon the people succumbed at Carchemish to the Chaldaean generally, and was completely neutralized by power, which was rising under his successor Amon, who did not walk in the Nebuchadnezzar upon the ruins of the Assyrian way of Jehovah, but merely worshipped his kingdom. At the same time Jeremiah father’s idols. In this state of things even the proclaimed to the incorrigible nation that the God-fearing Josiah, with all the stringency with Lord of Sabaoth would deliver Judah with all which he exterminated idolatry, more the surrounding nations into the hand of His especially after the discovery of the book of the servant Nebuchadnezzar, that the land of Judah law, was unable to effect any true change of would be laid waste and the people serve the heart or sincere conversion of the people to king of Babylon seventy years (Jer. 25). their God, and could only wipe out the outward Nebuchadnezzar appeared in Judah signs and traces of idolatry, and establish the immediately afterwards to follow up his victory external supremacy of the worship of Jehovah. over Necho, took Jerusalem, made Jehoiakim his The people, with their carnal security, imagined subject, and carried away Daniel, with many of that they had done quite enough for God by the leading young men, to Babylon (2 Kings restoring the outward and legal form of 24:1). But after some years Jehoiakim revolted; worship, and that they were now quite sure of whereupon Nebuchadnezzar sent fresh troops the divine protection; and did not hearken to against Jerusalem to besiege the city, and after the voice of the prophets, who predicted the defeating Jehoiachin, who had in the meantime speedy coming of the judgments of God. Josiah followed his father upon the throne, led away had warded off the bursting forth of these into captivity to Babylon, along with the kernel judgments for thirty years, through his of the nation, nobles, warriors, craftsmen, and humiliation before God and the reforms which smiths, and set upon the throne Mattaniah, the he introduced; but towards the end of his reign only remaining son of Josiah, under the name of the Lord began to put away Judah from before (2 Kings 24:2–17). But when he also His face for the sake of Manasseh’s sins, and to formed an alliance with Pharaoh-Hophra in the reject the city which He had chosen that His ninth year of his reign, and revolted from the name might dwell there (2 Kings 22–23:27). king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar advanced Necho king of Egypt advanced to extend his immediately with all his forces, besieged

2 KINGS Page 84 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Jerusalem, and having taken the city and more especially in that of Ahaz. The singular 2) הָאֲשֵרִ ים = is used in a collective sense הָאֲשֵרָ ה destroyed it, put an end to the kingdom of Judah by slaying Zedekiah and his sons, and Chron. 31:1). The only other idol that is carrying away all the people that were left, with specially mentioned is the brazen serpent the exception of a very small remnant of which Moses made in the wilderness (Num. cultivators of the soil (2 Kings 24:18–25:26), a 21:8, 9), and which the people with their hundred and thirty-four years after the leaning to idolatry had turned in the course of destruction of the kingdom of the ten tribes. time into an object of idolatrous worship. The Reign of King Hezekiah. Sennacherib Invades words, “to this day were the children of Israel Judah and Threatens Jerusalem. burning incense to it,” do not mean that this took place without interruption from the time 2 Kings 18:1–8. Length and character of of Moses down to that of Hezekiah, but simply, Hezekiah’s reign. 43—Vv. 1, 2. In the third year that it occurred at intervals, and that the of Hoshea of Israel, Hezekiah became king over idolatry carried on with this idol lasted till the Judah, when he was twenty-five years old. time of Hezekiah, namely, till this king broke in According to vv. 9 and 10, the fourth and sixth pieces the brazen serpent, because of the years of Hezekiah corresponded to the seventh idolatry that was associated with it. For further and ninth of Hoshea; consequently his first year remarks on the meaning of this symbol, see the apparently ran parallel to the fourth of Hoshea, Comm. on Num. 21:8, 9. The people called i.e., a ,נְּׂחֻשְֹּּׂתָ ן one called) this serpent ,וַיִקְּׂרָ א) so that Josephus (Ant. ix. 13, 1) represents him as having ascended the throne in the fourth brazen thing. This epithet does not involve year of Hoshea’s reign. But there is no necessity anything contemptuous, as the earlier for this alteration. If we assume that the commentators supposed, nor the idea of “Brass- commencement of his reign took place towards god” (Ewald). the close of the third year of Hoshea, the fourth and sixth years of his reign coincided for the 2 Kings 18:5. The verdict, “after him was none most part with the sixth and ninth years of like him among all the kings of Judah,” refers to in which he ,(בָטַ ח) vv. 9, Hezekiah’s confidence in God) חִ זְּׂקִ יָהּו or חִ זְּׂקִ יָה Hoshea’s reign. The name had no equal, whereas in the case of Josiah his ,יְּׂחִ זְּׂקִ יָהּו etc.) is given in its complete form ,13 conscientious adherence to the Mosaic law is “whom Jehovah strengthens,” in 2 Chron. 29ff. extolled in the same words (2 Kings 23:25); so in Hos. 1:1 and Mic. 1:1. that there is no ground for saying that there is a וְּׂחִ זְּׂקִ יָה and Isa. 1:1; and On his age when he ascended the throne, see contradiction between our verse and 2 Kings the Comm. on 2 Kings 16:2. The name of his 23:25 (Thenius). he adhered faithfully to :יִדְּׂבַ ק בַ יי׳ .is a strongly contracted form of 2 Kings 18:6 ,אֲבִ י ,mother as in 1 Kings 11:2), and departed דָבַ ק) Chron. 29:1). Jehovah 2) אֲבִ יָה 2 Kings 18:3ff. As ruler Hezekiah walked in the not from Him, i.e., he never gave himself up to footsteps of his ancestor David. He removed the idolatry. high places and the other objects of idolatrous 2 Kings 18:7. The Lord therefore gave him see at 1 ,הִשְּׂ כִ יל) worship, trusted in Jehovah, and adhered firmly success in all his undertakings to Him without wavering; therefore the Lord Kings 2:3), and even in his rebellion against the made all his undertakings prosper. , ,.king of Assyria, whom he no longer served, i.e הַבָ מות see at 1 Kings 14:23) to whom he paid no more tribute. It was) הָאֲשֵרָ ה and ,הַמַצֵ בות embrace all the objects of idolatrous worship, through Ahaz that Judah had been brought into which had been introduced into Jerusalem and dependence upon Assyria; and Hezekiah Judah in the reigns of the former kings, and released himself from this, by refusing to pay

2 KINGS Page 85 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study any more tribute, probably after the departure when, according to vv. 14ff., he sent a division of Salmanasar from Palestine, and possibly not of his army against Jerusalem, and summoned till after the death of that king. Sennacherib Hezekiah to surrender that city. According to therefore made war upon Hezekiah to Herodotus (l.c.), the real object of his campaign subjugate Judah to himself again (see vv. 13ff.). was Egypt, which is also apparent from 2 Kings 2 Kings 18:8. Hezekiah smote the Philistines to 19:24, and is confirmed by Isa. 10:24; for which Gaza, and their territory from the tower of the reason Tirhaka marched against him (2 Kings watchmen to the fortified city, i.e., all the towns 19:8; cf. M. v. Niebuhr, Gesch. Assurs, pp. 171, from the least to the greatest (see at 2 Kings 172). 17:9). He thus chastised these enemies for their 2 Kings 18:14ff. On the report of Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah in the time of Ahaz, wrested approach, Hezekiah made provision at once for from them the cities which they had taken at the safety of Jerusalem. He had the city fortified that time (2 Chron. 28:18), and laid waste all more strongly, and the fountain of the upper their country to Gaza, i.e., Ghuzzeh, the most Gihon and the brook near the city stopped up southerly of the chief cities of (see at (see at v. 17), to cut off the supply of water from Josh. 13:3). This probably took place after the the besiegers, as is stated in 2 Chron. 32:2–8, defeat of Sennacherib (cf. 2 Chron. 32:22, 23). and confirmed by Isa. 22:8–11. In the meantime 2 Kings 18:9–12. In vv. 9–12 the destruction of Sennacherib had pressed forward to Lachish, the kingdom of the ten tribes by Salmanasar, i.e., Um Lakis, in the plain of Judah, on the which has already been related according to the south-west of Jerusalem, seven hours to the annals of the kingdom of Israel in 2 Kings 17:3– west of Eleutheropolis on the road to Egypt (see 6, is related once more according to the annals at Josh. 10:3); so that Hezekiah, having doubts of the kingdom of Judah, in which this as to the possibility of a successful resistance, catastrophe is also introduced as an event that sent ambassadors to negotiate with him, and was memorable in relation to all the covenant- promised to pay him as much tribute as he nation. might demand if he would withdraw. The confession “I have sinned” is not to be pressed, 2 Kings 18:13–37. Sennacherib invades Judah inasmuch as it was forced from Hezekiah by the and threatens Jerusalem. 44—Sennacherib, pressure of distress. Since Asshur had made Sanchērībh), Σ νν χη (LXX), Judah tributary by faithless conduct on the part) סַ נְּׂחֵרִ יב Σ ν χή ιβ (Joseph.), Σ ν χά ιβ (Herodot.), of Tiglath-pileser towards Ahaz, there was whose name has not yet been deciphered with nothing really wrong in the shaking off of this certainty upon the Assyrian monuments or yoke by the refusal to pay any further tribute. clearly explained (see J. Brandis uber den histor. But Hezekiah certainly did wrong, when, after Gewinn aus der Entzifferung der assyr. taking the first step, he was alarmed at the Inschriften, pp. 103ff., and M. v. Niebuhr, Gesch. disastrous consequences, and sought to Assurs, p. 37), was the successor of Salmanasar purchase once more the peace which he himself (Sargina according to the monuments). He is had broken, by a fresh submission and renewal called β ιλ Ά β ων τ κ ὶΆ ων by of the payment of tribute. This false step on the Herodotus (ii. 141), and reigned, according to part of the pious king, which arose from a Berosus, eighteen years. He took all the fortified temporary weakness of faith, was nevertheless with the masculine suffix turned into a blessing through the pride of ,יִתְּׂ פְּׂשֵ ם) cities in Judah instead of the feminine: cf. Ewald, § 184, c.). The Sennacherib and the covenant-faithfulness of .all, is not to be pressed; for, beside the the Lord towards him and his kingdom ,כֹּל Sennacherib demanded the enormous sum of strongly fortified capital Jerusalem, he had not three hundred talents of silver and thirty yet taken the fortified cities of Lachish and talents of gold (more than two and a half Libnah (v. 17 and 2 Kings 19:8) at the time, million thalers, or £375,000); and Hezekiah not

2 KINGS Page 86 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study only gave him all the gold and silver found in into the lower, and which is called in 2 Chron. the treasures of the temple and palace, but had 32:30 “the outflow of the upper Gihon,” the gold plates with which he had covered the Hezekiah stopped up, and conducted the water doors and doorposts of the temple (2 Chron. downwards, i.e., the underground, towards the 29:3) removed, to send them to the king of west into the city of David; that is to say, he lit., the supports, i.e., the posts, conducted the water of the upper Gihon, which ,הָ אֹּמְּׂ נות .Assyria of the doors. had previously flowed along the western side of the city outside the wall into the lower Gihon These negotiations with Sennacherib on the and so away down the valley of Ben-hinnom, part of Hezekiah are passed over both in the into the city itself by means of a subterranean and also in the Chronicles, channel,45 that he might retain this water for because they had no further influence upon the the use of the city in the event of a siege of future progress of the war. Jerusalem, and keep it from the besiegers. 2 Kings 18:17ff. For though Sennacherib did This water was probably collected in the cistern indeed take the money, he did not depart, as he ( ) which Hezekiah made, i.e., order to be הַבְּׂרֵ כָ ה had no doubt promised, but, emboldened still further by this submissiveness, sent a constructed (2 Kings 20:20), or the reservoir detachment of his army against Jerusalem, and “between the two walls for the waters of the old summoned Hezekiah to surrender the capital. pool,” mentioned in Isa. 22:11, i.e., most “He sent Tartan, Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh.” probably the reservoir still existing at some Rabshakeh only is mentioned in Isaiah, as the distance to the east of the Joppa gate on the chief speaker in the negotiations which follow, western side of the road which leads to the although in Isa. 37:6 and 24 allusion is Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the so-called evidently made to the other two. Tartan had no “pool of Hezekiah,” which the natives call Birket doubt the chief command, since he is not only el Hamman, “Bathing-pool,” because it supplies mentioned first here, but conducted the siege of a bath in the neighbourhood, or B. el Batrak, Ashdod, according to Isa. 20:1. The three names “Patriarch’s pool” (see Robinson, Pal. i. p. 487, are probably only official names, or titles of the and Fresh Researches into the Topography of offices held by the persons mentioned. For Jerusalem, pp. 111ff.), since this is still fed by a .conduit from the Mamilla pool (see E. G רַ בְּׂשָקֵ ה means princeps eunuchorum, and רַ ב־סָרִ יס Schultz, Jerusalem, p. 31, and Tobler, is explained by Hitzig on Denkblätter, pp. 44ff.).46 ֹּתַרְּׂ ֹּתָ ן .chief cup-bearer Isa. 20:1 as derived from the Persian târ-tan, 2 Kings 18:18. Hezekiah considered it beneath “high person or vertex of the body,” and in Jer. his dignity to negotiate personally with the 39:3 as “body-guard;” but this is hardly correct, generals of Sennacherib. He sent three of his as the other two titles are Semitic. These leading ministers out to the front of the city: generals took up their station with their army Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, the captain of the “at the conduit of the upper pool, which ran by castle, who had only received the appointment the road of the fuller’s field,” i.e., the conduit to this office a short time before in ’s which flowed from the upper pool—according place (Isa. 22:20, 21); Shebna, who was still to 2 Chron. 32:30, the basin of the upper Gihon see at 2 Sam. 8:17); and :סֹֹּפֵ ר) secretary of state (Birket el Mamilla)—into the lower pool (Birket מַ :זְּׂכִ יר) es Sultân: see at 1 Kings 1:33). According to Isa. Joach the son of Asaph, the chancellor 7:3, this conduit was in existence as early as the see at 2 Sam. 8:16). time of Ahaz. The “end” of it is probably the Rabshakeh made a speech to these three (vv. locality in which the conduit began at the upper 19–25), in which he tried to show that pool or Gihon, or where it first issued from it. Hezekiah’s confidence that he would be able to This conduit which led from the upper Gihon resist the might of the king of Assyria was

2 KINGS Page 87 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study perfectly vain, since neither Egypt (v. 21), nor which Rabshakeh turned to the deputies, we according to which the , יכִ תֹּאמַ ר his God (v. 22), nor his forces (v. 23), would be have in Isa. 7:7 able to defend him. words are addressed to Hezekiah, as in v. 20. is preferred by Thenius, Knobel, and ֹּתֹּאמְּׂ רּו ,Kings 18:19. “The great king:” the Assyrian 2 Babylonian, and Persian kings all assumed this others, because in what follows Hezekiah is title (cf. Ezek. 26:7; Dan. 2:37), because kings of addressed in the third person. but the very conquered lands were subject to them as circumstance that is apparently more ֹּתֹּאמְּׂ רּו vassals (see at Isa. 10:8). “What is this ,ֹּתֹּאמַ ר confidence that thou cherishest?” i.e., how vain suitable favours the originality of or worthless is this confidence! according to which the king is still addressed in 2 Kings 18:20. “Thou sayest … it is only a lip- the person of his ambassadors, and Rabshakeh word … : counsel and might for battle;” i.e., if only speaks directly to the ambassadors when thou speakest of counsel and might for battle, this argument is answered. The attack upon the a word that merely confidence which the Judaeans placed in their , רדְּׂבַ שְּׂ ֹפָתַ יִם that is only The opinion of .הֲ לוא הּוא comes from the lips, not from the heart, the seat God commences with of the understanding, i.e., a foolish and Thenius, that the second clause of the verse is a inconsiderate saying (cf. Prov. 14:23; Job continuation of the words supposed to be of spoken by the Judaeans who trusted in God, and אָמַרְּׂ ֹּתִ י is to be preferred to the אָמַרְּׂ ֹּתָ —.(11:2 that the apodosis does not follow till v. 23, is now, quite a mistake. The ambassadors of Hezekiah ,עַֹּתָ ה .Isaiah as the more original of the two sc. we will see on whom thou didst rely, when could not regard the high places and idolatrous thou didst rebel against me. altars that had been abolished as altars of 2 Kings 18:21. On Egypt? “that broken reed, Jehovah; and the apodosis could not commence .וְּׂעַֹּתָ ה which runs into the hand of any one who would with lean upon it (thinking it whole), and pierces it 2 Kings 18:23, 24. Still less could Hezekiah through.” This figure, which is repeated in Ezek. :הִתְּׂעָרֶ ב נָ א .is so far suitably chosen, that the Nile, rely upon his military resources ,7 ,29:6 representing Egypt, is rich in reeds. What enter, I pray thee, (into contest) with my lord, Rabshakeh says of Egypt here, Isaiah had and I will give thee 2000 horses, if thou canst already earnestly impressed upon his people set the horsemen upon them. The meaning, of (Isa. 30:3–5), to warn them against trusting in course, is not that Hezekiah could not raise the support of Egypt, from which one party in 2000 soldiers in all, but that he could not the nation expected help against Assyria. produce so many men who were able to fight as 2 Kings 18:22. Hezekiah (and Judah) had a horsemen. “How then wilt thou turn back a stronger ground of confidence in Jehovah his single one of the smallest lieutenants of my ,to repulse a person’s face ,הֵשִ יבאֶ ת־פְּׂ נֵי ֹפל׳ ”?God. Even this Rabshakeh tried to shake, lord availing himself very skilfully, from his heathen means generally to turn away a person with his point of view, of the reform which Hezekiah had petition (1 Kings 2:16, 17), here to repulse an ,אַחַ ד is one pasha; although פַחַת אַחַ ד .made in the worship, and representing the assailant abolition of the altars on the high places as an is ,פַחַ ת which is grammatically subordinate to infringement upon the reverence that ought to be shown to God. “And if ye say, We trust in in the construct state, that the genitives which Jehovah our God, (I say:) is it not He whose high follow may be connected (for this פֶחָ ה .(.see Ewald, § 286, a אֶחָ ד places and altars Hezekiah has taken away and subordination of has said to Judah and Jerusalem, Ye shall (see at 1 Kings 10:15), lit., under-vicegerent, i.e., worship before this altar (in the temple) in administrator of a province under a satrap, in :וַֹּתִבְּׂטַ ח .according to military states also a subordinate officer כִי ,תֹּאמְּׂ רּו Jerusalem?” Instead of

2 KINGS Page 88 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study and so (with thy military force so small) thou upon the wall. The variation of the preposition ,(to thy lord (Hezekiah ,עַל אֲ דֹּנֶיָך in אֶ ל and עַ ל so far as war-chariots ,לָרֶ כֶ ב וגו׳ trustest in Egypt to thee (Eliakim as chief speaker), is ,אֵ לֶ יָך and horsemen are concerned. and is frequently עַ ל .Kings 18:25. After Rabshakeh had thus, as he avoided in the text of Isaiah 2 imagined, taken away every ground of used for , in the later usage of the language, in אֶ ל confidence from Hezekiah, he added still further, that the Assyrian king himself had also the sense of to or at. In the words “who sit upon not come without Jehovah, but had been the wall to eat their dung and drink their urine,” summoned by Him to effect the destruction of Rabshakeh points to the horrors which a siege Judah. It is possible that some report may have of Jerusalem would entail upon the inhabitants. ,שֵ ינֵיהֶ ם excrementa sua, and ,חַרְּׂ אֵיהֶ ם = חריהם reached his ears of the predictions of the For prophets, who had represented the Assyrian urinas suas, the Masoretes have substituted the ,מֵ ימֵ ירַ גְּׂלֵיהֶ ם going forth, and ,צואָתָ ם invasion as a judgment from the Lord, and euphemisms these he used for his own purposes. Instead of water of their feet. ,against this place, i.e., Jerusalem ,עַ ל הַמָ קום הַ זֶ ה not, he stood up, raised :וַיַעֲ מוד .Kings 18:28ff 2 in Isaiah,—a reading לעַ ץהָאָרֶ הַ זֹּאת we have himself (Ges.), or came forward (Then.), but he which owes its origin simply to the endeavour stationed himself, assumed an attitude to bring the two clauses into exact conformity calculated for effect, and spoke to the people to one another. with a loud voice in the Jewish language, telling 2 Kings 18:26–37. It was very conceivable that them to listen to the king of Assyria and not to Rabshakeh’s boasting might make an be led astray by Hezekiah, i.e., to be persuaded impression upon the people; the ambassadors to defend the city any longer, since neither of Hezekiah therefore interrupted him with the Hezekiah nor Jehovah could defend them from let not :אַ ל־יַשִ יא .request that he would speak to them in the might of Sennacherib Aramaean, as they understood that language, Hezekiah deceive you, sc. by pretending to be and not in Jewish, on account of the people who out of“ ,מִ יָדו able to defend or save Jerusalem. In was the אֲרָ מִ ית .were standing upon the wall his (the Assyrian’s) hand,” the speaker ceases to language spoken in Syria, Babylonia, and speak in the name of his king. On the probably also in the province of Assyria, and construction of the passive with , אֶת־הָעִ יר ֹּתִ נָתֵ ן -may possibly have been Rabshakeh’s mother tongue, even if the court language of the see Ewald, § 277, d., although in the instance after אֵ ת Assyrian kings was an Aryan dialect. With the before us he proposes to expunge the close affinity between the Aramaean and the Isa. 36:15. Hebrew, the latter could not be unknown to 2 Kings 18:31ff. “Make peace with me and Rabshakeh, so that he made use of it, just as the come out to me (sc., out of your walls, i.e., Aramaean language was intelligible to the surrender to me), and ye shall eat every one his ministers of Hezekiah, whereas the people in vine, … till I come and bring you into a land like is used here to signify בְּׂרָ כָ ה ”… Jewish, i.e., your own land ,יְּׂהּודִ ית Jerusalem understood only the spoken in the kingdom of peace as the concentration of weal and blessing. Judah. It is evident from the last clause of the expresses the וְּׂאִכְּׂ לּו The imperative verse that the negotiations were carried on in the neighbourhood of the city wall of Jerusalem. consequence of what goes before (vid., Ewald, § 347, b.). To eat his vine and fig-tree and to drink 2 Kings 18:27. But Rabshakeh rejected this the water of his well is a figure denoting the proposal with the scornful remark, that his quiet and undisturbed enjoyment of the fruits commission was not to speak to Hezekiah and of his own possession (cf. 1 Kings 5:5). Even in his ambassadors only, but rather to the people

2 KINGS Page 89 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study the event of their yielding, the Assyrian would Hamath, was certainly situated in the transport the Jewish people into another land, neighbourhood of that city, and still exists, so according to the standing custom of Asiatic far as the name is concerned, in the large village conquerors in ancient times (for proofs see of }rfâd, Arfâd (mentioned by Maraszid, i. 47), Hengstenberg, De rebus Tyriis, pp. 51, 52). To in northern Syria in the district of Azâz, which make the people contented with this thought, was seven hours to the north of Haleb, the boaster promised that the king of Assyria according to Abulf. Tab. Syr. ed. Köhler, p. 23, would carry them into a land which was quite and Niebuhr, Reise, ii. p. 414 (see Roediger, Hena, which ,הֵ נַֹע .(as fruitful and glorious as the land of Canaan. Addenda ad Ges. thes. p. 112 The description of it as a land with corn and is also combined with ’Ivvah in 2 Kings 19:13 new wine, etc., recalls the picture of the land of and Isa. 37:13, is probably the city of {ânt Ana, עִּוָ ה is the on the Euphrates, mentioned by Abulf., and זֵ ית יִצְּׂהָ ר .Canaan in Deut. 8:8 and 33:28 olive-tree which yields good oil, in distinction .in 2 Kings 17:24 עַּוָ א is most likely the same as and ye shall :וִחְּׂ יּו וגו׳ .from the wild olive-tree are omitted from the text of הֵ נַֹע וְּׂעִּוָ ה The names live and not die, i.e., no harm shall befall you from me (Thenius). This passage is abridged in Isaiah in consequence of the abridgment of Isa. 36:17. Rabshakeh’s address. 2 Kings 18:33ff. Even Jehovah could not 2 Kings 18:35. V. 35 contains the conclusion deliver them any more than Hezekiah. As a drawn from the facts already adduced: “which proof of this, Rabshakeh enumerated a number of all the gods of the lands are they who have of cities and lands which the king of Assyria had delivered their land out of my hand, that conquered, without their gods’ being able to Jehovah should deliver Jerusalem out of my offer any resistance to his power. “Where are hand?” i.e., as not one of the gods of the lands the gods of Hamath, etc., that they might have named have been able to rescue his land from delivered Samaria out of my hand?” Instead of Assyria, Jehovah also will not be able to defend Jerusalem. and that they might וְּׂכִ י הץ׳ we have יכִ הִצִ ילּו 2 Kings 18:36, 37. The people were quite have, which loosens the connection somewhat to ,הָעָ ם ”,more between this clause and the preceding silent at this address (“the people one, and makes it more independent. “Where whom Rabshakeh had wished to address are they?” is equivalent to they are gone, have himself); for Hezekiah had forbidden them to perished (cf. 2 Kings 19:18); and “that they make any answer, not only to prevent might have delivered” is equivalent to they Rabshakeh from saying anything further, but is that the ambassadors of Sennacherib might be כִ י הִצִ ילּו have not delivered. The subject to left in complete uncertainty as to the , which includes the God of Samaria. impression made by their words. The deputies אֱ יֹלהֵ הַ גִֹּ וים Sennacherib regards himself as being as it were of Hezekiah returned to the king with their one with his predecessors, as the clothes rent as a sign of grief at the words of the representative of the might of Assyria, so that Assyrian, by which not only Hezekiah, but still he attributes to himself the conquests of cities more Jehovah, had been blasphemed, and and lands which his ancestors had made. The reported what they had heard. cities and lands enumerated in v. 34 have been mentioned already in 2 Kings 17:24 as conquered territories, from which colonists had been transplanted to Samaria, with the which is ,אַרְּׂ פָ ד .exception of Arpad and Hena also mentioned in 2 Kings 19:13, Isa. 10:9; 36:19; 37:13, and Jer. 49:23, in connection with

2 KINGS Page 90 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 Kings 19 is a perf. rel. or a progressive perfect (Ewald, § and will“ :יִשְּׂמַ ֹע a.), and the continuation of ,234 Jerusalem Delivered. Destruction of the Assyrian chastise (punish, sc. him) for the words which Army and Death of Sennacherib. (Compare Isa. therefore lift up“ וְּׂנָ שָ אתָ תף׳ ”.He has heard 37.) prayer (to heaven) for the (still) existing 2 Kings 19:1–4. When Hezekiah had heard remnant, sc. of the people of God;” nearly all from his counsellors the report of Rabshakeh’s Judah having come into the power of words, he rent his clothes with horror at his Sennacherib since the carrying away of the ten daring mockery of the living God (v. 4), put on tribes. mourning clothes as a sign of the trouble of his 2 Kings 19:5–7. Isaiah replied with this soul and went into the temple, and at the same comforting promise: Hezekiah was not to be time sent Eliakim and Shebna with the oldest of afraid of the blasphemous words of the the priests in mourning costume to the prophet Assyrian king; the Lord would frighten him Isaiah, to entreat him to intercede with the Lord with a report, so that he would return to his in these desperate circumstances.47 The order own land, and there would He cause him to fall of the words: Isaiah the prophet, the son of the servants or young , ינַעֲרֵ מֶ לֶ ְך א׳ .Amoz, is unusual (cf. 2 Kings 14:25; 20:1; 1 by the sword Kings 16:7, etc.), and is therefore altered in men of the Assyrian king, is a derogatory Isaiah into Isaiah the son of Amoz, the prophet. epithet applied to the officials of Assyria. 2 Kings 19:3. “A day of distress, and of “Behold, I put a spirit into him, so that he shall hear a report and return into his own land.” chastisement, and of rejection is this day.” does not refer to the report of the שְּׂ מּועָ ה :נְּׂאָצָ ה .the divine chastisement :ֹּתוכֵחָ ה destruction of his army (v. 35), as Thenius contemptuous treatment, or rejection of the supposes, for Sennacherib did not hear of this .Deut ,נָאַ ץ people on the part of God (compare through the medium of an army, but was with 32:19, Jer. 14:21, Lam. 2:6). “For children have the army himself at the time when it was come to the birth, and there is not strength to smitten by the angel of the Lord; it refers to the bring forth.” A figure denoting extreme danger, report mentioned in v. 9. For even if he made the most desperate circumstances. If the one last attempt to secure the surrender of woman in travail has not strength to bring forth Jerusalem immediately upon hearing this the child which has come to the mouth of the report, yet after the failure of this attempt to womb, both the life of the child and that of the shake the firmness of Hezekiah his courage mother are exposed to the greatest danger; and must have failed him, and the thought of return this was the condition of the people here (see must have suggested itself, so that this was only accelerated by the blow which fell upon the לֵדָ ה the similar figure in Hos. 13:13). For see Ges. § 69, 2 Anm. army. For, as O. v. Gerlach has correctly ,לֶדֶ ת instead of observed, “the destruction of the army would 2 Kings 19:4. Perhaps Jehovah thy God will hardly have produced any decisive effect hear the blasphemies of the living God on the without the approach of Tirhakah, since the hear, equivalent to great power of the Assyrian king, especially in :יִ שְּׂמַ ֹע .part of Rabshakeh observes, take notice of, and in this case punish. relation to the small kingdom of Judah, was not the living God, in contrast to the gods broken thereby. But at the prayer of the king :אֱ ֹלהִ ים חַ י of the heathen, who are only lifeless idols (cf. 1 the Lord added this miracle to the other, which His providence had already brought to pass.— is not to be taken in וְּׂ הוכִיחַ .(Sam. 17:26, 36 For the fulfilment of the prophecy of .Sennacherib’s death, see v. 37 ,לְּׂ הוכִיחַ as if it stood for ,לְּׂחָרֵ ף connection with “and to scold with words” (Luth., Ges., etc.), but

2 KINGS Page 91 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 Kings 19:8–13. In the meantime Rabshakeh Kings 25:1ff.). But as Tirhakah was had returned to his king at Libnah (see at 2 approaching, Sennacherib had no time now for Kings 8:22), to which he had gone from Lachish, so tedious a siege. He therefore endeavoured to probably after having taken that fortress. induce Hezekiah to surrender the city quietly 2 Kings 19:9. There Sennacherib heard that by a boastful description of his own power. v. 9), we have in Isaiah) וַיָשָ בוַיִשְּׂ לַ ח Tirhakah was advancing to make war against Instead of when he heard this he sent,” which“ ,וַיִשְּׂמַ ֹעוַיִשְּׂ לַ ח him. Tirhakah, Θ κά (LXX), king of Cush, is the Τ κό of Manetho, the successor of is probably the more original, and indicates that Sevechus (Shebek II), the third king of the when Sennacherib received the intelligence he twenty-fifth (Ethiopian) dynasty, described by sent at once (Drechsler). Strabo (xv. 687), who calls him Τ ά κων, as a let not thy God“ : לאַ יַשִיאֲ ָך .great conqueror. His name is spelt Tåhålqa or 2 Kings 19:10 Tåharqo• upon the monuments, and on the deceive thee,” i.e., do not allow yourself to be ,לֵ אמֹּר .Pylon of the great temple at Medinet-Abu he is deceived by your confidence in your God represented in the form of a king, cutting down to say, i.e., to think or believe, that Jerusalem enemies of conquered lands (Egypt, Syria, and will not be given, etc. To shatter this confidence, Tepopå, an unknown land) before the god Sennacherib reminds him of the deeds of the (see Brugsch, hist. d’Egypte, i. pp. 244, to ban them, i.e., by ,לְּׂהַחֲרִ ימָ ם .Assyrian kings 245).48—On hearing the report of the advance is הֶחֱרִ ים of Tirhakah, Sennacherib sent ambassadors smiting them with the ban. The verb again to Hezekiah with a letter (v. 14), in which chosen with emphasis, to express the unsparing and thou shouldst be :וְּׂאַֹּתָ ה הִ נָצֵ ל .he summoned him once more to give up his destruction confidence in his God, and his assurance that saved?—a question implying a strong negative. Jerusalem would not be delivered into the 2 Kings 19:12. “Have the gods of the nations hands of the king of Assyria, since the gods of is not a pronoun used in אֹּתָ ם ”?no other nation had been able to save their delivered them גוזָ ן lands and cities from the kings of Assyria who anticipation of the object, which follows in in v. 11, a כָ ל־הָאֲרָ צות Thenius), but refers to) וגו׳ had preceded him. The letter contained nothing more, therefore, than a repetition of the specification of which is given in the following arguments already adduced by Rabshakeh (2 enumeration. Gozan may be the province of Kings 18:19ff.), though a larger number of the Gauzanitis in Mesopotamia, but it may just as lands conquered by the Assyrians are given, for well be the country of Gauzania on the other the purpose of strengthening the impression side of the Tigris (see at 2 Kings 17:6). The intended to be made upon Hezekiah of the combination with Haran does not force us to irresistible character of the Assyrian arms.—To the first assumption, since the list is not a offer a successful resistance to Tirhakah and geographical but a historical one.—Haran overcome him, Sennacherib wanted above all (Charan), i.e., the Carrae of the Greeks and things a firm footing in Judah; and for this the Romans, where Abraham’s father Terah died, a possession of Jerusalem was of the greatest place in northern Mesopotamia (see at Gen. importance, since it would both cover his back 11:31), is probably not merely the city here, but and secure his retreat. Fortifications like the country in which the city stood.—Rezeph Lachish and Libnah could be quickly taken by a the Arabic ruṣ fat, a very widespread ,(רֶ צֶ ף) violent assault. But it was very different with Jerusalem. Salmanasar had stood before name, since Jakut gives nine cities of this name Samaria for three years before he was able to in his Geographical Lexicon, is probably the conquer it; and Nebuchadnezzar besieged most celebrated of the cities of that name, the Jerusalem for two years before the city was Rusapha of Syria, called Ρη άφ in Ptol. v. 15, in starved out and it was possible to take it (2 Palmyrene, on the road from Racca to Emesa, a

2 KINGS Page 92 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study day’s journey from the Euphrates (cf. Ges. Thes. emporium for Arabian wares on the Persian p. 1308).—“The sons of Eden, which (were in Gulf, and supposes that Terodon has sprung Telassar,” were evidently a tribe whose chief from Teledon with the Persian pronunciation of which is very frequent in the names of ,תֵ ל we might the עֶדֶ ן settlement was in Telassar. By of Amos 1:5, a city in a Mesopotamian cities. This conjecture is at any בֵ ית־עֶדֶ ן understand the pleasant region of Syria, called Π άδ ι by rate a more natural one than that of Knobel on Ptol. (v. 15), since there is still a village called Isa. 37:12, that the place mentioned in Ehden in that locality (cf. Burckhardt, Syr. p. 66, Assemani (Bib. or. iii. 2, p. 870), (Arabic) tl b- and v. Schubert, Reise, iii. p. 366), if we could ṣrṣr, Tel on the Szarszar, to the west of the only discover Telassar in the neighbourhood, present Bagdad, is intended.—With regard to and if the village of Ehden could be identified the places named in v. 13, see at 2 Kings 18:34. with Π άδ ι and the Eden of the Bible, as is 2 Kings 19:14–19. Hezekiah’s prayer.—V. 14. done even by Gesenius on Burckhardt, p. 492, Hezekiah took the letter, read it, went into the and Thes. p. 195; but this Ehden is spelt ’hdn in temple and spread it out before Jehovah, to lay see open its contents before God. The contents of) עֶדֶ ן Arabic, and is not to be associated with the letter are given in vv. 10–13 in the form of Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 586, 587). Moreover the the message which the ambassadors delivered Thelseae near Damascus (in the Itin. Ant. p. 196, to Hezekiah from their king, because the ed. Wess.) is too unlike Telassar to come into ambassadors communicated to Hezekiah by consideration. There is more to be said in word of mouth the essential contents of the favour of the identification of our with the writing which they conveyed, and simply עֶדֶ ן Assyrian Eden, which is mentioned in Ezek. handed him the letter as a confirmation of their like litterae, means a letter; hence ,סְֹּׂפָרִ ים .along with Haran and Calneh as an words 27:23 important place for trade, although its position whereas ,וַיִֹפְּׂרְּׂשֵ הּו cannot be more certainly defined; and neither the singular suffix attached to which stands nearer, the ,וַיִקְּׂרָ אֵ ם the comparison with the tract of land called in the case of (Syr.) ma’āden, Maadon, which Assemani suffix follows the number of the noun to which (Biblioth. or. ii. p. 224) places in Mesopotamia, it refers. The spreading out of the letter before towards the Tigris, in the present province of God was an embodiment of the wish, which Diarbekr (Ges., Win.), nor the conjecture of sprang from a child-like and believing trust, Knobel that the tribe-name Eden may very that the Lord would notice and punish that probably have been preserved in the large but defiance of the living God which it contained. very dilapidated village of Adana or Adna, some What Hezekiah meant by this action he distance to the north of Bagdad (Ker Porter, expressed in the following prayer. Journey, ii. p. 355, and Ritter, Erdk. ix. p. 493), 2 Kings 19:15. In opposition to the delusion of the Assyrians, he describes Jehovah, the God of ,ֹּתְּׂ לַ אשָ ר .can be established as even a probability Telassar, is also quite unknown. The name Israel, as the only God of all the kingdoms of the applies very well to Thelser on the eastern side earth, since He was the Creator of heaven and .see at 1 Sam. 4:4 and Ex) יֹּשֵ בהַכְּׂרֻ בִ ים .of the Tigris (Tab. Peut. xi. e), where even the earth later on Gen. 10:12 have placed it, 25:22) indicates the covenant-relation into which Jehovah, the almighty Creator and Ruler תַ ,לְּׂאָסָ ר תַ ,לְּׂסַ ר interpreting Nimrod’s Resen by though Knobel opposes this on the ground that of the whole world, had entered towards Israel. a place in Assyria proper is unsuitable in such a As the covenant God who was enthroned above passage as this, where the Assyrian feats of war the cherubim the Lord was bound to help His outside Assyria itself are enumerated. Movers people, if they turned to Him with faith in the (Phöniz. ii. 3, p. 251) conjectures that the place time of their distress and entreated His referred to is Thelassar in Terodon, a leading assistance; and as the only God of all the world

2 KINGS Page 93 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

upon other lands, that is to say, had ,צְּׂבָ אות ,He had the power to help. In Isaiah which is very rare in historical prose, but very depopulated it and thereby laid it waste, was common in prophetical addresses, is added to not easy to understand. “And have cast their gods into the fire, for they are not gods, but and thus Jehovah at the very ,יְּׂהוָ ה the name works of human hands, wood and stone, and outset is addressed as the God of the universe. have thus destroyed them.” Hezekiah does not see at 1 Sam. 1:3. On mention this as a sign of the recklessness of the ,צְּׂבָ אות On the meaning of see 2 Sam. 7:28 and 1 Kings Assyrians (Knobel), but, because Sennacherib ,אַֹּתָ ההּוא הָאֱ ֹלהִ ים 18:39. had boasted that the gods of no nation had been able to resist him (vv. 12, 13), to put this fact in 2 Kings 19:16. The accumulation of the words, the right light, and attach thereto the prayer “bow down Thine ear, Jehovah, and hear; open, that Jehovah, by granting deliverance, would Jehovah, Thine eyes and see, and hear the make known to all the kingdoms of the earth words,” etc., indicates the earnestness and we have וְּׂנָתְּׂ נּו that He alone was God. Instead of by עֵ ינֵיָך importunity of the prayer. The plural the inf. absol.; in this connection ,וְּׂנָ תון in Isaiah is the correct אָ זְּׂנְָּׂך the side of the singular the more difficult and more genuine reading. reading, since the expression “to incline the This also applies to the omission of (v. אֱ ֹלהִ ים ;ear” is constantly met with (Ps. 17:6; 31:3 45:11, etc.); and even in the plural, “incline ye 19b) in Isa. 37:20, since the use of Jehovah as a your ear” (Ps. 78:1; Isa. 55:3), and on the other predicate, “that Thou alone art Jehovah,” is very hand “to open the eyes” (Job 27:19; Prov. 20:13; rare, and has therefore been misunderstood Zech. 12:4; Dan. 9:18), because a man always even by Gesenius. By the introduction of opens both eyes to see anything, whereas he Elohim, the thought “that Thou Jehovah art God .of alone” is simplified עֵ ינֶָך turns one ear to a person speaking. The Isaiah is also plural, though written defectively, 2 Kings 19:20–34. The divine promise.—Vv. 20, as the Masora has already observed. The suffix 21. When Hezekiah had prayed, the prophet Isaiah received a divine revelation with regard which is wanting in Isaiah, belongs to ,שְּׂ לָ חו in to the hearing of this prayer, which he sent, i.e., .v) שָמַעְֹּּׂתִ י .in the sense of caused to be handed over, to the king דִבְּׂרֵ י and refers with this to ,אֲשֶ ר speech: the speech which Sennacherib had אֲשֶר הִתְּׂ פַלַלְֹּּׂתָ וגו׳ is omitted in Isaiah, so that (21 made in his letter. is to be taken in the sense of “with regard to 2 Kings 19:17, 18. After the challenge, to that which thou hast prayed to me,” whilst observe the blasphemies of Sennacherib, (I have heard) elucidates the thought and שָמַעְֹּּׂתִ י Hezekiah mentions the fact that the Assyrians have really devastated all lands, and therefore simplifies the construction. The word of the that it is not without ground that they boast of Lord announced to the king, (1) the shameful their mighty power; but he finds the retreat of Sennacherib as a just retribution for explanation of this in the impotence and his mockery of the living God (vv. 21–28; Isa. the confirmation of this (2) ;(29–37:22 ,אָמְּׂ נָ ם .nothingness of the gods of the heathen assurance through the indication of a sign by truly, indeed—the kings of Asshur have which Hezekiah was to recognise the devastated the nations and their land. Instead deliverance of Jerusalem (vv. 29–31; Isa. 37:30– of this we find in Isaiah: “they have devastated 32), and through the distinct promise, that the all lands and their (own) land”—which is Assyrian would neither come into the city nor evidently the more difficult and also the more besiege it, because the Lord was sheltering it original reading, and has been altered in our (vv. 32–34; Isa. 37:33–35). In the first part the account, because the thought that the Assyrians words are addressed with poetic vivacity had devastated their own land by making war directly to Sennacherib, and scourge his

2 KINGS Page 94 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study haughty boastings by pointing to the ridicule Israel. This title of the Deity is one of the and scorn which would follow him on his peculiarities of Isaiah’s range of thought, departure from the land. although it originated with Asaph (Ps. 78:41; 2 Kings 19:21. “The virgin daughter Zion see at Isa. 1:4). This insult to the holy God despises thee, the daughter Jerusalem shakes consisted in the fact that Sennacherib had said the head behind thee.” By daughter Zion, through his servants (vv. 23, 24): “With my daughter Jerusalem, we are not to understand chariots upon chariots I have ascended the the inhabitants of Zion, or of Jerusalem, as height of the mountains, the uttermost part of Ges., Hitzig, and Lebanon, so that I felled the tallness of its) בְּׂ נֵי or בָ נִים stood for בַ ת though cedars, the choice of its cypresses, and came to others); but the city itself with its inhabitants is the shelter of its border, to the forest of its pictorially personified as a daughter and virgin, orchard. I have dug and drunk strange water, so is to be taken, that I dried up all the rivers of Egypt with the בַ ת־צִ יון and the construct state as in apposition: “daughter Zion,” sole of my feet.” The words put into the mouth ,נְּׂהַ רפְּׂרָ ת like not daughter of Zion (vid., Ges. § 116, 5; Ewald, of the Assyrian are expressive of the feeling .(the which underlay all his blasphemies (Drechsler בְּׂ תּולַ ת e.). Even in the case of ,287 § The two verses are kept quite uniform, the construct state expresses simply the relation of second hemistich in both cases expressing the apposition. Zion is called a “virgin” as being an result of the first, that is to say, what the inviolable city to the Assyrians, i.e., one which Assyrian intended still further to perform after they cannot conquer. Shaking the head is a having accomplished what is stated in the first gesture denoting derision and pleasure at hemistich. When he has ascended the heights of another’s misfortune (cf. Ps. 22:8; 109:25, etc.). Lebanon, he devastates the glorious trees of the “Behind thee,” i.e., after thee as thou goest mountain. Consequently in v. 24 the drying up away, is placed first as a pictorial feature for the of the Nile of Egypt is to be taken as the result sake of emphasis. of the digging of wells in the parched desert; in 2 Kings 19:22, 23. This derision falls upon the other words, it is to be interpreted as Assyrian, for having blasphemed the Lord God descriptive of the devastation of Egypt, whose by his foolish boasting about his irresistible whole fertility depended upon its being power. “Whom hast thou despised and watered by the Nile and its canals. We cannot blasphemed, and against whom hast thou lifted therefore take these verses exactly as Drechsler up the voice? and thou liftest up thine eyes does; that is to say, we cannot assume that the against the Holy One of Israel.” Lifting up the Assyrian is speaking in the first hemistichs of voice refers to the tone of threatening both verses of what he (not necessarily assumption, in which Rabshakeh and Sennacherib himself, but one of his Sennacherib had spoken. Lifting up the eyes on predecessors) has actually performed. For even high, i.e., to the heavens, signifies simply if the ascent of the uttermost heights of looking up to the sky (cf. Isa. 40:26), not Lebanon had been performed by one of the “directing proud looks against God” (Ges.). Still kings of Assyria, there is no historical evidence to be taken adverbially in the sense whatever that Sennacherib or one of his מָ רום less is of haughtily, as Thenius and Knobel suppose. predecessors had already forced his way into The bad sense of proud arrogance lies in the Egypt. The words are therefore to be words which follow, “against the Holy One of understood in a figurative sense, as an stands individualizing picture of the conquests which אֶ ל Israel,” or in the case of Isaiah, where the Assyrians had already accomplished, and ;in the context, viz., the parallelism of the those which they were still intending to effect ,עַ ל for members. God is called the Holy One of Israel as and this assumption does not necessarily He who manifests His holiness in and upon exhibit Sennacherib “as a mere braggart, who

2 KINGS Page 95 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

the forest of his orchard, i.e., the forest ,כַרְּׂ מִ לו boastfully heaps up in ridiculous hyperbole an enumeration of the things which he means to resembling an orchard. The reference is to the perform” (Drechsler). For if the Assyrian had celebrated cedar-forest between the loftiest not ascended with the whole multitude of his peaks of Lebanon at the village of Bjerreh (see war-chariots to the loftiest summits of at 1 Kings 5:20). Lebanon, to feel its cedars and its cypresses, 2 Kings 19:24. V. 24 refers to the intended Lebanon had set no bounds to his plans of conquest of Egypt. Just as Lebanon could not conquest, so that Sennacherib might very well stop the expeditions of the Assyrians, or keep represent his forcing his way into Canaan as an them back from the conquest of the land of ascent of the lofty peaks of this mountain range. Canaan, so the desert of et Tih, which separated Lebanon is mentioned, partly as a range of Egypt from Asia, notwithstanding its want of mountains that was quite inaccessible to war- water (cf. Herod. iii. 5; Rob. Pal. i. p. 262), was chariots, and partly as the northern defence of no hindrance to him, which could prevent his the land of Canaan, through the conquest of forcing his way through it and laying Egypt which one made himself lord of the land. And so waste. The digging of water is, of course, not far as Lebanon is used synecdochically for the merely “a reopening of the wells that had been land of which it formed the defence, the hewing choked with rubbish, and the cisterns that had down of its cedars and cypresses, those been covered up before the approaching glorious witnesses of the creation of God, enemy” (Thenius), but the digging of wells in denotes the devastation of the whole land, with strange water, is ,מַ יִם זָרִ ים .all its glorious works of nature and of human the waterless desert hands. The chief strength of the early Asiatic not merely water belonging to others, but water conquerors consisted in the multitude of their not belonging to this soil (Drechsler), i.e., water war-chariots: they are therefore brought into supplied by a region which had none at other consideration simply as signs of vast military times. By the perfects the thing is represented resources; the fact that they could only be used as already done, as exposed to no doubt on level ground being therefore disregarded. whatever; we must bear in mind, however, that my chariots upon the desert of et Tih is not expressly named, but“ ,רֶ כֶ ברִ כְּׂבָ י The Chethîb the expression is couched in such general chariots,” is used poetically for an innumerable terms, that we may also assume that it includes multitude of chariots, as for an what the Assyrian had really effected in his גוב גובַ י innumerable host of locusts (Nah. 3:17), and is expeditions through similar regions. The drying the up of the rivers with the soles of the feet is a ,רֹּב רִ כְּׂבִ י more original than the Keri multitude of my chariots, which simply follows hyperbolical expression denoting the Isaiah. The “height of the mountains” is more omnipotence with which the Assyrian rules over the earth. Just as he digs water in the ,יַרְּׂ כְּׂתֵ ילְּׂבָ נון precisely defined by the emphatic desert where no water is to be had, so does he the uttermost sides, i.e., the loftiest heights, of יְּׂאורֵ י annihilate it where mighty rivers exist.49 .in Isa. 14:15 and Ezek יַרְּׂ כְּׂתֵ י בור Lebanon, just as are the arms and canals of the Yeor, i.e., of the קומַ ת .are the uttermost depths of Sheol 32:23 a rhetorical epithet for Egypt, used ,מָ צור .Nile , his tallest cedars. , his most .not only here, but also in Isa. 19:6 and Mic מִבְּׂ חור בְּׂ רֹּשָ יו אֲרָ זָיו .for which 7:12 ,מְּׂ לון קִ צֹּה .select or finest cypresses the height 2 Kings 19:25ff. To this foolish boasting the“ ,מְּׂ רום קִ צו Isaiah has the more usual of his end,” is the loftiest point of Lebanon on prophet opposes the divine purpose which had which a man can rest, not a lodging built on the been formed long ago, and according to which the Assyrian, without knowing it or being יַעַ ר .(.highest point of Lebanon (Cler., Vitr., Ros willing to acknowledge it, had acted simply as

2 KINGS Page 96 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study the instrument of the Lord, who had given him shall be burned (cf. Isa. 5:5; 6:13; 44:15, and the power to destroy, but who would soon Ewald, § 237, c.). The rendering given by Ges., restrain his ranting against Him, the true God. Knob., Then., and others, “that thou mayest be 2 Kings 19:25. “Hast thou not heard? Long ago for destruction,” is at variance with this usage. have I done this, from the days of olden time 2 Kings 19:26. V. 26 is closely connected, so far have I formed it! Now have I brought it to pass, as the sense is concerned, with the last clause of that fortified cities should be to be destroyed v. 25, but in form it is only loosely attached: into waste heaps.” V. 26. “And their inhabitants, “and their inhabitants were,” instead of “that of short ,קִצְּׂרֵ י יָד ”.short of hand, were dismayed and put to their inhabitants might be shame; they were herb of the field and green of hand, i.e., without power to offer a successful the turf, grass of the roofs and blighted corn resistance (cf. Num. 11:23, and Isa. 50:2; before the stalk.” V.27. “And thy sitting and thy 59:1).—They were herbage of the field, etc., just going out and thy coming I know, and thy as perishable as the herbage, grass, etc., which raging against me.” V. 28. “Because of thy raging quickly fade away (cf. Ps. 37:2; 90:5, 6; Isa. against me and thy safety, which rise up into 40:6). The grass of the roofs fades still more my ears, I put my ring into thy nose, and my quickly, because it cannot strike deep roots (cf. bridle into thy lips, and bring thee back by the Ps. 129:6). Blighted corn before the stalk, i.e., way by which thou hast come.” The words are corn which is blighted and withered up, before still addressed to the Assyrian, of whom the שְּׂדֵמָ ה it shoots up into a stalk. In Isaiah we have Lord inquires whether he does not know that ,with a change of the labials ,שְּׂדֵ ֹפָ ה the destructive deeds performed by him had instead of been determined very long before. “Hast thou probably for the purpose of preserving an which must not therefore ,קָמָ ה not heart?” namely, what follows, what the Lord assonance with had long ago made known through His The thought in the two .שְּׂדֵמָ ה be altered into prophets in Judah (cf. Isa. 7:7–9; 16:17–20; 8:1– verses is this: The Assyrian does not owe his from distant time have I ,לְּׂמֵרָ חוק .(.and 7, etc 4 victories and conquests to his irresistible might, done it, etc., refers to the divine ordering and but purely to the fact that God had long ago governing of the events of the universe, which resolved to deliver the nations into his hands, God has purposed and established from the so that it was possible to overcome them .and without their being able to offer any resistance ,אֹּתָ ּה very beginning of time. The pronoun do This the Assyrian had not perceived, but in his ,הֲבֵ יאֹּתִ יהָ and יְּׂצַרְּׂ ֹּתִ יהָ the suffixes attached to not refer with vague generality to the substance daring pride had exalted himself above the of vv. 23 and 24, i.e., to the boastings of the living God. This conduct of his the Lord was well acquainted with, and He would humble ּותְּׂהִ י Assyrians quoted there (Drechsler), but to him for it. Sitting and going out and coming i.e., to the conquests and devastations denote all the actions of a man, like sitting ,לַהְּׂ שות down and rising up in Ps. 139:2. Instead of וְּׂ which the Assyrian had really effected. The rising up, we generally find going out and introduces the apodosis, as is יצרתיה before ,הִתְּׂרַ גֶזְָּׂך .(coming in (cf. Deut. 28:6 and Ps. 121:8 frequently the case after a preceding definition thy raging, commotio furibunda, quae ex ira that it“ ,ּותְּׂהִ ילַהְּׂ שות .(of time (cf. Ges. § 155, a nascitur superbiae mixta (Vitr.). We must repeat is to be taken in a עָלָ הבְּׂאָ זְּׂנַי and ;שַאֲ נַנְָּׂך before יַעַ ן a contraction of ,לַהְּׂ שות) ”may be to destroy ,see Ewald, § relative sense: on account of thy self-security ;שָאָ ה Keri and Isaiah, from ,לְּׂהַשְּׂ אות is the security שַאֲ נָ ן .c., and 245, b.), i.e., that it shall be which has come to my ears ,73 destroyed,—according to a turn which is very of the ungodly which springs from the feeling of it is to burn = it great superiority in power. The figurative ,הָ יָהלְּׂבָעֵ ר common in Isaiah, like

2 KINGS Page 97 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study words, “I put my ring into thy nose,” are taken the words, “in this and the following year will from the custom of restraining wild animals, they live upon that which has sprung up such as lions (Ezek. 19:4) and other wild beasts without any sowing,” is that for two years, i.e., (Ezek. 29:4 and Isa. 30:28), in this manner. For in two successive autumns, the fields could not “the bridle in the lips” of ungovernable horses, be cultivated because the enemy had occupied see Ps. 32:9. To lead a person back by the way the land and laid it waste. But whether the by which he had come, i.e., to lead him back occupation lasted two years, or only a year and disappointed, without having reached the goal a little over, depends upon the time of the year that he set before him. at which the Assyrians entered the land. If the 2 Kings 19:29. To confirm what he had said, invasion of Judah took place in autumn, shortly the prophet gave to Hezekiah a sign (vv. 29ff.): before the time for sowing, and the miraculous “Eat this year what groweth in the fallow, and destruction of the Assyrian forces occurred a in the second year what groweth wild, and in year after about the same time, the sowing of the third year sow and reap and plant two successive years would be prevented, and vineyards, and eat the fruit thereof.” That the the population of Judah would be compelled to words are not addressed to the king of Assyria live for two years upon what had sprung up as in v. 28, but to Hezekiah, is evident from without sowing. Consequently both the their contents. This sudden change in the prophecy of Isaiah and the fulfilment recorded person addressed may be explained from the in vv. 35, 36 would fall in the autumn, when the fact that from v. 29 the words contain a Assyrians had ruled for a whole year in the land; so that the prophet was able to say: in this זֶ ה־לְּׂ ָך הָ אות perfectly fresh train of thought. For year and in the second (i.e., the next) will they see Ex. 3:12, 1 Sam. 2:34 and 14:10; also Jer. eat after-growth and wild growth; inasmuch as η ν, is not a when he said this, the first year had not quite ,אות In all these passages .44:29 as in 1 Kings expired. Even if the overthrow of the Assyrians מוֹפֵ ת supernatural) wonder, a) 13:3, but consists simply in the prediction of took place immediately afterwards (cf. v. 35), natural events, which serve as credentials to a with the extent to which they had carried out prediction, whereas in Isa. 7:14 and 38:7 a the desolation of the land, many of the is inhabitants having been slain or taken אָ כול .The inf. abs .אות miracle is given as an prisoners, and many others having been put to not used for the pret. (Ges., Then., and others), flight, it would be utterly impossible in the ,same year to cultivate the fields and sow them ,הַשָ נָ ה ”.but for the imperf. or fut.: “one will eat signifies the corn which and the people would be obliged to live in the סָֹפִ יחַ .the (present) year springs up and grows from the grains that have second or following year upon what had grown been shaken out the previous year (Lev. 25:5, wild, until the harvest of the second year, when is explained by Abulw. the land could be properly cultivated, or rather (שָחִ יס .in Isa) סָחִ יש .(11 till the third year, when it could be reaped as signifying the corn which springs up again again.50 from the roots of what has been sown. The etymology of the word is uncertain, so that it is 2 Kings 19:30, 31. The sign is followed in vv. impossible to decide which of the two forms is 30, 31 by the distinct promise of the the original one. For the fact itself compare the deliverance of Judah and Jerusalem, for which evidence adduced in the Comm. on Lev. 25:7, Isaiah uses the sign itself as a type. “And the that in Palestine and other lands two or three remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah harvests can be reaped from one sowing.—The will again strike roots downwards and bear signs mentioned do not enable us to determine fruit upwards; for from Jerusalem will go forth with certainty how long the Assyrians were in a remnant, and that which is escaped from יָסַ ף ”.the land. All that can be clearly gathered from Mount Zion; the zeal of Jehovah will do this

2 KINGS Page 98 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

to add roots, i.e., to strike fresh roots. The relation to one another: not to take, not even to ,שֹּרֶ ש meaning is, that Judah will not succumb to this shoot at and attack, yea, not even to besiege the judgment. The remnant of the nation that has city, will he come. In v. 33a we have v. 28b escaped from destruction by the Assyrians will taken up again, and v. 32a is repeated in v. 33b once more grow and flourish vigorously; for for the purpose of strengthening the promise. by“ : אבָ בָ ּה we have in Isaiah יָבוא בָ ּה from Jerusalem will a rescued remnant go forth. Instead of denotes those who have escaped which he has come.” The perfect is actually פְּׂלֵיטָ ה destruction by the judgment (cf. Isa. 4:2; 10:20, more exact, and the imperfect may be explained etc.). The deliverance was attached to from the fact that Sennacherib was at that very Jerusalem or to Mount Zion, not so much time advancing against Jerusalem. In v. 34 we עַ ל :of Isaiah גַ נותִי עַ ל instead of the גַ נותִי אֶ ל because the power of the Assyrians was to be have For my sake,” as“ .אֶ ל destroyed before the gates of Jerusalem, as is more correct than because of the greater importance which Hezekiah had prayed in v. 19; and “for my Jerusalem and Mount Zion, as the centre of the servant David’s sake,” because Jehovah, as the kingdom of God, the seat of the God-King, unchangeably true One, must fulfil the promise possessed in relation to the covenant-nation, so which He gave to David (sees at 1 Kings 11:13). that, according to Isa. 2:3, it was thence that the 2 Kings 19:35–37. The fulfilment of the divine Messianic salvation was also to proceed. This promise.—V. 35. “It came to pass in that night, deliverance is traced to the zeal of the Lord on that the angel of the Lord went out and smote behalf of His people and against His foes (see at in the army of the Assyrian 185,000 men; and Ex. 20:5), like the coming of the Messiah in Isa. when they (those that were left, including the 9:6 to establish an everlasting kingdom of king) rose up in the morning, behold there were peace and righteousness. The deliverance of they all (i.e., all who had perished) dead Judah out of the power of Asshur was a prelude מֵתִ ים .and type of the deliverance of the people of God corpses,” i.e., they had died in their sleep .lifeless corpses :פְּׂ גָרִ ים by the Messiah out of the power of all that was is added to strengthen is in all probability the night בַלַ היְּׂלָ הַ הּוא of Isaiah is omitted after צְּׂבָ אות ungodly. The just as in v. 15; though here it is supplied following the day on which Isaiah had foretold ,יְּׂהוָ ה by the Masora as Keri.—In vv. 32–34 Isaiah to Hezekiah the deliverance of Jerusalem. concludes by announcing that Sennacherib will Where the Assyrian army was posted at the not come to Jerusalem, nor even shoot at the time when this terrible stroke fell upon it is not city and besiege it, but will return disappointed, stated, since the account is restricted to the because the Lord will defend and save the city principal fact. One portion of it was probably for the sake of His promise. The result of the still before Jerusalem; the remainder were either in front of Libnah (v. 8), or marching :לָכֵ ן whole prophecy is introduced with against Jerusalem. From the fact that therefore, because this is how the matter Sennacherib’s second embassy (vv. 9ff.) was stands, viz., as explained in what precedes. not accompanied by a body of troops, it by no , with regard to the king, as in v. 20. means follows that the large army which had לֹּא אֶל־מֶ לֶ ְך (he will not attack it with a shield,” come with the first embassy (2 Kings 18:17“ ,יְּׂקַדְּׂמֶ נָה מָ גֵ ן i.e., will not advance with shields to make an had withdrawn again, or had even removed to with a double accusative, as Libnah on the return of Rabshakeh to his king קִדֵ ם .attack upon it (2 Kings 19:8). The very opposite may be in Ps. 21:4. It only occurs here in a hostile inferred with much greater justice from 2 Kings sense: to come against, as in Ps. 18:19, i.e., to 19:32. And the smiting of 185,000 men by an advance against a city, to storm it. The four angel of the Lord by no means presupposes that clauses of the verse stand in a graduated the whole of Sennacherib’s army was

2 KINGS Page 99 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study concentrated at one spot. The blow could fighting with other mythical animals, such as certainly fall upon the Assyrians wherever they human-headed oxen or lions; and in these were standing or were encamped. The “angel of conflicts it always appears to be victorious,” the Lord” is the same angel that smote as from which we may infer that it was a type of the first-born of Egypt (Ex. 12:23, the supreme deity (see Layard’s Nineveh and its הַמַשְּׂחִ ית compared with vv. 12 and 13), and inflicted the Remains). The eagle was worshipped as a god pestilence upon Israel after the numbering of by the Arabs (Pococke, Specim. pp. 94, 199), the people by David (2 Sam. 24:15, 16). The last was regarded as sacred to Melkarth by the passage renders the conjecture a very probable Phoenicians (Nonnus, Dionys. xl. 495, 528), and, one, that the slaying of the Assyrians was also according to a statement of Philo. Bybl. (in effected by a terrible pestilence. But the Euseb. Praepar. evang. i. 10), that Zoroaster number of the persons slain—185,000 in a taught that the supreme deity was represented single night—so immensely surpasses the with an eagle’s head, it was also a symbol of effects even of the most terrible plagues, that Ormuzd among the Persians; consequently this fact cannot be interpreted naturally; and Movers (Phöniz. i. pp. 68, 506, 507) regards the deniers of miracle have therefore felt Nisroch as the supreme deity of the Assyrians. It obliged to do violence to the text, and to is not improbable that it was also connected pronounce either the statement that it was “the with the constellation of the eagle (see Ideler, same night” or the number of the slain a Ursprung der Sternnamen, p. 416). On the other mythical exaggeration.51 hand, the current interpretation of the name from ( , Chald.; nsr, Arab.), eagle, vulture, נְּׂשַ ר נֶשֶ ר Kings 19:36. This divine judgment compelled 2 Sennacherib to retreat without delay, and to with the Persian adjective termination ok or return to Nineveh, as Isaiah, 28 and 32, had ach, is very doubtful, not merely on account of but chiefly because this name ,נִסְּׂ רְֹּך in ס predicted. The heaping up of the verbs: “he the decamped, departed, and returned,” expresses does not occur in Assyrian, but simply Asar, he sat, Assar, and Asarak as the name of a deity which“ ,וַיֵשֶ בבְּׂ נִינְּׂוֵ ה .the hurry of the march home i.e., remained, in Nineveh,” implies not merely is met with in many Assyrian proper names. that Sennacherib lived for some time after his The last is also adopted by the LXX, who (ed. by Α άχ in נסרְך return, but also that he did not undertake any Aldin. Compl.) have rendered fresh expedition against Judah. On Nineveh see Isaiah, and Ε άχ (cod. Vatic.) in 2 Kings, by at Gen. 10:11. the side of which the various readings Μ άχ 2 Kings 19:37. V. 37 contains an account of in our text (cod. Vat.) and Ν άχ in Isaiah are Sennacherib’s death. When he was worshipping evidently secondary readings emended from in the temple of his god Nisroch, his sons the Hebrew, since Josephus (Ant. x. 1, 5) has the Adrammelech and Sharezer slew him, and fled form Α κή , which is merely somewhat into the land of Ararat, and his son Esarhaddon “Graecized.” The meaning of these names is still in obscurity, even if there should be some ,נִסְּׂ רְֹּך became king in his stead. With regard to foundation for the assumption that Assar Nisroch, all that seems to be firmly established belongs to the same root as the name of the is that he was an eagle-deity, and represented people and land, Asshur. The connection by the eagle- or vulture-headed human figure between the form Nisroch and Asarak is also with wings, which is frequently depicted upon still obscure. Compare the collection which J. G. the Assyrian monuments, “not only in colossal Müller has made of the different conjectures proportions upon the walls and watching the concerning this deity in the Art. Nisroch in portals of the rooms, but also constantly in the Herzog’s Cycl.—Adrammelech, according to 2 groups upon the embroidered robes. When it is Kings 17:31, was the name of a deity of introduced in this way, we see it constantly Sepharvaim, which was here borne by the

2 KINGS Page 100 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Sharezer, is said to mean 38 with Hezekiah’s psalm of thanksgiving for ,שַרְּׂ אֶצֶ ר .king’s son “prince of fire,” and was probably also his recovery (vv. 9–20 of Isaiah). Isa.) is wanting in 2 Kings 20:1. “In those days was Hezekiah sick) בָ נָיו .borrowed from a deity unto death.” By the expression “in those days” our text, but is supplied by the Masora in the the illness of Hezekiah is merely assigned in a Keri. The “land of Ararat” was a portion of the general manner to the same time as the events high land of Armenia; according to Moses v. previously described. That it did not occur after Chorene, the central portion of it with the the departure of the Assyrians, but at the mountains of the same name (see at Gen. 8:4). commencement of the invasion of Sennacherib, The slaying of Sennacherib is also confirmed by i.e., in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah’s reign, is Alex. Polyhistor, or rather Berosus (in Euseb. evident from v. 6, namely, both from the fact Chron. Armen. i. p. 43), who simply names, that in answer to his prayer fifteen years more however, a son Ardumusanus as having of life were promised him, and that he committed the murder, and merely mentions a nevertheless reigned only twenty-nine years (2 second Asordanius as viceroy of Babylon.52 The Kings 18:2), and also from the fact that God identity of the latter with Esarhaddon is beyond promised to deliver him out of the hand of the all doubt. The name , Esar-cha-don, Assyrians and to defend Jerusalem. The אֵסַ ר־חַ דֹּן consisting of two parts with the guttural widespread notion that his sickness was an inserted, the usual termination in Assyrian and attack of plague, and was connected with the Babylonian, Assar-ach, is spelt Α δάν in the pestilence which had broken out in the LXX, Σ χ δ νό in Tobit—probably formed Assyrian camp, is thereby deprived of its chief from Α -χ-δ ν by a transposition of the support, apart from the fact that the epithet ,v. 7), which is applied to the sickness) שְּׂחִ ין) letters,—by Josephus Α χόδδ , by Berosus (in the armen. Euseb.) Asordanes, by does not indicate pestilence. Isaiah then called Abyden. ibid. Axerdis, in the Canon Ptol. set :צַו לְּׂבֵ יתְּׂ ָך .Α άδιν , and lastly in Ezra 4:10 mutilated upon him to set his house in order Osnappar (Chald.), and in the LXX thy house in order, lit., command or order with ,אָסְּׂ נַפַ ר into Α ν φά ; upon the Assyrian monuments, regard to thy house, not declare thy (last) will is construed צִּוָ ה according to Oppert, Assur-akh-iddin (cf. M. v. to thy family (Ges., Knob.), for Niebuhr, Gesch. Ass. p. 38). The length of his with the accus. pers. in the sense of is לְּׂ reign is uncertain. The statements of Berosus, commanding anything, whereas here Sam. 17:23). “For thou 2) אֶ ל that he was first of all viceroy of Babylon, and synonymous with then for eight years king of Assyria, and that of wilt die and not live;” i.e., thy sickness is to the Canon Ptol., that he reigned for thirteen death, namely, without the miraculous help of years in Babylon, are decidedly incorrect. God. Sickness to death in the very prime of life Brandis (Rerum Assyr. tempora emend. p. 41) (Hezekiah was then in the fortieth year of his conjectures that he reigned twenty-eight years, age) appeared to the godly men of the Old but in his work Ueber den histor. Gewinn, pp. 73, Testament a sign of divine displeasure. 74, he suggests seventeen years. M. v. Niebuhr Hezekiah was therefore greatly agitated by this (ut sup. p. 77), on the other hand, reckons his announcement, and sought for consolation and reign at twenty-four years. help in prayer. He turned his face to the wall, sc. 2 Kings 20 of the room, not of the temple (Chald.), i.e., away from those who were standing round, to Hezekiah’s Illness and Recovery. Merodach be able to pray more collectedly. Baladan’s Embassy. Death of Hezekiah. 2 Kings 20:3. In his prayer he appealed to his 2 Kings 20:1–11. Hezekiah’s Illness and walking before the Lord in truth and with a Recovery.—Compare the parallel account in Isa. thoroughly devoted heart, and to his acting in a

2 KINGS Page 101 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study manner that was well-pleasing to God, in Vitringa and others, that the words contain perfect accordance with the legal standpoint of simply a promise of deliverance out of the hand the Old Testament, which demanded of the of the oppressor for the next fifteen years, puts godly righteousness of life according to the law. a meaning into them which they do not contain, This did not imply by any means a self- as is clearly shown by Isa. 37:20, where this righteous trust in his own virtue; for walking thought is expressed in a totally different ,as in 2 Kings 19:34 :וְּׂגַ נותִי עַ ל־הָעִ יר וגו׳ .before God with a thoroughly devoted heart manner was impossible without faith. “And Hezekiah where the prophet repeated this divine promise wept violently,” not merely at the fact that he in consequence of the attempt of Sennacherib was to die without having an heir to the throne, to get Jerusalem into his power. since Manasseh was not born till three years 2 Kings 20:7. Isaiah ordered a lump of figs to afterwards (Joseph., Ephr. Syr., etc.), but also be laid upon the boil, and Hezekiah recovered because he was to die in the very midst of his he revived again). It is of course assumed :וַיֶחִ י) life, since God had promised long life to the righteous. as self-evident, that Isaiah returned to the king 2 Kings 20:4ff. This prayer of the godly king in consequence of a divine revelation, and was answered immediately. Isaiah had not gone communicated to him the word of the Lord is a mass דְּׂבֶלֶ תֹּתְּׂאֵ נִים out of the midst of the city, when the word of which he had received.53 the Lord came to him to return to the king, and consisting of compressed figs, which the tell him that the Lord would cure him in three ancients were in the habit of applying, days and add fifteen years to his life, and that according to many testimonies (see Celsii He would also deliver him from the power of Hierob. ii. p. 373), in the case of plague-boils and abscesses of other kinds, because the fig הָעִ יר .the Assyrians and defend Jerusalem δι φ κλη (Dioscor.) and ulcera aperit the middle city, i.e., the central portion ,הַֹּתִ יכֹּנָ ה (Plin.), and which is still used for softening of the city, namely, the Zion city, in which the an abscess, is never used in ,שְּׂחִ ין .ulcers the central ,חָ צֵ ר הת׳ royal citadel stood. The Keri connection with plague or plague-boils, but court, not of the temple, but of the royal citadel, only to denote the abscesses caused by leprosy which is adopted in all the ancient versions, is (Job 2:7, 8), and other abscesses of an inflammatory kind (Ex. 9:9ff.). In the case of עִ יר nothing more than an interpretation of the as denoting the royal castle, after the analogy of Hezekiah it is probably a carbuncle that is 2 Kings 10:25. The distinct assurance added to intended. the promise “I will heal thee,” viz., “on the third After the allusion to the cure and recovery of day thou wilt go into the house of the Lord,” Hezekiah, we have an account in vv. 8ff. of the was intended as a pledge to the king of the sign by which Isaiah confirmed the promise promised cure. The announcement that God given to the king of the prolongation of his life. would add fifteen years to his life is not put into In the order of time the contents of v. 7 follow v. the prophet’s mouth ex eventu (Knobel and 11, since the prophet in all probability first of others); for the opinion that distinct statements all disclosed the divine promise to the king, and as to time are at variance with the nature of then gave him the sign, and after that appointed prophecy is merely based upon an a priori the remedy and had it applied. At the same denial of the supernatural character of time, it is also quite possible that he first of all prophecy. The words, “and I will deliver thee directed the lump of figs to be laid upon the out of the hand of the Assyrians,” imply most boil, and then made known to him the divine distinctly that the Assyrian had only occupied promise, and guaranteed it by the sign. In this .merely anticipates the order of events וַיֶחִ י the land and threatened Jerusalem, and had not case yet withdrawn. The explanation given by The sign which Isaiah gave to the king, at his

2 KINGS Page 102 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study request, consisted in the miraculous movement also for the sum-total of these scala, i.e., for the of the shadow backward upon the sundial of sun-dial itself, without there being any Ahaz. necessity to assume that it was an obelisk-like the shadow is gone ten pillar erected upon an elevated place with steps“ :הָ לַ ְך הַצֵ ל .Kings 20:9 2 running round it (Knobel), or a long portable degrees, if it should go back ten degrees?” The scale of twice ten steps with a gnomon rendering, visne umbram solarii decem gradibus (Gumpach, Alttestl. Studien, pp. 181ff.). All that progredi an … regredi, which Maurer still gives follows from the descent of the shadow is that after the Vulgate, vis an ut ascendat … an ut the dial of the gnomon was placed in a vertical revertatur, cannot be grammatically reconciled direction; and the fact that the shadow went ten and is merely a conjecture degrees down or backward, simply ,הָ לַ ְך with the perfect founded upon the answer of Hezekiah.54 presupposes that the gnomon had at least According to this answer, “it is easy for the twenty degrees, and therefore that the degrees shadow to decline (i.e., to go farther down) ten indicated smaller portions of time than hours. degrees; no (sc., that shall not be a sign to me), If, then, it is stated in v. 8b of Isaiah that the sun but if the shadow turn ten degrees backwards,” went back ten degrees, whereas the going back Isaiah seems to have given the king a choice as of the shadow had been previously mentioned to the sign, namely, whether the shadow should in agreement with our text, it is self-evident go ten degrees forward or backward. But this that the sun stands for the shining of the sun does not necessarily follow from the words which was visible upon the dial-plate, and quoted. Hezekiah may have understood the which made the shadow recede. We are not, of hypothetically: course, to suppose that the sun in the sky and הָ לַ ְך הַצֵ ל וגו׳ prophet’s words “has the shadow gone (advanced) ten degrees, the shadow on the sun-dial went back at the whether it should,” etc.; and may have replied, same time, as Knobel assumes. So far as the the advance of the shadow would not be a sure miracle is concerned, the words of the text do sign to him, but only its going back. not require that we should assume that the sun receded, or the rotation of the earth was 2 Kings 20:11. Isaiah then prayed to the Lord, reversed, as Eph. Syr. and others supposed, but and the Lord “turned back the shadow (caused simply affirm that there was a miraculous it to go back) upon the sun-dial, where it had movement backward of the shadow upon the gone down, on the sundial of Ahaz, ten degrees dial, which might be accounted for from a ,cannot be understood, as miraculous refraction of the rays of the sun מַעֲ לות אָחָ ז ”.backward it has been by the LXX, Joseph., Syr., as referring effected by God at the prophet’s prayer, of to a flight of steps at the palace of Ahaz, which which slight analoga are met with in the was so arranged that the shadow of an object ordinary course of nature.55 This miraculous standing near indicated the hours, but is no sign was selected as a significant one in itself, to doubt a gnomon, a sun-dial which Ahaz may confirm the promise of a fresh extension of life have received from Babylonia, where sun-dials which had been given to Hezekiah by the grace were discovered (Herod. ii. 109). Nothing of God in opposition to the natural course of further can be inferred from the words with things. The retrograde movement of the regard to its construction, since the ancients shadow upon the sun-dial indicated that had different kinds of sun-dials (cf. Martini Hezekiah’s life, which had already arrived at its Abhandlung von den Sonnenuhren der Alten, close by natural means, was to be put back by a steps in the literal miracle of divine omnipotence, so that it might מַעֲ לות Lpz. 1777). The word sense, is transferred to the scala, which the continue for another series of years. shadow had to traverse both up and down upon 2 Kings 20:12–19. The Babylonian embassy, the disk of the sun-dial, and is used both to and Hezekiah’s imprudence (cf. Isa. 39).—V. 12. denote the separate degrees of this scala, and “At that time Berodach Baladan, king of Babel,

2 KINGS Page 103 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

is apparently a וַיִשְּׂמַ ֹע sent a letter and a present to Hezekiah, because 2 Kings 20:13. In v. 13 of Isaiah, which many וַיִשְּׂמַ ח copyist’s error for בָעֵ ת he had heard that Hezekiah was sick.” By the arrival of these ambassadors is merely of the codd. and ancient versions have even in הַהִ יא assigned in the most general manner to the our text. At the same time, the construction of —.is also found in 2 Kings 22:13 עַ ל with שָמַ ֹע period following Hezekiah’s recovery. But from the object of their mission, it is evident that concerning them, i.e., the ambassadors ,עֲלֵיהֶ ם they did not arrive in Jerusalem till after the overthrow and departure of Sennacherib, and who had brought the letter and the present. In therefore at least half a year after Hezekiah’s his delight at the honour paid to him by this recovery. The ostensible reason given is, that embassy, Hezekiah showed the ambassadors all Berodach Baladan had heard of Hezekiah’s his treasure-house, the silver, and the gold, and illness, and therefore sent to congratulate him the spices, and the costly oil, and all his arsenal, is probably בֵ יתנְּׂ כֹּת on his recovery; but in 2 Chron. 32:31 the etc. The literal meaning of being a נְּׂ כֹּת ,(.further reason is mentioned, that he wished to spice-house (Aquila, Symm., Vulg inquire concerning the miracle upon the sun- in Ge. 37:25, whereas the נְּׂ כֹּאת contraction of dial. But, as Josephus has shown, the true object, no doubt, was to make sure of derivation suggested from the Arabic kayyata, Hezekiah’s friendship in anticipation of his farsit, implevit locum, is much more wide of the intended revolt from the Assyrian rule. mark. The house received its name from the Berodach Baladan, for Merodach Baladan (Isa.), spices for the storing of which it was really with the labial changed, is the same person as intended, although it was also used for the is not fine שֶמֶ ן הַ טוב .the Marodach Baladan who reigned in Babylon storing of silver and gold for six months, according to Alex. Polyhistor, or olive oil, but, according to the Rabbins and rather Berosus (Euseb. Chron. armen. i. pp. 42, Movers (Phöniz. iii. p. 227), the valuable balsam 43), and was slain by Elibus, and also the same oil which was obtained in the royal gardens; for as the Mardokempad who reigned, according to olive oil, which was obtained in all Judaea, was the Can. Ptol., from 26 to 38 aer. Nab., i.e., from not stored in the treasure-chambers along with gold, silver, and perfumes, but in special ,מְּׂ רֹּדָ ְך ,to 709 B.C. The first part of the name 721 in all ,בְּׂכָל־מֶמְּׂשַ לְּׂ ֹּתו .(occurs in Jer. 50:2 in connection with Bel as the storehouses (1 Chron. 27:28 name of a Babylonian idol; and the whole name his dominion, i.e., in all the district which he is found on a cylinder (in the ) was able to govern or control.—The existence which contains the first expeditions of of such treasures, of which, according to v. 17, Sennacherib against Babylon and Media, and the ancestors of Hezekiah had collected a very upon the inscriptions at Khorsabad spelt either large store, at so short a period after the Merodak-pal-dsana (according to Brandis, departure of the Assyrians, is not at variance Ueber der Gewinn, pp. 44 and 53) or Marduk bal with 2 Kings 18:15, 16, according to which Hezekiah had sent to Sennacherib all the silver כִי שָמַ ֹע iddin (according to Oppert).56 Instead of in his treasuries, and even the gold plate upon ,in Isaiah, which is not so clear וַיִשְּׂמַ ֹע we have the temple doors. For, in the first place, it is not though it is probably more original; whereas stated that there was much silver and gold in that he had the treasure-house, but the silver and gold are“ ,כִי חָ לָ ה וַיֶחֱ זָ ק ,the clause in Isaiah been sick and had become strengthened, i.e., simply mentioned along with the spices; and, secondly, Hezekiah may have kept back from כִ י well again,” is simply an elucidation of the Sennacherib many a valuable piece of silver or of our text, in which the recovery is חָ לָהחִ זְּׂקִ יָהּו gold, and have taken off the gold plate from the implied in the pluperfect “had been sick.” temple doors, to show the ambassadors of Sennacherib, who came to receive the money

2 KINGS Page 104 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study demanded as compensation, that he was not in courtiers, not necessarily eunuchs, as in 1 Sam. a condition to give anything more. Moreover a 8:15, etc.—For the fulfilment of this threat see great deal may have flowed into the treasuries Dan. 1:2ff. since the payment of that tribute, partly from 2 Kings 20:19. The first part of Hezekiah’s the presents which Hezekiah received from reply, “Good is the word of Jehovah, which thou many quarters after the overthrow of hast spoken,” is an expression of submission to Sennacherib (2 Chron. 32:23), and partly from the will of the Lord, like Eli’s answer in 1 Sam. the booty that had been collected in the camp of 3:18 (cf. 1 Kings 2:38, 42);57 the second part, shows to have וַ יֹּאמֶ ר the Assyrians after their hurried departure. And which the repetition of again, the treasures which the ancestors of been spoken after a pause, and which was not Hezekiah had collected (v. 17) may not have addressed directly to Isaiah, “Is it not so (i.e., is consisted of gold and silver exactly, but of it not purely goodness), if there are to be peace different jewels and objects of art, which could and truth in my days (during my life)?” is a not be applied to the payment of the tribute candid acknowledgment of the grace and truth demanded by Sennacherib. And, lastly, “we is used, as is frequently the הֲ לוא must not overlook the fact, that it answered the of the Lord.58 purpose of the reporter to crowd together as case, in the sense of a lively affirmation. Instead for there will be“ ,כִ י we have in Isaiah הֲלוא אִ ם much as possible, in order to show how anxious of Hezekiah was to bring out and exhibit peace and truth,” by which this clause is everything whatever that could contribute to attached more clearly to the first declaration as the folly” (Drechsler). Hezekiah evidently a reason for it: the word of the Lord is good, for wanted to show all his glory, because the the Lord proves His goodness and truth in the arrival of the Babylonian ambassadors had fact, that He will not inflict the merited flattered his vanity. punishment in my lifetime. “Peace and truth” does not אֱמֶ ת .Kings 20:14ff. Isaiah therefore announced to are connected as in Jer. 33:6 2 him the word of the Lord, that all his treasures mean continuance (Ges.), security (Knobel), but would one day be carried to Babel, and some fides, faithfulness,—not human faithfulness, even of his sons would serve as chamberlains in however, which preserves peace, and observes the palace of the king of Babel. The sin of vanity a tacit treaty (Hitzig), but the faithfulness of was to be punished by the carrying away of that God, which preserves the promised grace to the of which his heart was proud. Isaiah did not go humble. to Hezekiah by his own impulse, but by the 2 Kings 20:20, 21. Close of Hezekiah’s reign.— direction of God. His inquiries: “What have and the aqueduct (בְּׂרֵ כָ ה) these men said, and whence do they come to On the basin thee?” were simply intended to lead the king to constructed by him, see at 2 Kings 18:17. give expression to the thoughts of his heart. In 2 Kings 21 the answer, “From a distant land have they come, from Babel,” his vanity at the great Reigns of Manasseh and Amon. honour that had been paid him comes clearly to light. 2 Kings 21:1–18. Reign of Manasseh (cf. 2 Chron. 33:1–20).—V. 1. Manasseh was twelve 2 Kings 20:18. The words, “of thy sons, which years old when he began to reign, so that he shall proceed from thee, which thou shalt was not born till after Hezekiah’s dangerous beget,” do not necessarily refer to the actual illness (2 Kings 20:1ff.). sons, but only to lineal descendants. The Chethîb 2 Kings 21:2ff. Having begun to reign at this יִקָ חּו will one take,” is to be preferred to the“ ,יִקַ ח early age, he did not choose his father’s ways, of Isaiah and the Keri, as being the more but set up the idolatry of his father Ahab again, chamberlains, since the godless party in the nation, at whose ,סָרִ יסִ ים .difficult reading

2 KINGS Page 105 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study head chiefs, priests, and (false) prophets stood, stars, with the face turned towards the east, and who would not hearken to the law of the upon altars which were built either upon Lord, and in the time of Hezekiah had sought housetops, as in the case of the Nabataeans help against Assyria not from Jehovah, but from (Strabo, xvi. 784), or within the limits of the the Egyptians (Isa. 28:7, 14ff., 30:9ff.), had temple in the two courts (cf. Ezek. 8:16, also 2 obtained control of the young an inexperienced Kings 21:5; 23:12, and 2 Chron. 33:5, Jer. 19:13, king, and had persuaded him to introduce Zeph. 1:5). This burning of incense took place idolatry again. On v. 2 cf. 2 Kings 8:18 and 16:3. not merely to the sun and moon, but also to the ,he built again” the high signs of the zodiac and to all the host of heaven“ ,וַיָשָ ב וַיִבֶ ן .Kings 21:3 2 i.e., to all the stars (2 Kings 23:5); by which we places, which Hezekiah had destroyed (2 Kings are no doubt to understand that the sun, moon, 18:4), erected altars for Baal and an Asherah, planets and other stars, were worshipped in is conjunction with the zodiac, and with this were הָאֲשֵרָ ה .(like Ahab of Israel (1 Kings 16:32, 33 the image of Asherah mentioned in v. 7, connected astrology, augury, and the casting of whereas in the Chronicles the thought is nativities, as in the case of the later so-called Chaldaeans.59 This star-worship is more .הָאֲשֵ רות and לַבְּׂעָלִ ים generalized by the plurals To these two kinds of idolatry, the idolatrous minutely described in vv. 4 and 5. The two of ּובָנָ ה מִ זְּׂבְּׂ חֹּת bamoth and the (true) Baal- and Asherah- verses are closely connected. The בְּׂבֵ ית יי׳ in v. 5, and the וַיִבֶ ן מזב׳ worship, Manasseh added as a third kind the v. 4 is resumed in worship of all the host of heaven, which had not of v. 4 is more minutely defined in the בִשְֹּּׂתֵ י occurred among the Israelites before the of. v. 5. “In the two courts:” not חַ צְּׂ רות בֵ ית יי׳ Assyrian era, and was probably of Assyrian or Chaldaean origin. This worship differed from merely in the outer court, but even in the court the Syrophoenician star-worship, in which sun of the priests, which was set apart for the and moon were worshipped under the names worship of Jehovah. of Baal and Astarte as the bearers of the male 2 Kings 21:6. He also offered his son in and female powers of nature, and was pure sacrifice to Moloch, like Ahaz (2 Kings 16:3), in star-worship, based upon the idea of the the valley of Benhinnom (Chron. cf. 2 Kings unchangeableness of the stars in 23:10), and practised soothsaying and contradistinction to the perishableness of .see Deut ֹעונֵ ןוְּׂנִחֵ ש witchcraft of every kind. On everything earthly, according to which the stars ,.he made, i.e ,עָשָ ה אוב ,were worshipped not merely as the originators 18:10 and Lev. 19:26 of all rise and decay in nature, but also as the appointed, put into office, a “necromancer and leaders and regulators of sublunary things (see wise people” (cf. Lev. 19:31 and Deut. 18:11). Movers, Phöniz. i. pp. 65 and 161). This star- 2 Kings 21:7. Yea, he even placed the image of worship was a later development of the Asherah in the temple, i.e., in the Holy Place. In primary star-worship of Ssabism, in which the the description of his idolatry, which advances stars were worshipped without any image, in gradatim, this is introduced as the very worst the open air or upon the housetops, by simple crime. According to the express declaration of contemplation, the oldest and comparatively the Lord to David (2 Sam. 7:13) and Solomon (1 the purest form of deification of nature, to Kings 9:3 compared with 2 Kings 8:16), the which the earlier Arabians and the worshippers temple was to serve as the dwelling-place of His of the sun among the Ssabians (Zabians) were name. addicted (cf. Delitzsch on Job 31:26, 27), and 2 Kings 21:8. The word of the Lord, “I will no which is mentioned and forbidden in Deut. 4:19 more make the foot of Israel to move out of the and 17:3. In this later form the sun had sacred land which I gave to their fathers,” refers to the chariots and horses as among the Persians (2 promise in 2 Sam. 7:10: “I will appoint my Kings 23:11), and incense was offered to the

2 KINGS Page 106 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study people a place, that they may dwell in a place of sprang the figurative expressions, measure of their own, and be stirred up no more,” which desolation and plummet of devastation (Isa. had been fulfilled by the building of the temple 34:11).—The measure of Samaria therefore as the seat of the name of the Lord, in the denotes the measure which was applied to the manner indicated in pp. 85ff. The lasting destruction of Samaria, and the plummet of the fulfilment of this promise, however, was made house of Ahab denotes the extermination of the to rest upon the condition of Israel’s faithful royal house of Ahab. The meaning is: I shall adherence to the commandments of God (cf. 1 destroy Jerusalem as I have destroyed Samaria, Kings 9:6ff.). and exterminate its inhabitants like the house 2 Kings 21:9. This condition was not observed of Ahab. In the second hemistich the same thing by the Israelites; Manasseh seduced them, so is expressed, if possible, still more strongly: “I that they did more evil than the Canaanites, wipe away Jerusalem as one wipes the dish, and whom Jehovah had destroyed before them. (having) wiped (it), turns it upon its upper side ,The wiping of a dish that has been used ”.(פָ נֶיהָ ) Kings 21:10–15. The Lord therefore 2 announced through the prophets, to the and the turning over of the dish wiped, so as rebellious and idolatrous nation, the not to leave a single drop in it, are a figurative destruction of Jerusalem and the deliverance of representation of the complete destruction of Judah into the hands of its enemies; but, as is Jerusalem and the utter extermination of its added in 2 Chron. 33:10, they paid no heed to inhabitants. them. The prophets who foretold this terrible 2 Kings 21:14. With the destruction of judgment are not named. According to 2 Chron. Jerusalem the Lord forsakes the people of His 33:18, their utterances were entered in the possession, and give it up to its enemies for a Judah is called the :שְּׂאֵרִ ית נַחֲ לָתִ י .annals of the kings. Habakkuk was probably prey and spoil one of them, since he (Hab. 1:5) predicted the remnant of the people of God’s inheritance with Chaldaean judgment as a fact which excited a reference to the rejection and leading away of astonishment and appeared incredible. The the ten tribes, which have already taken place. Amorites are mentioned in v. 11 instar omnium On see Isa. 42:22, Jer. 30:16. בַ ז ּומְּׂשִסָ ה as the supporters of the Canaanitish ungodliness, as in 1 Kings 21:26, etc.—The To this announcement of the judgment there is phrase, “that whosoever heareth it, both his appended in 2 Chron. 33:11ff. the statement, ears may tingle,” denotes such a judgment as that Jehovah caused Manasseh the king to be has never been heard of before, and excites taken prisoner by the generals of the king of alarm and horror (cf. 1 Sam. 3:11 and Jer. 19:3). Assyria and led away to Babylon in chains; and is a correction, to bring the that when he humbled himself before God שֹּמְּׂעָ ּה The Keri there, and made supplication to Him, He רָ עָ ה pronom. suff. into conformity with the noun brought him back to Jerusalem and placed him so far as the gender is concerned, whereas in upon his throne again; whereupon Manasseh ,the masculine suffix is used in fortified the walls of Jerusalem still further שֹּמְּׂעָ יו the Chethîb the place of the feminine, as is frequently the placed garrisons in the fortified cities, removed case. the idol from the temple, abolished from the 2 Kings 21:13. “I stretch over Jerusalem the city the idolatrous altars erected in Jerusalem measure of Samaria, and the plummet of the and upon the temple-mountain, restored the and the altar of Jehovah, and commanded the people to (קַ ו) house of Ahab.” The measure offer sacrifice upon it.—This incident is omitted lit., a level) were applied to in our book, because the conversion of ,מִשְּׂ קֹּלֶ ת) plummet what was being built (Zech. 1:16), and also to Manasseh was not followed by any lasting what was being made level with the ground, i.e., results so far as the kingdom was concerned; completely thrown down (Amos 7:7). From this

2 KINGS Page 107 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study the abolition of outward idolatry in Jerusalem 2 Kings 21:26. Amon was buried “in his grave did not lead to the conversion of the people, in the garden of Uzza,” i.e., in the grave which and after the death of Manasseh even the he had had made in the garden of Uzza by the idolatrous abominations that had been side of his father’s grave. He had probably one ,יִקְּׂ בֹּר .abolished were restored by Amon.60 resided in this palace of his father 2 Kings 21:16. Manasseh also sinned buried him. grievously by shedding innocent blood till 2 Kings 22 from , הפֶ לָֹפֶ ה .Jerusalem was quite filled with it one edge to the other, see at 2 Kings 10:21. This Reign of King Josiah. statement has been paraphrased by Josephus thus (Ant. x. 3, 1): Manasseh slew άντ ὁ ῶ 2 Kings 22:1–23:30. After a brief account of τ δικ τ ἐν τ Ἑβ ι , and did not the length and spirit of the reign of the pious spare even the prophets, with the additional Josiah (vv. 1 and 2), we have a closely clause, which exaggerates the thing: κ ὶ τ ύτων connected narrative, in v. 3–23:24, of what he δέ τιν κ θ᾽ ἡ έ ν έ φ ξὲ ὥ τ ἵ τι did for the restoration of idolatry; and the θ ι τὰἹ όλ .61 whole of the reform effected by him is placed in the eighteenth year of his reign, because it was 2 Kings 21:17, 18. Manasseh was buried “in in this year that the book of the law was the garden of his house, in the garden of Uzza.” discovered, through which the reformation of “His house” cannot be the royal palace built by worship was carried to completion. It is evident Solomon, because the garden is also called the that it was the historian’s intention to combine garden of Uzza, evidently from the name of its together everything that Josiah did to this end, former possessor. “His house” must therefore so as to form one grand picture, from the have been a summer palace belonging to circumstance that he has not merely placed the Manasseh, the situation of which, however, it is chronological datum, “it came to pass in the impossible to determine more precisely. The eighteenth year of king Josiah,” at the arguments adduced by Thenius in support of beginning, but has repeated it at the close (2 the view that it was situated upon Ophel, Kings 23:23). If we run over the several facts opposite to Zion, are perfectly untenable. which are brought before us in this section,— Robinson (Pal. i. p. 394) conjectures that the the repairing of the temple (2 Kings 22:3–7); the discovery of the book of the law; the עֻּוָ א garden of Uzza was upon Zion. The name occurs again in 2 Sam. 6:8, 1 Chron. 8:7, reading of the book to the king; the inquiry (עֻ זָ ה) :49, and Neh. 7:51. made of the prophetess Huldah, and her prophecy (vv. 8–20); the reading of the law to 2 Kings 21:19–26. Reign of Amon (cf. 2 Chron. the assembled people in the temple, with the 33:21–25).—Amon reigned only two years, and renewal of the covenant (2 Kings 23:1–3); the that in the spirit of his father, that is to say, eradication of idolatry not only from Jerusalem worshipping all his idols. The city of Jotbah, and Judah, but from Bethel also, and all the from which his mother sprang, was, according cities of Samaria (vv. 4–20); and, lastly, the to Jerome (in the Onom. s. v. Jethaba), urbs passover (vv. 21–23),—there is hardly any antiqua Judaeae; but it is not further known. need to remark, that all this cannot have taken 2 Kings 21:23, 24. His servants conspired place in the one eighteenth year of his reign, against him and slew him in his palace; even if, with Usher (Annales ad a.m. 3381), we whereupon the people of the land, i.e., the were to place the solemn passover at the close of the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign, which is 2 ,עַ ם יְּׂהּודָ ה = עַ ם הָאָרֶ ץ) population of Judah Chron. 26:1), put the conspirators to death and hardly suitable, and by no means follows from made Josiah the son of Amon king, when he was the circumstance that the chronological datum, only eight years old. “in the eighteenth year,” stands at the

2 KINGS Page 108 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study commencement of the complete account of the of the law was to be an act in accordance with reform of worship introduced by that king. For the law, the public memorials of idolatry must we may clearly infer that the several details of be destroyed at all events in the neighbourhood this account are not arranged chronologically, of the temple. And is it likely that the king, who but according to the subject-matter, and that had been so deeply moved by the curses of the the historian has embraced the efforts of Josiah law, would have undertaken so solemn a to restore the legal worship of Jehovah, which transaction in sight of the idolatrous altars and spread over several years, under the one point other abominations of idolatry in the house of of view of a discovery of the law, and therefore Jehovah, and not rather have seen that this within the eighteenth year of his reign, from the would be only a daring insult to Jehovah? These fact that he introduces the account of the reasons are quite sufficient to prove that the repairing of the temple (2 Kings 22:3–7) in a extermination of idolatry had commenced period by itself, and makes it subordinate to the before the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign, and account of the discovery of the book of the law, had simply been carried out with greater zeal and indeed only mentions it in a general throughout the whole kingdom after the manner, because it led to the finding of the discovery of the book of the law. book of the law. It is true that the other facts This view of our account is simply confirmed by are attached to one another in the narrative by a comparison with the parallel history in 2 Vav consec.; but, on a closer inspection of the Chron. 34 and 35. According to 2 Chron. 34:3ff., several details, there cannot be any doubt Josiah began to seek the God of his father David whatever that the intention is not to arrange in the eighth year of his reign, when he was still them in their chronological order. The repairing a youth, that is to say, not more than sixteen of the temple must have commenced before the years old, and in the twelfth year of his reign eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign, inasmuch as in began to purify Judah and Jerusalem from that year, in which the incident occurred which idolatry; and, according to vv. 8ff., in the led to the discovery of the book of the law (2 eighteenth year of his reign, at the purification Kings 22:3–7), not only were the builders of the land and temple, and the renovation of occupied with the repairs of the temple, but the temple, the book of the law was found by money had been brought by all the people to the high priest, and handed over to the king and the house of God to carry on this work, and had read before him (vv. 8–28), after which the been collected by the Levites who kept the renewal of the covenant took place, and all the door. Moreover, from the very nature of the abominations of idolatry that still remained in case, we cannot conceive of the restoration of the land were swept away (vv. 29–33), and, the temple, that had fallen to decay, without the lastly, a solemn passover was celebrated, of removal of the idolatrous abominations found which we have an elaborate account in 2 Kings in the temple. And the assumption is an equally 35:1–19. Consequently the account given in the inconceivable one, that all the people entered Chronicles is, on the whole, arranged with into covenant with the Lord (2 Kings 23:3), greater chronological precision, although even before any commencement had been made there, after the commencement of the towards the abolition of the prevailing idolatry, extermination of idolatry has been mentioned, or that the pious king had the book of the law we have a brief and comprehensive statement read in the temple and entered into covenant of all that Josiah did to accomplish that results; with the Lord, so long as the Ashera was so that after the renewal of the covenant (2 standing in the temple, and the idolatrous altars Chron. 34:33) we have nothing more than a erected by Manasseh in the courts, together passing allusion, by way of summary, to the with the horses and chariots dedicated to the complete abolition of the abominations of sun. If the conclusion of a covenant in idolatry throughout the whole land. consequence of the public reading of the book

2 KINGS Page 109 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 Kings 22:1, 2. Length and spirit of Josiah’s commencement to the minor clauses inserted reign.—Josiah (for the name, see at 1 Kings within the principal clause, and subordinate to 13:2), like Hezekiah, trode once more in the it: “the king had sent Shaphan,” etc. According footsteps of his pious forefather David, to 2 Chron. 34:8, the king had deputed not only adhering with the greatest constancy to the law Shaphan the state- secretary, but also Maaseiah of the Lord. He reigned thirty-one years. As a the governor of the city and Joach the child he had probably received a pious training chancellor, because the repairing of the temple from his mother; and when he had ascended was not a private affair of the king and the high the throne, after the early death of his godless priest, but concerned the city generally, and father, he was under the guidance of pious men indeed the whole kingdom. In vv. 4, 5 there who were faithfully devoted to the law of the follows the charge given by the king to Lord, and who turned his heart to the God of Shaphan: “Go up to Hilkiah the high priest, that their fathers, as was the case with Joash in 2 he may make up the money, … and hand it over Kings 12:3, although there is no allusion to to the workmen appointed over the house of Hiphil, signifies to ,ֹּתָמַ ם from ,יַֹּתֵ ם .guardianship. His mother Jedidah, the daughter Jehovah,” etc of Adaiah, was of Boscath, a city in the plain of finish or set right, i.e., not pay out (Ges., Dietr.), Judah, of which nothing further is known (see but make it up for the purpose of paying out, at Josh. 15:39). The description of his character, namely, collect it from the door-keepers, count “he turned not aside to the right hand and to it, and bind it up in bags (see 2 Kings 12:11). the left,” sc. from that which was right in the is therefore quite appropriate here, and יַֹּתֵ ם eyes of the Lord, is based upon Deut. 5:29; 17:11, 20, and 28:14, and expresses an there is no alteration of the text required. The unwavering adherence to the law of the Lord. door-keepers had probably put the money in a chest placed at the entrance, as was the case at 2 Kings 22:3–8. Repairing of the temple, and the repairing of the temple in the time of Joash discovery of the book of the law (cf. 2 Chron. (2 Kings 12:10). In v. 5 the Keri is a bad יִתְּׂ נֻ הּו When Josiah sent Shaphan the—.(18–34:8 and give (it) into“ ,יִתְּׂ נֶ ה see at 2 Sam. 8:17) into alteration of the Chethîb ,סוֹפֵ ר) secretary of state ֹעֹּשֵ י .the temple, in the eighteenth year of his reign, the hand,” which is perfectly correct might denote both the masters and the הַמְּׂ לָ אכָ ה with instructions to Hilkiah the high priest to pay to the builders the money which had been workmen (builders), and is therefore defined collected from the people for repairing the more precisely first of all by , הַמֹֻפְּׂקָדִ ים בְּׂבֵ ית יי׳ ,temple by the Levites who kept the door Hilkiah said to Shaphan, “I have found the book “who had the oversight at the house of of the law.” Vv. 3–8 form a long period. The Jehovah,” i.e., the masters or inspectors of the who ,אֲשֶ רבְּׂבֵ ית יי׳ it came to pass in the building, and secondly by“ ,וַיְּׂהִ י וגו׳ apodosis to eighteenth year of king Josiah—the king had were (occupied) at the house of Jehovah, whilst אֲשֶ רֹעֹּשִ ים ב׳ sent Shaphan,” etc., does not follow till v. 8: in the Chronicles it is explained by ,is an alteration after v. 9 בֵ ית יי׳ The Keri .י׳ that Hilkiah said,” etc. The principal fact which“ the historian wished to relate, was the whereas the combination is מֹֻפְּׂקָדִ ים בְּׂבֵ ית discovery of the book of the law; and the .c. acc הִֹפְּׂקִ יד repairing of the temple is simply mentioned justified by the construction of rei in Jer. 40:5. The masters are the ב because it was when Shaphan was sent to pers. and Hilkiah about the payment of the money to the they were to pay the money as it ;וְּׂיִֹּתְּׂ נּו subject to builders that the high priest informed the king’s secretary of state of the discovery of the book of was wanted, either to the workmen, or for the the law in the temple, and handed it over to him purchase of materials for repairing the .in v. 3, forms the dilapidations, as is more precisely defined in v ,שָ חלַ הַמֶ לֶ ְך .to take to the king

2 KINGS Page 110 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

6. Compare 2 Kings 12:12, 13; and for v. 7 Hilkiah had given him a book, and read it to the to bring an answer, to give a ,הֵשִ יב דָבָ ר .compare 2 Kings 12:16. The names of the king masters or inspectors are given in 2 Chron. report as to a commission that has been 34:12.—The execution of the king’s command ,.they poured out the money, i.e ,הִֹּתִ יכּו .received is not specially mentioned, that the parenthesis may not be spun out any further. out of the chest in which it was collected, into bags. , “he read it to the king,” is וַיִ קְּׂרָ אֵ הּו Kings 22:8. Hilkiah the high priest (cf. 1 2 ,יִקְּׂרָ א בו Chron. 5:39) said, “I have found the book of the simplified in the Chronicles (v. 18) by does not signify יקראהו the “he read therein.” That , רסֵֹפֶ הַ ֹּתורָ ה ”.law in the house of Jehovah book of the law (not a law-book or a roll of that the whole was read, is evident from a laws), cannot mean anything else, either comparison of 2 Kings 23:2, where the reading Which .כָל־דִבְּׂרֵ י ס׳ grammatically or historically, than the Mosaic of the whole is expressed by book of the law (the Pentateuch), which is so passages or sections Shaphan read by himself designated, as is generally admitted, in the (v. 8), and which he read to the king, it is Chronicles, and the books of Ezra and impossible to determine exactly. To the king he Nehemiah.62 The finding of the book of the law most likely read, among other things, the in the temple presupposes that the copy threats and curses of the law against those who deposited there had come to light. But it by no transgressed it (Deut. 28), and possibly also means follows from this, that before its Lev. 26, because the reading made such an discovery there were no copies in the hands of impression upon him, that in his anguish of soul the priests and prophets. The book of the law he rent his clothes. Nor is it possible to decide that was found was simply the temple copy,63 anything with certainty, as to whether the king deposited, according to Deut. 31:26, by the side had hitherto been altogether unacquainted of the ark of the covenant, which had been lost with the book of the law, and had merely a under the idolatrous kings Manasseh and traditional knowledge of the law itself, or Amon, and came to light again now that the whether he had already had a copy of the law, temple was being repaired. We cannot learn, but had not yet read it through, or had not read either from the account before us, or from the it with proper attention, which accounted for words of the Chronicles (2 Chron. 34:14), the passages that were read to him now making “when they were taking out the money brought so deep and alarming an impression upon him. into the house of Jehovah, Hilkiah found the It is a well-known experience, that even books book of the law of the Lord,” in what part of the which have been read may, under peculiar temple it had hitherto lain; and this is of no circumstances, produce an impression such as importance so far as the principal object of the has not been made before. But in all probability history is concerned. Even the words of the Josiah had not had in his possession any copy of Chronicles simply point out the occasion on the law, or even read it till now; although the which the book was discovered, and do not thorough acquaintance with the law, which all affirm that it had been lying in one of the the prophets display, places the existence of the treasure-chambers of the temple, as Josephus Pentateuch in prophetical circles beyond the .does not imply that reach of doubt וַיִקְּׂרָ אֵ הּו says. The expression Shaphan read the whole book through 2 Kings 22:11. In his alarm at the words of the immediately. book of the law that had been read to him, 2 Kings 22:9–14. The reading of the book of the Josiah rent his clothes, and sent a deputation to law to the king, and the inquiry made of the the prophetess Huldah, to make inquiry of prophetess Huldah concerning it.—Vv. 9, 10. Jehovah through her concerning the things When Shaphan informed the king of the which he had heard from the law. The execution of his command, he also told him that deputation consisted of the high priest Hilkiah,

2 KINGS Page 111 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Ahikam the supporter of Jeremiah (Jer. 26:24) the Chronicles. Huldah lived at Jerusalem in the second part” or district of the“ ,בַמִשְּׂ נֶ ה and the father of the governor (2 Kings 25:22; Jer. 39:14, etc.), Achbor the son of city, i.e., in the lower city, upon the hill Ακ Michaiah, Shaphan the state-secretary (v. 3), in הַמִשְּׂ נֶ ה Rob. Pal. i. p. 391), which is called) and Asahiah the servant (i.e., an officer) of the in Neh. 11:9, and הָעִ יר מִשְּׂ נֶ ה king. Zeph. 1:10, and 2 Kings 22:13. From the commission, “Inquire ἄλλη όλι in Joseph. Ant. xv. 11, 5. ye of Jehovah for me and for the people and for 2 Kings 22:15–20. The reply of Huldah the all Judah (i.e., the whole kingdom) concerning prophetess.—Huldah confirmed the fear the words of this book of the law that has been expressed by Josiah, that the wrath of the Lord found, for great is the wrath of the Lord which was kindled against Jerusalem and its has been kindled against us, because our inhabitants on account of their idolatry, and fathers have not heard …,” we may infer that proclaimed first of all (vv. 16, 17), that the Lord the curses of the law upon the despisers of the would bring upon Jerusalem and its inhabitants commandments of God in Lev. 26, Deut. 28, and all the punishments with which the rebellious and idolaters are threatened in the book of the דָרַ ש .other passages, had been read to the king law; and secondly (vv. 18–20), to the king ,means to inquire the will of the Lord אֶ ת־יי׳ himself, that on account of his sincere what He has determined concerning the king, repentance and humiliation in the sight of God, signifies he would not live to see the predicted שָמַֹע עַ ל .his people, and the kingdom here to hearken to anything, to observe it, for calamities, but would be gathered to his fathers to prescribe in peace. The first part of her announcement ,כָתַ ב עַ ל .is used elsewhere אֶ ל which applies “to the man who has sent you to me” (v. prescribed for us,” is“ ,עָלֵ ינּו .for performance 15), the second “to the king of Judah, who has quite appropriate, since the law was not only sent to inquire of the Lord” (v. 18). “The man” given to the fathers to obey, but also to the who had sent to her was indeed also the king; existing generation,—a fact which Thenius has but Huldah intentionally made use of the To render general expression “the man,” etc., to indicate .עָלָ יו overlooked with his conjecture the king’s alarm and his fear of severe that the word announced to him applied not judgments from God intelligible, there is no merely to the king, but to every one who would need for the far-fetched and extremely hearken to the word, whereas the second precarious hypothesis, that just at that time the portion of her reply had reference to the king in vv. 16, 19, and 20, is ,הַמָ קום הַ זֶ ה .Scythians had invaded and devastated the land. alone 2 Kings 22:14. Nothing further is known of the Jerusalem as the capital of the kingdom. In v. is an explanatory apposition to יכָל־דִבְּׂרֵ הַסֵֹפֶ ר ,prophetess Huldah than what is mentioned 16 here. All that we can infer from the fact that the . V. 17. “With all the work of their hands,” רָ עָ ה king sent to her is, that she was highly distinguished on account of her prophetical i.e., with the idols which they have made for gifts, and that none of the prophets of renown, themselves (cf. 1 Kings 16:7). The last clause in such as Jeremiah and Zephaniah, were at that v. 18, “the words which thou hast heard,” is not time in Jerusalem. Her father Shallum was to be connected with the preceding one, “thus to be supplied; but it לְּׂ or עַ ל keeper of the clothes, i.e., superintendent over saith the Lord,” and either the priests’ dresses that were kept in the belongs to the following sentence, and is placed temple (according to the Rabbins and Wits. de at the head absolutely: as for the words, which proph. in his Miscell. ss. i. p. 356, ed. 3), or the thou hast heart—because thy heart has become king’s wardrobe. The names of his ancestors soft, i.e., in despair at the punishment with .in which the sinners are threatened (cf. Deut חַסְּׂרָ ה and ֹּתוקְּׂהַ ת are written חַרְּׂ חַ ס and ֹּתִקְּׂ וָ ה

2 KINGS Page 112 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

20:3; Isa. 7:4), and thou hast humbled thyself, 2 Kings 23 when thou didst hear, etc.; therefore, behold, I 2 Kings 23:1–3. Reading of the law in the .temple, and renewal of the covenant (cf. 2 Chron ,לִהְּׂ יות לְּׂשַמָ ה .will gather thee to thy fathers, etc “that they (the city and inhabitants) may 34:29–32). Beside the priests, Josiah also become a desolation and curse.” These words, gathered together the prophets, including which are often used by the prophets, but perhaps Jeremiah and Zedekiah, that he might which are not found connected like this except carry out the solemn conclusion of the covenant in Jer. 44:22, rest upon Lev. 26 and Deut. 28, with their co-operation, and, as is evident from and show that these passages had been read to Jer. 1–11, that they might then undertake the the king out of the book of the law. task, by their impressive preaching in 2 Kings 22:20. To gather to his fathers means Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, of making the merely to let him die, and is generally applied people conscious of the earnestness of the to a peaceful death upon a sick-bed, like the covenant duties which they had so recently synonymous phrase, to lie with one’s fathers; undertaken (see Oehler in Herzog’s Cycl.). but it is also applied to a violent death by being Instead of the prophets, the Levites are slain in battle (1 Kings 22:40 and 34), so that mentioned in the Chronicles, probably only there is no difficulty in reconciling this because the Levites are mentioned along with comforting assurance with the slaying of Josiah the priests in other cases of a similar kind. he read, i.e., had it read; for the duty of ,וַיִקְּׂרָ א ,.in peace, i.e ,בְּׂשָ לום .(in battle (2 Kings 23:29 without living to witness the devastation of reading the law in the temple devolved upon Jerusalem, as is evident from the words, “thine the priests as the keepers of the law (Deut. eyes will not see,” etc. 31:9ff.). as in 2 , לעַ הָעַ מּוד Kings 23:1–30. Instead of resting content 2 Kings 23:3. The king stood 2 .see 2 Kings 11:17 וַיִכְּׂ רֹּת וגו׳ with the fact that he was promised deliverance Kings 11:14. For from the approaching judgment, Josiah did i.e., he bound himself solemnly to walk ,לָלֶכֶ ת everything that was in his power to lead the whole nation to true conversion to the Lord, after the Lord, that is to say, in his walk to and thereby avert as far as possible the follow the Lord and keep His commandments all the ,בַבְּׂרִ ית … וַיַעֲ מוד—.(threatened curse of rejection, since the Lord in (see at 1 Kings 2:3 His word had promised forgiveness and mercy people entered into the covenant (Luther and to the penitent. He therefore gathered together others); not perstitit, stood firm, continued in the elders of the nation, and went with them, the covenant (Maurer, Ges.), which would be at with the priests and prophets and the variance with Jer. 11:9, 10; 25:3ff., and other assembled people, into the temple, and there utterances of the prophets. had the book of the law read to those who were 2 Kings 23:4–20. The eradication of idolatry.— assembled, and concluded a covenant with the According to 2 Chron. 34:3–7, this had already Lord, into which the people also entered. After begun, and was simply continued and carried to this he had all the remnants of idolatry completion after the renewal of the covenant. eradicated, not only in Jerusalem and Judah, but also in Bethel and the other cities of Samaria, 2 Kings 23:4–14. In Jerusalem and Judah. V. 4. and directed the people to strengthen The king commanded the high priest and the themselves in their covenant fidelity towards other priests, and the Levites who kept the the Lord by the celebration of a solemn door, to remove from the temple everything passover. that had been made for Baal and Asherah, and ,כֹּהֲ נֵיהַמִשְּׂ נֶ ה .to burn it in the valley of Kidron sacerdotes secundi ordinis (Vulg., Luth., etc.), are

2 KINGS Page 113 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

in v. 8 Levitical priests who were devoted to the הַ כֹּהֵ ן the common priests as distinguished from worship on the high places. The primary the high priest. The Rabbins are wrong in ,הַ גָדול is disputed. In Syriac the כֹּמֶ ר signification of their explanation vicarii summi sacerdotis, according to which Thenius would alter the text word signifies the priest, in Hebrew spurious in the sense of to כָמַ ר the keepers of priests, probably from ,שֹּמְּׂ רֵ י הַסַ ף .כֹּהֲ נֵי for כֹּהֵ ן and read the threshold, are the Levites whose duty it was bring together, or complete, as the performers to watch the temple, as in 2 Kings 22:4 (cf. 1 of sacrifice, like ἕ δων, the sacrificer (Dietr.); whereas the connection suggested by Hitzig (on alles Zeug, Luth.), i.e., all) כָ ל־הַכֵלִ ים .(Chron. 23:5 Zeph.) with (Arabic) kfr, to be unbelieving, in the apparatus, consisting of altars, idols, and the opposite sense of the religious, is very far- other things, that had been provided for the fetched, and does not answer either to the worship of Baal and Astarte. Josiah had these Hebrew or the Syriac use of the word.64 The things burned, according to the law in Deut. is striking, inasmuch as if the וַיְּׂקַטֵ ר singular 7:25, and that outside Jerusalem in the fields of we ,נָתְּׂ נּו fields of imperf. c. Vav rel. were a continuation of) שַדְּׂ מות קִדְּׂ רון the Kidron valley. The Kidron) are probably to be sought for to the should expect the plural, “and who had burnt north-east of Jerusalem, where the Kidron incense,” as it is given in the Chaldee. The LXX, from which ,לְּׂקַטֵ ר valley is broader than between the city and the Vulg., and Syr. have rendered has probably arisen by a mistake in וַיְּׂקַטֵ ר Mount of Olives, and spreads out into a basin of considerable size, which is now cultivated and copying. In the following clause, “and those who contains plantations of olive and other fruit- had burnt incense to Baal, to the sun and to the trees (Rob. Pal. i. p. 405). “And he had their dust moon,” etc., Baal is mentioned as the deity carried to Bethel,” i.e., the ashes of the wooden worshipped in the sun, the moon, and the stars objects which were burned, and the dust of synonymous with ,מַ זָ לות .(see at 2 Kings 21:3) those of stone and metal which were ground to -in Job 38:32, does not mean the twenty מִ זָ רות powder, to defile the idolatrous place of worship at Bethel as the chief seat of idolatry eight naxatra, or Indian stations of the moon,65 and false worship. but the twelve signs or constellations of the 2 Kings 23:5. “He abolished the high priests.” zodiac, which were regarded by the Arabs as are also mentioned in Hos. 10:5 and Zech. menâzil, i.e., station-houses, in which the sun כְּׂמָרִ ים took up its abode in succession when 1:4: they were not idolatrous priests or describing the circuit of the year (cf. Ges. Thes. prophets of Baal, but priests whom the kings of p. 869, and Delitzsch on Job 38:32). Judah had appointed to offer incense upon the = הָאֲשֵרָ ה) altars of the high places; for they are 2 Kings 23:6. The image of Asherah Kings 21:3, 7), which Manasseh 2 ,פֶסֶ ל הא׳ distinguished from the idolatrous priests, or those who burnt incense to Baal, the sun, etc. In placed in the temple and then removed after his Hos. 10:5 the priests appointed in connection return from Babylon (2 Chron. 33:15), but which Amon had replaced, Josiah ordered to be ;כמרים with the golden calf at Bethel are called are not exclusively burned and ground to powder in the valley of כמרים and in Zeph. 1:4 the idolatrous priests, but such as did service Kidron, and the dust to be thrown upon the to ,דָקַ ק from ,וַיָדֶ ק .sometimes for Jehovah, who had been degraded graves of the common people into a Baal, and sometimes to actual idols. Now make fine, to crush, refers to the metal covering who burnt incense upon high places are of the image (see at Ex. 32:10). Asa had already כֹּהֲ נִים as also mentioned in v. 8, we must understand by had an idol burned in the Kidron valley (1 Kings 15:13), and Hezekiah had ordered the כהנים non-Levitical priests, and by the כמרים the idolatrous abominations to be taken out of the

2 KINGS Page 114 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study city and carried thither (2 Chron. 29:16); so is impossible to determine. This also applies to is the valley gate or שַ עַ ר הָעִ יר that the valley had already been defiled. There the opinion that i.e., the Joppa gate (Thenius) as being the gate of ,בְּׂ נֵי הָעָ ם was a burial-place there for common people (cf. Jer. 26:23), who had no greatest traffic; for the traffic through the graves of their own, just as at the present day northern or Ephraim gate was certainly not .at the left of every one, sc ,עַ ל־שְּׂ מאול אִ יש .the burial-ground of the Jews there lies to the less north of Kefr Silwân. Josiah ordered the ashes to going into the city. be cast upon these graves, probably in order to 2 Kings 23:9. “Only the priests of the high defile them as the graves of idolaters. places did not sacrifice, … but ate unleavened is אַ ְך the houses (places of bread in the midst of their brethren.” The ,בָֹּתֵ יהַקְּׂדֵשִ ים .Kings 23:7 2 see at 1 connected with v. 8: Josiah did not allow the הקדשים abode) of the paramours (for Kings 14:24), were probably only tents or huts, priests, whom he had brought out of the cities which were erected in the court of the temple of Judah to Jerusalem, to offer sacrifice upon the for the paramours to dwell in, and in which altar of Jehovah in the temple, i.e., to perform there were also women who wove tent-temples the sacrificial service of the law, though he did ”,for Asherah (see at 2 Kings 17:30).66 allow them “to eat that which was unleavened (בָֹּתִ ים) i.e., to eat of the sacred altar-gifts intended for 2 Kings 23:8. All the (Levitical) priests he sent the priests (Lev. 6:9, 10 and 22); only they were for from the cities of Judah to Jerusalem, and not allowed to consume this at a holy place, but defiled the altars of the high places, upon which simply in the midst of their brethren, i.e., at they had offered incense, from Geba to home in the family. They were thus placed on a Beersheba, i.e., throughout the whole kingdom. par with the priests who were rendered Geba, the present Jeba, about three hours to the incapable of service on account of a bodily north of Jerusalem (see at Josh. 18:24), was the defect (Lev. 21:17–22). northern frontier of the kingdom of Judah, and Beersheba (Bir-seba: see the Comm. on Gen. 2 Kings 23:10. He also defiled the place of 21:31) the southern frontier of Canaan. It is sacrifice in the valley of Benhinnom, for the purpose of exterminating the worship of .are Levitical priests כֹּהֲ נִים evident from v. 9 that Moloch. Moloch’s place of sacrifice is called He ordered them to come to Jerusalem, that as an object of abhorrence, or one to be ,הַ ֹּתֹֹּפֶ ת they might not carry on illegal worship any to spit, or spit ,ֹּתּוף Job 17:6), from :ֹּתֹֹּפֶ ת) longer in the cities of Judah. He then spat at commanded that the unlawful high places out (cf. Roediger in Ges. thes. p. 1497, where the should be defiled throughout the whole land, other explanations are exploded).67 On the for the purpose of suppressing this worship valley Bne or Ben-Hinnom, at the south side of altogether. He also destroyed “the altars of the Mount Zion, see at Josh. 15:8. high places at the gates, (both that) which was 2 Kings 23:11. He cleared away the horses at the entrance of the gate of Joshua the dedicated to the sun, and burned up the governor of the city, (and also that) which was chariots of the sun. As the horses were only whereas the chariots ,(וַיַשְּׂ בֵ ת) at the left of every one (entering) by the city cleared away gate.” The two clauses beginning with were burned, we have not to think of images of אֲ שֶ ר horses (Selden, de Diis Syr. ii. 8), but of living בָ מות contain a more precise description of The gate of Joshua the governor of the horses, which were given to the sun, i.e., kept .הַשְּׂ עָרִ ים for the worship of the sun. Horses were city is not mentioned anywhere else, but it was regarded as sacred to the sun by many nations, probably near to his home, i.e., near the citadel viz., the Armenians, Persians, Massagetae, of the city; but whether it was the future gate of Ethiopians, and Greeks, and were sacrificed to Gennath, as Thenius supposes, or some other, it

2 KINGS Page 115 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study it (for proofs see Bochart, Hieroz. i. lib. ii. c. 10); 2 Kings 23:12. The altars built upon the roof of and there is no doubt that the Israelites the aliyah of Ahaz were dedicated to the host of received this worship first of all from Upper heaven (Zeph. 1:5; Jer. 19:13; 32:29), and Asia, along with the actual sun-worship, certainly built by Ahaz; and inasmuch as possibly through the Assyrians. “The kings of Hezekiah had undoubtedly removed them Judah” are Ahaz, Manasseh, and Amon. These when he reformed the worship, they had been horses were hardly kept to be offered to the sun restored by Manasseh and Amon, so that by in sacrifice (Bochart and others), but, as we “the kings of Judah” we are to understand these must infer from the “chariots of the sun,” were three kings as in v. 11. We are unable to ,the upper chamber ,עֲלִ יָה used for processions in connection with the determine where the worship of the sun, probably, according to the of Ahaz really was. But since the things spoken unanimous opinion of the Rabbins, to drive and of both before and afterwards are the objects of idolatry found in the temple, this aliyah was ,מִ בֹּא בֵ ית יי׳ meet the rising sun. The definition “from the coming into the house of Jehovah,” probably also an upper room of one of the i.e., near the entrance into the temple, is buildings in the court of the temple (Thenius), they had given (placed) possibly at the gate, which Ahaz had built when“ ,נָתְּׂ נּו dependent upon the horses of the sun near the temple entrance,” he removed the outer entrance of the king into the temple (2 Kings 16:18), since, according to does אֶ ל ”.in the cell of Nethanmelech“ ,אֶ ל־לִשְּׂ כַ ת Jer. 35:4, the buildings at the gate had upper not mean at the cell, i.e., in the stable by the cell stories. The altars built by Manasseh in the two (Thenius), because the ellipsis is too harsh, and courts of the temple (see 2 Kings 21:5) Josiah the cells built in the court of the temple were and crushed them to“ ,וַיָרָ ץ מִשָ ם ,destroyed intended not merely as dwelling-places for the priests and persons engaged in the service, but powder from thence,” and cast their dust into to run, but ,רּוץ not from ,יָרֹּץ .also as a depôt for the provisions and vessels the Kidron valley to pound or crush to pieces. The ,רָ צַ ץ belonging to the temple (Neh. 10:38ff.; 1 Chron. from 9:26). One of these depôts was arranged and he ,וַיָרֶ ץ alteration proposed by Thenius into used as a stable for the sacred horses. This cell, which derived its name from Nethanmelech, a caused to run and threw = he had them removed with all speed, is not only arbitrary, of whom nothing further is ,(סָרִ יס) chamberlain but unsuitable, because it is impossible to see known, possibly the builder or founder of it, why Josiah should merely have hurried the ,the plural of clearing away of the dust of these altars ,פַרְּׂ וָרִ ים .in the Pharvars ,בַפַרְּׂ וָרִ ים was to pound or grind to powder, was ,רָ צַ ץ in 1 Chron. whereas פַרְּׂ בָ ר is no doubt identical with ,פַרְּׂ וָ ר to destroy, but really ,נָתַ ץ This was the name given to a building at not superfluous after .26:18 the western or hinder side of the outer temple- necessary, if the dust was to be thrown into the court by the gate Shalleket at the ascending in וַיָדֶ ק is substantially equivalent to וַיָרָ ץ .Kidron road, i.e., the road which led up from the city standing in the west into the court of the v. 6. temple (1 Chron. 26:16 and 18). The meaning of 2 Kings 23:13, 14. The places of sacrifice built is uncertain. Gesenius (thes. p. by Solomon upon the southern height of the ֹפרור the word Mount of Olives (see at 1 Kings 11:7) Josiah 1123) explains it by porticus, after the Persian defiled, reducing to ruins the monuments, frwâr, summer-house, an open kiosk. Böttcher cutting down the Asherah idols, and filling their (Proben, p. 347), on the other hand, supposes it places with human bones, which polluted a to be “a separate spot resembling a suburb,” place, according to Num. 19:16. V. 14 gives a ,signifies suburbia ֹפרורין because in the in v. 13 in the טִמֵ א more precise definition of loca urbi vicinia. form of a simple addition (with Vav cop.).

2 KINGS Page 116 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

mountain of destruction (not this assumption may be adduced not only the ,הַ ר־הַמַשְּׂחִ ית improbability that Nabopolassar would give Rashi and Cler.), is the ,הַמִשְּׂחָ ה = unctionis him any such permission, but still more the southern peak of the Mount of Olives, called in circumstance that at a still earlier period, even the tradition of the Church mons offensionis or before Nabopolassar became king of Babylon, and Josiah had had taxes collected of the inhabitants מַצֵ בות scandali (see at 1 Kings 11:7). For are the places of the kingdom of Israel for the repairing of the מְּׂ קומָ ם .see at 1 Kings 14:23 אֲשֵרִ ים where the Mazzeboth and Asherim stood by the temple (2 Chron. 34:9), from which we may see altars that were dedicated to Baal and Astarte, that the Israelites who were left behind in the so that by defiling them the altar-places were land were favourably disposed towards his also defiled. reforms, and were inclined to attach themselves in religious matters to Judah (just 2 Kings 23:15–20. Extermination of idolatry in as, indeed, even the Samaritans were willing Bethel and the cities of Samaria.—In order to after the captivity to take part in the building of suppress idolatry as far as possible, Josiah did the temple, Ezra 4:2ff.), which the Assyrians at not rest satisfied with the extermination of it in that time were no longer in a condition to his own kingdom Judah, but also destroyed the prevent. temples of the high places and altars and idols in the land of the former kingdom of the ten 2 Kings 23:15. “Also the altar at Bethel, the tribes, slew all the priests of the high places high place which Jeroboam had made—this that were there, and burned their bones upon altar also and the high place he destroyed.” It is as an הַבָמָ ה the high places destroyed, in order to defile the grammatically impossible to take ground. The warrant for this is not to be found, accusative of place (Thenius); it is in apposition serving to define it more precisely: the ,הַמִ זְּׂבֵחַ as Hess supposes, in the fact that Josiah, as to vassal of the king of Assyria, had a certain altar at Bethel, namely the high place; for which limited power over these districts, and may we have afterwards the altar and the high place. have looked upon them as being in a certain the altar at Bethel is הַבָמָ ה By the appositional sense his own territory, a power which the Assyrians may have allowed him the more described as an illegal place of worship. “He i.e., the buildings of this ”,בָמָ ה readily, because they were sure of his fidelity in burned the relation to Egypt. For we cannot infer that sanctuary, ground to powder everything that Josiah was a vassal of the Assyrians from the was made of stone or metal, i.e., both the altar imprisonment and release of Manasseh by the and the idol there. This is implied in what king of Assyria, nor is there any historical follows: “and burned Asherah,” i.e., a wooden evidence whatever to prove it. The only reason idol of Astarte found there, according to which that can have induced Josiah to do this, must there would no doubt be also an idol of Baal, a of stone. The golden calf, which had מַצֵבָ ה have been that after the dissolution of the kingdom of the ten tribes he regarded himself formerly been set up at Bethel, may, as Hos. as the king of the whole of the covenant-nation, 10:5, 6 seems to imply, have been removed by and availed himself of the approaching or the Assyrians, and, after the settlement of existing dissolution of the Assyrian empire to heathen colonists in the land, have been secure the friendship of the Israelites who were supplanted by idols of Baal and Astarte (cf. 2 left behind in the kingdom of the ten tribes, to Kings 17:29). reconcile them to his government, and to win 2 Kings 23:16ff. In order to desecrate this them over to his attempt to reform; and there is idolatrous site for all time, Josiah had human no necessity whatever to assume, as Thenius bones taken out of the graves that were to be does, that he asked permission to do so of the found upon the mountain, and burned upon the newly arisen ruler Nabopolassar. For against altar, whereby the prophecy uttered in the

2 KINGS Page 117 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study reign of Jeroboam by the prophet who came out Judah and Israel;” (2) that it was kept in strict of Judah concerning this idolatrous place of accordance with the precepts of the Mosaic worship was fulfilled; but he spared the tomb of book of the law, whereas in the passover that prophet himself (cf. :26–32). The instituted by Hezekiah there were necessarily mountain upon which Josiah saw the graves many points of deviation from the precepts of was a mountain at Bethel, which was visible the law, more especially in the fact that the ,a sepulchral feast had to be transferred from the first month ,צִ יּון .from the bamah destroyed monument, probably a stone erected upon the which was the legal time, to the second month, because the priests had not yet purified (so they rescued (from burning“ :וַיְּׂמַ לְּׂ טּו .grave themselves in sufficient numbers and the his bones (the bones of the prophet who had people had not yet gathered together at come from Judah), together with the bones of Jerusalem, and also that even then a number of the prophet who had come from Samaria,” i.e., the people had inevitably been allowed to eat of the old prophet who sprang from the the passover without the previous purification kingdom of the ten tribes and had come to required by the law (2 Chron. 30:2, 3, 17–20). in antithesis This is implied in the words, “for there was not בָא מִ שֹּמְּׂ רון .(Bethel (1 Kings 13:11 denotes simply descent from the holden such a passover since the days of the בָא מִיהּודָ ה to land of Samaria.68 judges and all the kings of Israel and Judah.” That this remark does not preclude the holding 2 Kings 23:19, 20. All the houses of the high of earlier passovers, as Thenius follows De places that were in the (other) cities of Samaria Wette in supposing, without taking any notice Josiah also destroyed in the same way as that at of the refutations of this opinion, was correctly Bethel, and offered up the priests of the high maintained by the earlier commentators. Thus places upon the altars, i.e., slew them upon the Clericus observes: “I should have supposed that altars on which they had offered sacrifice, and what the sacred writer meant to say was, that burned men’s bones upon them (the altars) to during the times of the kings no passover had defile them. The severity of the procedure ever been kept so strictly by every one, towards these priests of the high places, as according to all the Mosaic laws. Before this, contrasted with the manner in which the even under the pious kings, they seem to have priests of the high places in Judah were treated followed custom rather than the very words of (vv. 8 and 9), may be explained partly from the the law; and since this was the case, many fact that the Israelitish priests of the high places things were necessarily changed and were not Levitical priests, but chiefly from the neglected.” Instead of “since the days of the fact that they were really idolatrous priests. judges who judged Israel,” we find in 2 Chron. 2 Kings 23:21–23. The passover is very briefly 35:18, “since the days of Samuel the prophet,” noticed in our account, and is described as such who is well known to have closed the period of an one as had not taken place since the days of the judges. the judges. V. 21 simply mentions the 2 Kings 23:24–30. Conclusion of Josiah’s appointment of this festival on the part of the reign.—V. 24. As Josiah had the passover kept king, and the execution of the king’s command in perfect accordance with the precepts of the has to be supplied. V. 22 contains a remark law, so did he also exterminate the concerning the character of the passover. In 2 necromancers, the teraphim and all the Chron. 35:1–19 we have a very elaborate abominations of idolatry, throughout all Judah description of it. What distinguished this and Jerusalem, to set up the words of the law in passover above every other was, (1) that “all the book of the law that had been found, i.e., to the nation,” not merely Judah and Benjamin, but carry them out and bring them into force. For also the remnant of the ten tribes, took part in and see at 2 Kings 21:6. , ֹּתְּׂרָ ֹפִ ים הַ יִדְּׂ ֹעֹּנִים הָ אֹּבות it, or, as it is expressed in 2 Chron. 35:18, “all

2 KINGS Page 118 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study penates, domestic gods, which were a resumé of his labours in the reign of Josiah, worshipped as the authors of earthly prosperity and bear witness to the deep inward apostasy of the people from the Lord, not only before and גִלֻלִ ים .(and as oracular deities (see at Gen. 31:19 during Josiah’s reform of worship, but also .connected together, as in Deut ,שִקֻ צִ ים and afterwards. As the Holy One of Israel, therefore, 29:16, as a contemptuous description of idols in God could not forgive any more, but was general.—In v. 25 the account of the efforts obliged to bring upon the people and kingdom, made by Josiah to restore the true worship of after the death of Josiah, the judgment already Jehovah closes with a general verdict foretold to Manasseh himself (2 Kings 21:12ff.). concerning his true piety. See the remarks on 2 Kings 23:27. The Lord said: I will also put this point at 2 Kings 18:5. He turned to Jehovah away Judah (in the same manner as Israel: cf. 2 with all his heart, etc.: there is an evident וַ יֹּאמֶ ר .allusion here to Deut. 6:5. Compare with this Kings 17:20, 23) from my face, etc the sentence of the prophet Jeremiah expresses the divine decree, which was concerning his reign (Jer. 22:15, 16). announced to the people by the prophets, 2 Kings 23:26. Nevertheless the Lord turned especially Jeremiah and Zephaniah. not from the great fierceness of His wrath, 2 Kings 23:29, 30: compare 2 Chron. 35:20– wherewith He had burned against Judah on 24. The predicted catastrophe was brought to account of all the provocations “with which pass by the expedition of Necho the king of Manasseh had provoked Him.” With this Egypt against Assyria. “In his days (i.e., towards forms an the end of Josiah’s reign) Pharaoh Necho the אַ ְך לֹּא שָ ב sentence, in which king of Egypt went up against the king of ,אֲשֶר שָב אֶ ל יי׳ unmistakeable word-play upon or נְּׂ כֹּה) Asshur to the river Euphrates.” Necho the historian introduces the account not merely Chron. 35:20, Jer. 46:2; called Ν χ ώ by 2 ,נְּׂ כו of the end of Josiah’s reign, but also of the destruction of the kingdom of Judah. Manasseh Josephus, Manetho in Jul. Afric., and Euseb., is mentioned here and at 2 Kings 24:3 and Jer. after the LXX; and Ν κώ by Herod. ii. 158, 159, 15:4 as the person who, by his idolatry and his iv. 42, and Diod. Sic. i. 33; according to Brugsch, unrighteousness, with which he provoked God hist. d’Eg. i. p. 252, Nekåou) was, according to to anger, had brought upon Judah and Man., the sixth king of the twenty-sixth (Saitic) Jerusalem the unavoidable judgment of dynasty, the second Pharaoh of that name, the rejection. It is true that Josiah had exterminated son of Psammetichus I and grandson of Necho I; outward and gross idolatry throughout the land and, according to Herodotus, he was celebrated by his sincere conversion to the Lord, and by for a canal which he proposed to have cut in his zeal for the restoration of the lawful order to connect the Nile with the Red Sea, as worship of Jehovah, and had persuaded the well as for the circumnavigation of Africa people to enter into covenant with its God once (compare Brugsch, l.c., according to whom he more; but a thorough conversion of the people reigned from 611 to 595 B.C.). Whether “the to the Lord he had not been able to effect. For, king of Asshur” against whom Necho marched as Clericus has correctly observed, “although was the last ruler of the Assyrian empire, the king was most religious, and the people Asardanpal (Sardanapal), Saracus according to obeyed him through fear, yet for all that the the monuments (see Brandis, Ueber den Gewinn, mind of the people was not changed, as is p. 55; M. v. Niebuhr, Gesch. Assurs, pp. 110ff. and evident enough from the reproaches of 192), or the existing ruler of the Assyrian Jeremiah, Zephaniah, and other prophets, who empire which had already fallen, Nabopolassar prophesied about that time and a little after.” the king of Babylon, who put an end to the With regard to this point compare especially Assyrian monarchy in alliance with the Medes the first ten chapters of Jeremiah, which contain by the conquest and destruction of Nineveh,

2 KINGS Page 119 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study and founded the Chaldaean or Babylonian the present Mejdel, to the south-east of Acca, at empire, it is impossible to determine, because a northern source of the Kishon, and regard this the year in which Nineveh was taken cannot be as the place where the Egyptian camp was exactly decided, and all that is certain is that pitched, whereas Israel stood to the east of it, at Nineveh had fallen before the battle of the place still called Rummane, at Hadad- Carchemish in the year 606 B.C. Compare M. v. Rimmon in the valley of Megiddo, as Ewald Niebuhr, Gesch. Assurs, pp. 109ff. and 203, assumes (Gesch. iii. p. 708). But even this 204.—King Josiah went against the Egyptian, combination is overthrown by the face that and “he (Necho) slew him at Megiddo when he Rummane, which lies to the east of el Mejdel at saw him,” i.e., caught sight of him. This the distance of a mile and three-quarters extremely brief notice of the death of Josiah is (geogr.), on the southern edge of the plain of explained thus in the Chronicles: that Necho Buttauf, cannot possibly be the Hadad-Rimmon sent ambassadors to Josiah, when he was taking mentioned in Zech. 12:11, where king Josiah the field against him, with an appeal that he died after he had been wounded in the battle. would not fight against him, because his only For since Megiddo is identical with the Roman intention was to make war upon Asshur, but Legio, the present Lejun, as Robinson has that Josiah did not allow himself to be diverted proved (see at Josh. 12:21), and as is generally from his purpose, and fought a battle with admitted even by C. v. Raumer (Pal. p. 447, Necho in the valley of Megiddo, in which he was note, ed. 4), Hadad-Rimmon must be the same mortally wounded by the archers. What as the village of Rümmuni (Rummane), which is induced Josiah to oppose with force of arms the three-quarters of an hour to the south of Lejun, advance of the Egyptian to the Euphrates, where the Scottish missionaries in the year notwithstanding the assurance of Necho that he 1839 found many ancient wells and other had no wish to fight against Judah, is neither to traces of Israelitish times (V. de Velde, R. i. p. be sought for in the fact that Josiah was 267; Memoir, pp. 333, 334). But this Rummane dependent upon Babylon, which is at variance is four geographical miles distant from el with history, nor in the fact that the kingdom of Mejdel, and Mediggo three and a half, so that the Judah had taken possession of all the territory battle fought at Megiddo cannot take its name of the ancient inheritance of Israel, and Josiah from el Mejdel, which is more than three miles was endeavouring to restore all the ancient off. The Magdolon of Herodotus can only arise glory of the house of David over the from some confusion between it and Megiddo, surrounding nations (Ewald, Gesch. iii. p. 707), which was a very easy thing with the Greek but solely in Josiah’s conviction that Judah pronunciation Μ δδώ, without there being could not remain neutral in the war which had any necessity to assume that Herodotus was broken out between Egypt and Babylon, and in thinking of the Egyptian Migdol, which is called the hope that by attacking Necho, and Magdolo in the Itin. Ant. p. 171 (cf. Brugsch, frustrating his expedition to the Euphrates, he Geogr. Inschriften altägypt. Denkmäler, i. pp. might be able to avert great distress from his 261, 262). If, then, Josiah went to Megiddo in own land and kingdom.69 the plain of Esdrelom to meet the king of Egypt, This battle is also mentioned by Herodotus (ii. and fell in with him there, there can be no 159); but he calls the place where it was fought doubt that Necho came by sea to Palestine and Μά δ λ ν, i.e., neither Migdol, which was landed at Acco, as des Vignoles (Chronol. ii. p. twelve Roman miles to the south of 427) assumed.70 For if the Egyptian army had (Forbiger, Hdb. d. alten Geogr. ii. p. 695), nor the marched by land through the plain of Philistia, perfectly apocryphal Magdala or Migdal Josiah would certainly have gone thither to Zebaiah mentioned by the Talmudists (Reland, meet it, and not have allowed it to advance into Pal. p. 898, 899), as Movers supposes. We might the plain of Megiddo without fighting a battle. rather think with Ewald (Gesch. iii. p. 708) of

2 KINGS Page 120 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

2 Kings 23:30. The brief statement, “his heard of him, was taken in their pit and led by servants carried him dead from Megiddo and nose-rings to Egypt, and thus attributes to him brought him to Jerusalem,” is given with more the character of a tyrant disposed to acts of minuteness in the Chronicles: his servants took violence; and Josephus accordingly (Ant. x. 5, 2) him, the severely wounded king, by his own describes him as βὴ κ ὶ ι ὸ τὸν τ ό ν. command, from his chariot to his second 2 Kings 23:33. “Pharaoh Necho put him in ,at Riblah in the land of Hamath (וַיַאַסְּׂרֵ הּו) chariot, and drove him to Jerusalem, and he fetters died and was buried, etc. Where he died the when he had become king at Jerusalem.” In 2 Chronicles do not affirm; the occurrence of Chron. 36:3 we have, instead of this, “the king of וַיָמָ ת at Jerusalem.” The (יְּׂסִ ירֵ הּו) after the words “they brought him to Egypt deposed him Jerusalem,” does not prove that he did not die away“ ,מִמְּׂ ֹלְך till he reached Jerusalem. If we compare Zech. Masoretes have substituted as Keri 12:11, where the prophet draws a parallel from being king,” or “that he might be no longer and Thenius and ,בִמְּׂ ֹלְך between the lamentation at the death of the king,” in the place of Messiah and the lamentation of Hadad-Rimmon Bertheau prefer the former, because the LXX in the valley of Megiddo, as the deepest have τ ῦ ὴ β ιλ ύ ιν not in our text only, but lamentation of the people in the olden time, in the Chronicles also; but they ought not to with the account given in 2 Chron. 35:25 of the have appealed to the Chronicles, inasmuch as lamentation of the whole nation at the death of the LXX have not rendered the Hebrew text Josiah, there can hardly be any doubt that there, but have simply repeated the words from Josiah died on the way to Jerusalem at Hadad- the text of the book of Kings. The Keri is nothing Rimmon, the present Rummane, to the south of more than an emendation explaining the sense, Lejun (see above), and was taken to Jerusalem which the LXX have also followed. The two texts dead.—He was followed on the throne by his are not contradictory, but simply complete each ,other: for, as Clericus has correctly observed עַ ם ) younger son Jehoahaz, whom the people as in 2 Kings 21:24) anointed king, “Jehoahaz would of course be removed from ,הָאָרֶ ץ Jerusalem before he was cast into chains; and passing over the elder, Eliakim, probably there was nothing to prevent his being because they regarded him as the more able dethroned at Jerusalem before he was taken to man. Riblah.” Reigns of the Kings Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, and We are not told in what way Necho succeeded Jehoiachin. in getting Jehoahaz into his power, so as to put him in chains at Riblah. The assumption of J. D. 2 Kings 23:31–35. Reign of Jehoahaz (cf. 2 Michaelis and others, that his elder brother Chron. 36:1–4).—Jehoahaz, called significantly Eliakim, being dissatisfied with the choice of by Jeremiah (Jer. 22:11) Shallum, i.e., “to whom Jehoahaz as king, had recourse to Necho at it is requited,” reigned only three months, and Riblah, in the hope of getting possession of his did evil in the eyes of the Lord as all his fathers father’s kingdom through his instrumentality, is had done. The people (or the popular party), precluded by the face that Jehoahaz would who had preferred him to his elder brother, had certainly not have been so foolish as to appear apparently set great hopes upon him, as we before the enemy of his country at a mere may judge from Jer. 22:10–12, and seem to summons from Pharaoh, who was at Riblah, have expected that his strength and energy and allow him to depose him, when he was would serve to avert the danger which perfectly safe in Jerusalem, where the will of threatened the kingdom on the part of Necho. the people had raised him to the throne. If Ezekiel (Ezek. 19:3) compares him to a young Necho wanted to interfere with the internal lion which learned to catch the prey and affairs of the kingdom of Judah, it would never devoured men, but, as soon as the nations

2 KINGS Page 121 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study have done for him to proceed beyond Palestine though without reflecting that as a rule the .כִכָרִ ים to Syria after the victory at Megiddo, without number 10 would require the plural having first deposed Jehoahaz, who had been 2 Kings 23:34. From the words “Necho made raised to the throne at Jerusalem without any Eliakim the son of Josiah king in the place of his regard to his will. The course of events was father Josiah,” it follows that the king of Egypt therefore probably the following: After the did not acknowledge the reign of Jehoahaz, victory at Megiddo, Necho intended to continue because he had been installed by the people his march to the Euphrates; but on hearing that without his consent. “And changed his name Jehoahaz had ascended the throne, and possibly into Jehoiakim.” The alteration of the name was also in consequence of complaints which a sign of dependence. In ancient times princes Eliakim had made to him on that account, he were accustomed to give new names to the ordered a division of his army to march against persons whom they took into their service, and Jerusalem, and while the main army was masters to give new names to their slaves (cf. marching slowly to Riblah, he had Jerusalem Gen. 41:45, Ezra 5:14, Dan. 1:7, and Hävernick taken, king Jehoahaz dethroned, the land laid on the last passage).—But while these names under tribute, Eliakim appointed king as his were generally borrowed from heathen deities, vassal, and the deposed Jehoahaz brought to his Eliakim, and at a later period Mattaniah (2 headquarters at Riblah, then put into chains Kings 24:17), received genuine Israelitish and transported to Egypt; so that the statement names, Jehoiakim, i.e., “Jehovah will set up,” and in 2 Chron. 36:3, “he deposed him at Zidkiyahu, i.e., “righteousness of Jehovah;” from Jerusalem,” is to be taken quite literally, even if which we may infer that Necho and Necho did not come to Jerusalem in propriâ Nebuchadnezzar did not treat the vassal kings personâ, but simply effected this through the installed by them exactly as their slaves, but medium of one of his generals.71 Riblah has allowed them to choose the new names for been preserved in the miserable village of Rible, themselves, and simply confirmed them as a from ten to twelve hours to the S.S.W. of Hums sign of their supremacy. Eliakim altered his (Emesa) by the river el Ahsy (Orontes), in a name into Jehoiakim, i.e., El (God) into Jehovah, large fruitful plain of the northern portion of to set the allusion to the establishment of the the Bekaa, which was very well adapted to kingdom, which is implied in the name, in a still serve as the camping ground of Necho’s army more definite relation to Jehovah the covenant as well as of that of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings God, who had promised to establish the seed of 25:6, 20, 21), not only because it furnished the David (2 Sam. 7:14), possibly with an most abundant supply of food and fodder, but intentional opposition to the humiliation with also on account of its situation on the great which the royal house of David was threatened caravan-road from Palestine by Damascus, by Jeremiah and other prophets.—“But Emesa, and Hamath to Thapsacus and in 2 Kings יִקַ ח like ,לָקַ ח) Carchemish on the Euphrates (cf. Rob. Bibl. Res. Jehoahaz he had taken pp. 542–546 and 641). 24:12), and he came to Egypt and died there”— In the payment imposed upon the land by when, we are not told.—In v. 35, even before Necho, one talent of gold (c. 25,000 thalers: the account of Jehoiakim’s reign, we have fuller £3750) does not seem to bear any correct particulars respecting the payment of the proportion to 100 talents of silver (c. 250,000 tribute which Necho imposed upon the land (v. thalers, or £37,500), and consequently the LXX 33), because it was the condition on which he have 100 talents of gold, the Syr. and Arab. 10 was appointed king.—“The gold and silver but in = אַ ְך) talents; and Thenius supposes this to have been Jehoiakim gave to Pharaoh; yet .as in Lev הֶעֱרִ יְך) the original reading, and explains the reading in order to raise it) he valued the land, to give the money according to (27:8 ,(10 =) י the text from the dropping out of a

2 KINGS Page 122 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Pharaoh’s command; of every one according to to 562 B.C. With regard to his first campaign his valuation, he exacted the silver and gold of against Jerusalem, it is stated in 2 Chron. 36:6, the population of the land, to give it to Pharaoh that “against him (Jehoiakim) came up to exact tribute, is construed with a Nebuchadnezzar, and bound him with brass ,נָגַש ”.Necho to Babylon;” and in (לְּׂ הולִ יכו) placed first for chains, to carry him אִ יש בְּׂעֶרְּׂ כו double accusative, and the sake of emphasis, as an explanatory Dan. 1:1, 2, that “in the year three of the reign of Jehoiakim, Nebuchadnezzar came against .אֶ ת־עַ ם הָאָרֶ ץ apposition to Jerusalem and besieged it; and the Lord gave 2 Kings 23:36–24:7. Reign of Jehoiakim (cf. 2 Jehoiakim, the king of Judah, into his hand, and Chron. 36:5–8).—Jehoiakim reigned eleven a portion of the holy vessels, and he brought years in the spirit of his ungodly forefathers them (the vessels) into the land of Shinar, into (compare v. 37 with v. 32). Jeremiah represents the house of his god,” etc. Bertheau (on Chr.) him (Jer. 22:13ff.) as a bad prince, who admits that all three passages relate to enriched himself by the unjust oppression of Nebuchadnezzar’s first expedition against his people, “whose eyes and heart were Jehoiakim and the first taking of Jerusalem by directed upon nothing but upon gain, and upon the king of Babylon, and rejects the alteration of to lead him to Babylon” (Chr.), into“ ,לְּׂ הולִ יכו innocent blood to shed it, and upon oppression and violence to do them” (compare 2 Kings ή ν ὐτόν (LXX), for which Thenius 24:4 and Jer. 26:22, 23). Josephus therefore decides in his prejudice in favour of the LXX. He describes him as τὴν φύ ιν ἄδικ κ ὶ κ κ ῦ has also correctly observed, that the chronicler κ ὶ ήτ ὸ Θ ὸν ι ήτ ὸ νθ ώ ,ל ἐ ι ική (Ant. x. 5, 2). The town of Rumah, from intentionally selected the infinitive with which his mother sprang, is not mentioned because he did not intend to speak of the actual anywhere else, but it has been supposed to be transportation of Jehoiakim to Babylon. The identical with Aruma in the neighbourhood of words of our text, “Jehoiakim became servant to him,” i.e., subject to him, simply affirm (עֶבֶ ד) .(Shechem (Judg. 9:41 2 Kings 24 that he became tributary, not that he was led away. And in the book of Daniel also there is 2 Kings 24:1. “In his days Nebuchadnezzar, the nothing about the leading away of Jehoiakim to king of Babel, came up; and Jehoiakim became Babylon. Whilst, therefore, the three accounts subject to him three years, then he revolted agree in the main with one another, and supply Nebuchadnezzar, or one another’s deficiencies, so that we learn that ,נְּׂבֻכַדְּׂ נֶ אצַ ר ”.from him again Nebuchadrezzar (Jer. 21:2, 7; 22:25, Jehoiakim was taken prisoner at the capture of ,נְּׂ בּוכַדְּׂרֶ אצַ ר etc.), Ν β χ δ νό (LXX), Jerusalem and put in chains to be led away, but Ν β χ δ νό (Beros. in Jos. c. Ap. i. 20, that, inasmuch as he submitted to 21), Ν β κ δ ό (Strabo, xv. 1, 6), upon Nebuchadnezzar and vowed fidelity, he was not the Persian arrow-headed inscriptions at taken away, but left upon the throne as vassal Bisutun Nabhukudracara (according to Oppert, of the king of Babylon; the statement in the composed of the name of God, Nabhu (Nebo), book of Daniel concerning the time when this the Arabic kadr, power, and zar or sar, prince), event occurred, which is neither contained in and in still other forms (for the different forms our account nor in the Chronicles, presents a of the name see M. v. Niebuhr’s Gesch. pp. 41, difficulty when compared with Jer. 25 and 46:2, 42). He was the son of Nabopolassar, the and different attempts, some of them very founder of the Chaldaean monarchy, and constrained, have been made to remove it. reigned, according to Berosus (Jos. l.c.), Alex. According to Jer. 46:2, Nebuchadnezzar smote Polyh. (Eusebii Chron. arm. i. pp. 44, 45), and Necho the king of Egypt at Carchemish, on the the Canon of Ptol., forty-three years, from 605 Euphrates, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. This year is not only called the first year of

2 KINGS Page 123 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Nebuchadnezzar in Jer. 25:1, but is represented hostages, one of whom was Daniel (2 Chron. by the prophet as the turning-point of the 36:7; Dan. 1:2ff.). The fast mentioned in Jer. kingdom of Judah by the announcement that 36:9, which took place in the fifth year of the Lord would bring His servant Jehoiakim, cannot be adduced in disproof of Nebuchadnezzar upon Judah and its this; for extraordinary fast-days were not only inhabitants, and also upon all the nations appointed for the purpose of averting great dwelling round about, that he would devastate threatening dangers, but also after severe Judah, and that these nations would serve the calamities which had fallen upon the land or king of Babylon seventy years (Jer. 25:9–11). people, to expiate His wrath by humiliation Consequently not only the defeat of Necho at before God, and to invoke the divine Carchemish, but also the coming of compassion to remove the judgment that had Nebuchadnezzar to Judah, fell in the fourth year fallen upon them. The objection, that the of Jehoiakim, and not in the third. To remove godless king would hardly have thought of this discrepancy, some have proposed that the renewing the remembrance of a divine time mentioned, “in the fourth year of judgment by a day of repentance and prayer, Jehoiakim” (Jer. 46:2), should be understood as but would rather have desired to avoid relating, not to the year of the battle at everything that could make the people despair, Carchemish, but to the time of the prophecy of falls to the ground, with the erroneous Jeremiah against Egypt contained in Jer. 46, and assumption upon which it is founded, that by that Jer. 25 should also be explained as follows, the fast-day Jehoiakim simply intended to that in this chapter the prophet is not renew the remembrance of the judgment which announcing the first capture of Jerusalem by had burst upon Jerusalem, whereas he rather Nebuchadnezzar, but is proclaiming a year after desired by outward humiliation before God to this the destruction of Jerusalem and the secure the help of God to enable him to throw devastation of the whole land, or a total off the Chaldaean yoke, and arouse in the judgment upon Jerusalem and the rest of the people a religious enthusiasm for war against nations mentioned there (M. v. Nieb. Gesch. pp. their oppressors.—Further information 86, 87, 371). But this explanation is founded concerning this first expedition of upon the erroneous assumption, that Jer. 46:3– Nebuchadnezzar is supplied by the account of 12 does not contain a prediction of the Berosus, which Josephus (Ant. x. 11, and c. Ap. i. catastrophe awaiting Egypt, but a picture of 19) has preserved from the third book of his what has already taken place there; and it is Chaldaean history, namely, that when only in a very forced manner that it can be Nabopolassar received intelligence of the revolt brought into harmony with the contents of Jer. of the satrap whom he had placed over Egypt, 25.72 Coele-Syria, and Phoenicia, because he was no We must rather take “the year three of the reign longer able on account of age to bear the of Jehoiakim” (Dan. 1:1) as the extreme hardships of war, he placed a portion of his terminus a quo of Nebuchadnezzar’s coming, army in the hands of his youthful son i.e., must understand the statement thus: that in Nebuchadnezzar and sent him against the the year referred to Nebuchadnezzar satrap. Nebuchadnezzar defeated him in battle, commenced the expedition against Judah, and and established his power over that country smote Necho at Carchemish at the again. In the meantime Nabopolassar fell sick commencement of the fourth year of Jehoiakim and died in Babylon; and as soon as the tidings (Jer. 46:2), and then, following up this victory, reached Nebuchadnezzar, he hastened through took Jerusalem in the same year, and made the desert to Babylon with a small number of Jehoiakim tributary, and at the same time attendants, and directed his army to follow carried off to Babylon a portion of the sacred slowly after regulating the affairs of Egypt and vessels, and some young men of royal blood as the rest of the country, and to bring with it the

2 KINGS Page 124 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study prisoners from the Jews, Syrians, Phoenicians, Jehovah, which He spake by His servants the and Egyptian tribes, and with the heavily- prophets,” viz., Isaiah, Micah, Habakkuk, armed troops. So much, at any rate, is evident Jeremiah, and others. only according to“ :אְַך עַ ל־פִ י יי׳ .from this account, after deducting the motive 2 Kings 24:3, 4 assigned for the war, which is given from a the mouth (command) of Jehovah did this take Chaldaean point of view, and may be taken as a place against Judah,” i.e., for no other reason historical fact, that even before his father’s than because the Lord had determined to put death Nebuchadnezzar had not only smitten the away Judah from before His face because of Egyptians, but had also conquered Judah and Manasseh’s sins (cf. 2 Kings 21:12–16, and penetrated to the borders of Egypt. And there is 23:27). “And Jehovah would not forgive,” even no discrepancy between the statement of if the greatest intercessors, Moses and Samuel, Berosus, that Nebuchadnezzar was not yet king, had come before Him (Jer. 15:1ff.), because the and the fact that in the biblical books he is measure of the sins was full, so that God was called king proleptically, because he marched obliged to punish according to His holy against Judah with kingly authority. from the בְּׂ righteousness. We must repeat 2 Kings 24:2–7. To punish Jehoiakim’s .דַ ם הַ נָקִ י rebellion, Jehovah sent hosts of Chaldaeans, preceding words before Aramaeans, Moabites, and Ammonites against 2 Kings 24:6. “Jehoiakim lay down to (fell asleep with) his fathers, and Jehoiachin his son .(לְּׂהַאֲבִ ידו) him and against Judah to destroy it Nebuchadnezzar was probably too much became king in his stead.” That this statement is occupied with other matters relating to his not in contradiction to the prophecies of Jer. kingdom, during the earliest years of his reign 22:19: “Jehoiakim shall be buried like an ass, after his father’s death, to be able to proceed at carried away and cast out far away from the once against Jehoiakim and punish him for his gates of Jerusalem,” and 36:30: “no son of his revolt.73 He may also have thought it a matter of shall sit upon the throne of David, and his body too little importance for him to go himself, as shall lie exposed to the heat by day and to the there was not much reason to be afraid of Egypt cold by night,” is now generally admitted, as it since its first defeat (cf. M. v. Niebuhr, p. 375). has already been by J. D. Michaelis and Winer. He therefore merely sent such troops against But the solution proposed by Michaelis, Winer, him as were in the neighbourhood of Judah at and M. v. Niebuhr (Gesch. p. 376) is not the time. The tribes mentioned along with the sufficient, namely, that at the conquest of Chaldaeans were probably all subject to Jerusalem, which took place three months after Nebuchadnezzar, so that they attacked Judah at the death of Jehoiakim, his bones were taken his command in combination with the out of the grave, either by the victors out of Chaldaean tribes left upon the frontier. How revenge for his rebellion, or by the fury of the much they effected is not distinctly stated; but people, and cast out before the city gate; for it is evident that they were not able to take Jeremiah expressly predicts that he shall have Jerusalem, from the fact that after the death of no funeral and no burial whatever. We must Jehoiakim his son was able to ascend the throne therefore assume that he was slain in a battle (v. 6).—The sending of these troops is ascribed fought with the troops sent against him, and to Jehovah, who, as the supreme controller of was not buried at all; an assumption which is the fate of the covenant-nation, punished not at variance with the words, “he laid himself Jehoiakim for his rebellion. For, after the Lord down to his fathers,” since this formula does had given Judah into the hands of the not necessarily indicate a peaceful death by Chaldaeans as a punishment for its apostasy sickness, but is also applied to king Ahab, who from Him, all revolt from them was rebellion was slain in battle (1 Kings 22:40, cf. 2 Kings against the Lord. “According to the word of 22:20).74—And even though his son Jehoiachin

2 KINGS Page 125 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study ascended the throne after his father’s death and 2 Kings 24:10. “At that time,” i.e., when maintained his position for three months Jehoiachin had come to the throne, or, against the Chaldaeans, until at length he fell according to 2 Chron. 36:10, “at the turn of the into their hands and was carried away alive to year,” i.e., in the spring (see at 1 Kings 20:22), Babylon, the prophet might very truly describe the servants (generals) of Nebuchadnezzar this short reign as not sitting upon the throne of marched against Jerusalem, and the city was ,is substantially correct עָ לּו David (cf. Graf on Jer. 22:19).—To the death of besieged. The Keri Jehoiakim there is appended the notice in v. 7, but is an unnecessary alteration of the Chethîb that the king of Egypt did not go out of his own since the verb when it precedes the subject ,עָלָ ה land any more, because the king of Babylon had taken away everything that had belonged to the is not unfrequently used in the singular, though king of Egypt, from the to the before a plural subject (cf. Ewald, § 316, a.). The of v. 2. As גְּׂדּודִ ים are different from the עַבְּׂדֵ י נב׳ river Euphrates. The purpose of this notice is to indicate, on the one hand, what attitude Necho, the troops sent against Jehoiakim had not been whose march to the Euphrates was previously able to conquer Judah, especially Jerusalem, mentioned, had assumed on the conquest of Nebuchadnezzar sent his generals with an army Judah by the Chaldaeans, and on the other against Jerusalem, to besiege the city and take hand, that under these circumstances a it. successful resistance to the Chaldaeans on the 2 Kings 24:11. During the siege he came part of Judah was not for a moment to be himself to punish Jehoiakim’s revolt in the thought of. person of his successor. 2 Kings 24:8–17 (cf. 2 Chron. 36:9 and 10). 2 Kings 24:12. Then Jehoiachin went out to the ,Ezek. 1:2), i.e., he king of Babylon to yield himself up to him) יויָכִ ין or יְּׂהויָכִ ין ,Jehoiachin in 1 Chron. because he perceived the impossibility of יְּׂכָ נְּׂיָהּו whom Jehovah fortifies, called holding the city any longer against the 3:16, 17, and Jer. 27:20; 28:4, etc., and in besiegers, and probably hoped to secure the כָ נְּׂיָהּו Jer. 22:24, 28; 37:1, probably according to the favour of Nebuchadnezzar, and perhaps to popular twisting and contraction of the name retain the throne as his vassal by a voluntary Jehoiachin, was eighteen years old when he submission. Nebuchadnezzar, however, did not ascended the throne (the eight years of the show favour any more, as he had done to Chronicles are a slip of the pen), and reigned Jehoiakim at the first taking of Jerusalem, but three months, or, according to the more precise treated Jehoiachin as a rebel, made him statement of the Chronicles, three months and prisoner, and led him away to Babylon, along ten days, in the spirit of his father. Ezekiel with his mother, his wives (v. 15), his princes (Ezek. 19:5–7) describes him not only as a and his chamberlains, as Jeremiah had young lion, who learned to prey and devoured prophesied (Jer. 22:24ff.), in the eighth year of men, like Jehoahaz, but also affirms of him that his (Nebuchadnezzar’s) reign. The reference to he knew their (the deceased men’s) widows, the king’s mother in vv. 12 and 15 is not to be i.e., ravished them, and destroyed their cities,— explained on the ground that she still acted as that is to say, he did not confine his deeds of guardian over the king, who was not yet of age violence to individuals, but extended them to all (J. D. Mich.), but from the influential position הַ גְּׂבִ ירָ ה that was left behind by those whom he had which she occupied in the kingdom as murdered, viz., to their families and (Jer. 29:2: see at 1 Kings 14:21). The eighth year possessions; and nothing is affirmed in Jer. of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar is reckoned 22:24 and 28 respecting his character at from the time when his father had transferred variance with this. His mother Nehushta was a to him the chief command over the army to daughter of Elnathan, a ruler of the people, or make war upon Necho, according to which his prince, from Jerusalem (Jer. 26:22; 36:12, 25).

2 KINGS Page 126 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study first year coincides with the fourth year of a general form, according to its sum-total, as Jehoiakim (Jer. 25:1). As Nebuchadnezzar acted 10,000; and then in vv. 15 and 16 the details as king, so far as the Jews were concerned, from are more minutely specified. “All Jerusalem” is that time forward, although he conducted the the whole of the population of Jerusalem, which war by command of his father, this is always is first of all divided into two leading classes, reckoned as the point of time at which his reign and then more precisely defined by the clause, commenced, both in our books and also in “nothing was left except the common people,” Jeremiah (cf. 2 Kings 25:8; Jer. 32:1). According and reduced to the cream of the citizens. The to this calculation, his reign lasted forty-four king, queen-mother, and king’s wives being years, viz., the eight years of Jehoiakim and the passed over and mentioned for the first time in thirty-six years of Jehoiachin’s imprisonment, the special list in v. 15, there are noticed here who form the first of ,כֹּל גִ בורֵ י הַחַ יִל and כָ ל־הַשָרִ ים .as is evident from 2 Kings 25:27 ,are meant שָרִ ים Kings 24:13. Nebuchadnezzar thereupon, the leading classes. By the 2 that is to say, when he had forced his way into according to v. 15, the , chamberlains, i.e., סָרִ יסִ ים the city, plundered the treasures of the temple and palace, and broke the gold off the vessels the officials of the king’s court in general, and the mighty of the land”) all the“) אּולֵ י הָאָרֶ ץ which Solomon had made in the temple of by to cut off, break off, as in 2 Kings heads of the tribes and families of the nation ,קִצֵ ץ .Jehovah 16:17, i.e., to bear off the gold plates. that were found in Jerusalem; and under the Nebuchadnezzar had already taken a portion of last the priests and prophets, who were also the golden vessels of the temple away with him carried away according to Jer. 29:1, with at the first taking of Jerusalem in the fourth Ezekiel among them (Ezek. 1:1), are included as גִ בורֵ י הַחַ יִל year of Jehoiakim, and had placed them in the the spiritual heads of the people. The in v. 16; their number was אַ נְּׂשֵ י הַחַ יִל temple of his god at Babylon (2 Chron. 36:7; are called Dan. 1:2). They were no doubt the smaller 7000. The persons intended are not warriors, vessels of solid gold,—basins, scoops, goblets, but men of property, as in 2 Kings 15:20. The knives, tongs, etc.,—which Cyrus delivered up second class of those who ere carried away again to the Jews on their return to their native consisted of , all the workers in stone, כָ ל־הֶחָרָ ש land (Ezra 1:7ff.). This time he took the gold off the larger vessels, which were simply plated metal, and wood, that is to say, masons, smiths, ,the locksmiths ,הַמַסְּׂ גֵ ר with that metal, such as the altar of burnt- and carpenters; and offering, the table of shew-bread and ark of the including probably not actual locksmiths only, covenant, and carried it away as booty, so that but makers of weapons also. There is no need on the third conquest of Jerusalem, in the time for any serious refutation of the marvellous .by Hitzig (on Jer מַסְּׂ גֵ ר of Zedekiah, beside a few gold and silver basins explanation given of and scoops (2 Kings 25:15) there were only the and ,גֵ ר and מַ ס who derives it from ,(24:1 large brazen vessels of the court remaining (2 Kings 25:13–17; Jer. 27:18ff.). The words, “as supposes it to be an epithet applied to the Jehovah had spoken,” refer to 2 Kings 20:17 and remnant of the Canaanites, who had been made Isa. 39:6, and to the sayings of other prophets, into tributary labourers, although it has been such as Jer. 15:13; 17:3, etc. adopted by Thenius and Graf, who make them דַ לַ ת .Kings 24:14–16. Beside these treasures, he into artisans of the foreign socagers 2 Kings 25:12), the poor 2) דַ לַ ת־הָאָרֶ ץ = עַ ם־הָאָרֶ ץ carried away captive to Babylon the cream of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, not only the most people of the land, i.e., the lower portion of the affluent, but, as is evident from Jer. 24, the best population of Jerusalem, from whom portion in a moral respect. In v. 14 the number Nebuchadnezzar did not fear any rebellion, of those who were carried off is simply given in because they possessed nothing (Jer. 39:10),

2 KINGS Page 127 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study i.e., neither property (money nor other 36:11–13).—Zedekiah’s mother Hamital, possessions), nor strength and ability to daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah, was also the organize a revolt. The antithesis to these mother of Jehoahaz (2 Kings 23:31); the strong or consequently he was his own brother and the ,גִ בורִ ים ֹעֹּשֵ י מִ לְּׂחָמָ ה formed by the powerful men, who were in a condition to half-brother of Jehoiakim, whose mother was originate and carry on a war; for this category named Zebidah (2 Kings 23:36). His reign includes all who were carried away, not merely lasted eleven years, and in its attitude towards the thousand workmen, but also the seven the Lord exactly resembled that of his brother Jehoiakim, except that Zedekiah does not and the king’s officers and ,אַ נְּׂשֵ י הַחַ יִל thousand appear to have possessed so much energy for the chiefs of the nation, whose number that which was evil. According to Jer. 38:5 and amounted to two thousand, since the total 24ff., he was weak in character, and completely number of the exiles was then thousand. There governed by the great men of his kingdom, is no special allusion to warriors or military, having no power or courage whatever to offer because in the struggle for the rescue of the resistance. but, like them, he did not hearken to capital and the kingdom from destruction every the words of the Lord through Jeremiah (Jer. man who could bear arms performed military 37:2), or, as it is expressed in 2 Chron. 36:12, service, so that the distinction between “he did not humble himself before Jeremiah the warriors and non-warriors was swept away, prophet, who spake to him out of the mouth of and the actual warriors are swallowed up in the the Lord.” ten thousand. Babel is the country of Babylonia, 2 Kings 24:20. “For because of the wrath of the or rather the Babylonian empire. Lord it happened concerning Judah and 2 Kings 24:17. Over the lower classes of the is to be taken הָ יְּׂתָ ה Jerusalem.” The subject to people who had been left behind Nebuchadnezzar placed the paternal uncle of from what precedes, viz., Zedekiah’s doing evil, the king, who had been led away, viz., or that such a God-resisting man as Zedekiah Mattaniah, and made him king under the name became king. “Not that it was of God that of Zedekiah. He was the youngest son of Josiah Zedekiah was wicked, but that Zedekiah, a man (Jer. 1:3; 37:1); was only ten years old when his (if we believe Brentius, in loc.) simple, father died, and twenty-one years old when he dependent upon counsellors, yet at the same ascended the throne; and as the uncle of time despising the word of God and impenitent Jehoiachin, who being only a youth of eighteen (2 Chron. 36:12, 13), became king, so as to be could not have a son capable of reigning, had the cause of Jerusalem’s destruction” (Seb. cf. v. 3, and 2 Kings עַ דהִשְּׂ לִ יכו וגו׳ his Schm.). On ,דֹּדֹּו the first claim to the throne. Instead of his 17:18, 23. “And Zedekiah rebelled against the ,ָאחִיו uncle, we have in 2 Chron. 36:10 brother, i.e., his nearest relation. On the change king of Babel,” who, according to 2 Chron. in the name see at 2 Kings 23:34. The name 36:13, had made him swear by God, to whom he i.e., he who has Jehovah’s righteousness, was bound by oath to render fealty. This breach ,צִדְקִיָּהּו was probably chosen by Mattaniah in the hope of covenant and frivolous violation of his oath that through him or in his reign the Lord would Ezekiel also condemns in sharp words (Ezek. create the righteousness promised to His 17:13ff.), as a grievous sin against the Lord. people. Zedekiah also appears from the very first to have had no intention of keeping the oath of Reign of Zedekiah, Destruction of Jerusalem and fealty which he took to the king of Babel with the Kingdom of Judah, and Fate of the People very great uprightness. For only a short time 75 Left Behind, and of King Jehoiachin. after he was installed as king he despatched an 2 Kings 24:18–20. Length and spirit of embassy to Babel (Jer. 29:3), which, judging Zedekiah’s reign (cf. Jer. 52:1–3, and 2 Chron. from the contents of the letter to the exiles that

2 KINGS Page 128 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

Jeremiah gave to the ambassadors to take with 17:17 and 21:27), but a watch, and that in a them, can hardly have been sent with any other collective sense: watch-towers or siege-towers object that to obtain from the king of Babel the (cf. Ges. thes. p. 330, and Hävernick on Ezek. return of those who had been carried away. 4:2). Then in the fourth year of his reign he himself 2 Kings 25:2. “And the city was besieged till made a journey to Babel (Jer. 41:59), evidently the eleventh year of king Zedekiah,” in which to investigate the circumstances upon the spot, the northern wall of the city was broken and to ensure the king of Babel of his fidelity. through on the ninth day of the fourth month And in the fifth month of the same year, (v. 3). That Jerusalem could sustain a siege of probably after his return from Babel, this duration, namely eighteen months, shows ambassadors of the Moabites, Ammonites, what the strength of the fortifications must Tyrians, and Sidonians came to Jerusalem to have been. Moreover the siege was interrupted make an alliance with him for throwing off the for a short time, when the approach of the Chaldaean yoke (Jer. 27:3). Zedekiah also had Egyptian king Hophra compelled the recourse to Egypt, where the enterprising Chaldaeans to march to meet him and drive him Pharaoh Hophra (Apries) had ascended the back, which they appear to have succeeded in throne; and then, in spite of the warnings of doing without a battle (cf. Jer. 37:5ff., Ezek. Jeremiah, trusting to the help of Egypt, revolted 17:7). from the king of Babel, probably at a time when 2 Kings 25:3, 4. Trusting partly to the help of Nebuchadnezzar (according to the the Egyptians and partly to the strength of combinations of M. v. Nieb., which are open to Jerusalem, Zedekiah paid no attention to the question however) was engaged in a war with repeated entreaties of Jeremiah, that he would Media. save himself with his capital and people from 2 Kings 25 the destruction which was otherwise inevitable, 2 Kings 25:1–7. Siege and conquest of by submitting, to the Chaldaeans (cf. Jer. 21:37 Jerusalem; Zedekiah taken prisoner and led away and 38), but allowed things to reach their to Babel (cf. Jer. 52:4–11 and 39:1–7).—V. 1. In worst, until the famine became so intense, that the ninth year of the reign of Zedekiah, on the inhuman horrors were perpetrated (cf. Lam. tenth day of the tenth month, Nebuchadnezzar 2:20, 21; 4:9, 10), and eventually a breach was marched with all his forces against Jerusalem made in the city wall on the ninth day of the and commenced the siege (cf. Jer. 39:1), after he fourth month. The statement of the month is בַחֹּדֶ ש had taken all the rest of the fortified cities of the omitted in our text, where the words Jer. 52:6, cf. 39:2) have fallen out before) הָרְּׂ בִיעִ י ,land, with the exception of Lachish and Azekah which were besieged at the same time as v. 3, commencement) through the) בְּׂתִשְּׂ עָ ה Jerusalem (Jer. 34:7). On the very same day the commencement of the siege of Jerusalem was oversight of a copyist. The overwhelming revealed to the prophet Ezekiel in his exile extent of the famine is mentioned, not “because (Ezek. 24:1). “And they built against it (the city) the people were thereby rendered quite unfit to offer any further resistance” (Seb. Schm.), but which only ,דָ יֵק ”.siege-towers round about as a proof of the truth of the prophetic occurs here and in Jeremiah (Jer. 52:4) and announcements (Lev. 26:29; Deut. 28:53–57; Ezekiel (Ezek. 4:2; 17:17; 21:27; 26:8), does not are the עַ ם הָאָרֶ ץ .(Jer. 15:2; 27:13; Ezek. 4:16, 17 mean either a line of circumvallation (J. D. Mich., Hitzig), or the outermost enclosure common people in Jerusalem, or the citizens of constructed of palisades (Thenius, whose the capital. From the more minute account of the entrance of the enemy into the city in Jer. is always mentioned as the דָ יֵק assertion that 39:3–5 we learn that the Chaldaeans made a first work of the besiegers is refuted by Ezek. breach in the northern or outer wall of the

2 KINGS Page 129 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study lower city, i.e., the second wall, built by immediately discovered. The Chaldaean army Hezekiah and Manasseh (2 Chron. 32:5; 33:14), pursued him, and overtook him in the steppes ,of Jericho, whilst his own army was dispersed ,הַמִשְּׂ נֶ ה) and forced their way into the lower city 22:14), so that their generals took their stand at all of which Ezekiel had foreseen in the Spirit are that portion of the עַרְּׂ בות יְּׂרֵ חו .(.the gate of the centre, which was in the wall (Ezek. 12:3ff that separated the lower city from the upper plain of the Jordan which formed the country city upon Zion, and formed the passage from round Jericho (see at Josh. 4:13). the one to the other. When Zedekiah saw them 2 Kings 25:6. Zedekiah having been seized by here, he fled by night with the soldiers out of the Chaldaeans, was taken to the king of Babel the city, through the gate between the two in the Chaldaean headquarters at Riblah (see at walls at or above the king’s garden, on the road 2 Kings 23:33), and was there put upon his to the plain of the Jordan, while the Chaldaeans trial. According to v. 1, Nebuchadnezzar had were round about the city. In v. 4 a faulty text commenced the siege of Jerusalem in person; but afterwards, possibly not till after the וְּׂכָל־אַ נְּׂשֵ י has come down to us. In the clause is omitted, if not even Egyptians who came to relieve the besieged city יִבְּׂרְּׂ חּו the verb הַמִ לְּׂחָמָ ה had been repulsed, he transferred the more, namely , “fled and went continuance of the siege, which was a יִבְּׂרְּׂ חּווַיֵצְּׂ אּו מִ ן הָעִ יר out of the city.” And if we compare Jer. 39:4, it is prolonged one, to his generals, and retired to still more has Riblah, to conduct the operations of the whole וְּׂכָל־אַ נְּׂשֵ י הם׳ evident that before to ,דִבֶר מִשְּׂ פָט אֶ ת־ֹפל׳ .which must have campaign from thence ,הַמֶ לֶ ְך dropped out, not merely stood in the text, since according to v. 5 the king conduct judicial proceedings with any one, i.e., was among the fugitives; but most probably the to hear and judge him. For this Jeremiah not only in 2 ,מִשְּׂ פָטִ ים constantly uses the plural ,וַיְּׂהִי רכַאֲשֶ רָאָם צִדְּׂ קִ יָהּומֶ לֶ ְך יְּׂהּודָ ה whole clause have no real Kings 52:9 and 39:5, but also in 2 Kings 1:16 וְּׂכָל־אַ נְּׂשֵ י הם׳ since the words and 4:12. connection with what precedes, and cannot form a circumstantial clause so far as the sense 2 Kings 25:7. The punishment pronounced is concerned. The “gate between the two walls, upon Zedekiah was the merited reward of the the king’s garden,” breach of his oath, and his hardening himself (עַ ל) which (was) at or over against the counsel of the Lord which was was a gate at the mouth of the Tyropoeon, that announced to him by Jeremiah during the siege, is to say, at the south-eastern corner of the city that he should save not only his own life, but of Zion; for, according to Neh. 3:15, the king’s also Jerusalem from destruction, by a voluntary garden was at the pool of Siloah, i.e., at the submission to the Chaldaeans, whereas by mouth of the Tyropoeon (see Rob. Pal. ii. 142). obstinate resistance he would bring an By this defile, therefore, the approach to the ignominious destruction upon himself, his city was barred by a double wall, the inner one family, the city, and the whole people (Jer. running from Zion to the Ophel, whilst the 38:17ff., 32:5; 34:3ff.). His sons, who, though outer one, at some distance off, connected the not mentioned in v. 4, had fled with him and Zion wall with the outer surrounding wall of had been taken, and (according to Jer. 52:10 the Ophel, and most probably enclosed the and 39:6) all the nobles (princes) of Judah, sc. which those who had fled with the king, were slain ,הַמֶ לֶ ְך is וַיֵלֶ ְך king’s garden. The subject to ,is before his eyes. He himself was then blinded הָעֲרָ בָ ה .וְּׂכָל־אַ נְּׂשֵ י הם׳ has dropped out before the lowland valley on both sides of the Jordan and led away to Babel, chained with double (see at Deut. 1:1). chains of brass, and kept a prisoner there till his death (Jer. 52:11); so that, as Ezekiel (Ezek. 2 Kings 25:5. As the Chaldaeans were 12:13) had prophesied, he came to Babel, but encamped around the city, the flight was

2 KINGS Page 130 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study did not see the land, and died there. Blinding by merely in remembrance of the Chaldaean pricking out the eyes was a common destruction of Jerusalem, but of the Roman also, punishment for princes among the Babylonians and of three other calamities which had and Persians (cf. Herod. vii. 18, and Brisson, de befallen the nation (see the statement of the .double Gemara on this subject in Lightfoot, Opp. ii. p ,נְּׂחֻשְֹּּׂתַ יִם .(region Pers. princip. p. 589 brazen chains, are brazen fetters for the hands 139, ed. Leusden, and in Köhler on Zech. 7:3), and feet. Samson was treated in the same from which we see that the Gemarists in the manner by the Philistines (Judg. 16:21). most unhistorical manner grouped together different calamitous events in one single day. 2 Kings 25:8–21. Destruction of Jerusalem and The nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar the temple. The people carried away to Babel (cf. corresponds to the eleventh of Zedekiah (see at Jer. 52:12–27, and 39:8–10).—In this section 2 Kings 24:12). Nebuzaradan is not mentioned we have first a general account of the in Jer. 39:3 among the Chaldaean generals who destruction of the temple and city (vv. 8–10), forced their way into the city, so that he must and of the carrying away of the people (vv. 11 have been ordered to Jerusalem by and 12), and then a more particular description Nebuchadnezzar after the taking of the city and of what was done with the metal vessels of the the condemnation of Zedekiah, to carry out the temple (vv. 13–17), and how the spiritual and destruction of the city, the carrying away of the secular leaders of the people who had been people, and the appointment of a deputy- taken prisoners were treated (vv. 18–21). governor over those who were left behind in 2 Kings 25:8–10. The destruction of Jerusalem, the land. This explains in a very simple manner by the burning of the temple, of the king’s how a month could intervene between their palace, and of all the larger buildings, and by forcing their way into the city, at all events into throwing down the walls, was effected by the lower city, and the burning of it to the Nebuzaradan, the chief of the body-guard of ground, without there being any necessity to Nebuchadnezzar, on the seventh day of the fifth assume, with Thenius, that the city of Zion held month in the nineteenth year of the reign of out for a month, which is by no means probable, Nebuchadnezzar. Instead of the seventh day we for the simple reason that the fighting men had have the tenth in Jer. 52:12. This difference fled with Zedekiah and had been scattered in ;in Gen. 37:36 שַ ר הַטַבָחִ ים = רַ ב־טַבָחִ ים .might be reconciled, as proposed by earlier their flight commentators, on the assumption that the 39:1, was with the Babylonians, as with the burning of the city lasted several days, Egyptians, the chief of the king’s body-guard, commencing on the seventh and ending on the whose duty it was to execute the sentences of tenth. But since there are similar differences answers to הַטַבָחִ ים .(met with afterwards (vv. 17 and 19) in the death (see at Gen. 37:36 of the Israelites (2 Sam. 8:18, etc.). In הַכְּׂרֵתִ י statement of numbers, which can only be the עֶבֶ ד instead of עָמַ דלִֹפְּׂ נֵי מֶ לֶ ְך accounted for from the substitution of similar Jer. 52:12 we have numeral letters, we must assume that there is a which is rarely omitted in ,אֲשֶ ר without the ,מֶ לֶ ְך change of this kind here. Which of the two dates he came :יְּׂרּושָ לִָ ם instead of בִ ירּושָ לִָ ם is the correct one it is impossible to determine. prose, and The circumstance that the later Jews kept the into Jerusalem, not he forced a way into the real ninth as a fast-day cannot be regarded as Jerusalem (Thenius). The meaning is not decisive evidence in favour of the date given in altered by these two variations. Jeremiah, as Thenius supposes; for in Zech. 7:3 2 Kings 25:9. By the words, “every great and 8:19 the fasting of the fifth month is house,” is more minutely defined: אֵ תכָ ל־בָֹּתֵ י יר׳ mentioned, but no day is given; and though in the Talmudic times the ninth day of the month not all the houses to the very last, but simply all began to be kept as a fast-day, this was not the large houses he burned to the very last,

2 KINGS Page 131 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study

the rest of the population of the יֶתֶ ר הֶהָ מון together with the temple and the royal palaces. and The victors used one portion of the dwelling- land outside Jerusalem. The latter is probably houses for their stay in Jerusalem. He then had the preferable view, not only because full all the walls of the city destroyed. In Jeremiah ,in the first clause בָעִ יר justice is thereby done to as not being required ,חומֹּת is omitted before כֹּל but also because it is evident from the exception mentioned in v. 12 that the ,רַב טַבָחִ ים before אֵ ת for the sense; and also the which is indispensable to the sense, and has deportation was not confined to the inhabitants fallen out through a copyist’s oversight. of Jerusalem, but extended to the population of 2 Kings 25:11, 12. The rest of the people he led the whole land. The “poor people,” whom he away, both those who had been left behind in allowed to remain in the land as vine-dressers the city and the deserters who had gone over to and husbandmen, were the common people, or the Chaldaeans, and the remnant of the people without property, not merely in דַ לַ ת .Jerusalem, but throughout the whole land יֶתֶ ר for which we have ,יֶתֶ ר הֶהָ מון .multitude Kings 24:14). Instead of 2) דַ לַת עַ ם־הָאָרֶ ץ = הָאָרֶ ץ in Jer. 52:15, has been interpreted in הָאָ מון the plural used :מִדַ לות we have in Jeremiah מִדַ לַ ת signifies an artist or אָ מון various ways. As has just in an abstract sense, “the poverty,” i.e., the יֶתֶ ר הָעָ ם artificer in Prov. 8:30, and lower people, “the poor who had nothing” (Jer. preceded it, we might be disposed to give the ,גּוב from לְּׂגָבִ ים Instead of the Chethîb .(39:10 as Hitzig and ,הָאָ מון preference to the reading secuit, aravit, the Keri has from , in the יָגַ ב לְּׂ יֹּגְּׂבִ ים Graf have done, and understand by it the .same sense, after Jer. 52:16 הֶחָ רָ ש remnant of the artisans, who were called 2 Kings 25:13–17. The brazen vessels of the in 2 Kings 24:14, 16. But this view is וְּׂהַמַסְּׂ גֵ ר temple were broken in pieces, and the brass, ,and smaller vessels of brass, silver, and gold יֶתֶ ר הָעָ ם precluded by Jer. 39:9, where we find ,These were carried away. Compare Jer. 52:17–23 .י׳ הֶהָ מון or יֶתֶ ר הָאָ מון instead of הַ נִשְּׂאָרִ ים words cannot be set aside by the arbitrary where several other points are mentioned that assumption that they crept into the text have been passed over in the account before us. through a copyist’s error; for the assertion that The pillars of brass (see 1 Kings 7:15ff.), the they contain a purposeless repetition is a piece stands (see 1 Kings 7:27ff.), and the brazen sea of dogmatical criticism, inasmuch as there is a (1 Kings 7:23ff.), were broken in pieces, because it would have been difficult to carry יֶתֶ ר הָעָ ם distinction drawn in Jer. 39:9 between these colossal things away without breaking them up. On the smaller vessels used in the . ריֶתֶ םהָעָ הַ נִשְּׂאָרִ ים and הַ נִשְּׂאָרִ ים בָעִ יר is simply another form for worship (v. 14) see 1 Kings 7:40. In Jer. 52:18 הָאָ מון Consequently are also mentioned. V. 15 is abridged הַמִ זְּׂרָ קֹּת being interchanged) in the sense א and ה) הֶהָ מון of a mass of people, and we have simply the still more in contrast with Jer. 52:19, and only are mentioned, whereas in הַמִ זְּׂרָ קות and הַמַחְּׂ ֹּתות choice left between two interpretations. Either means the fighting people Jeremiah six different things are enumerated ריֶתֶ םהָעָ הַ נִשְּׂאָרִ ים בָעִ יר what“ ,כֶסֶ ף … אֲשֶ ר זָהָ ב .left in the city, as distinguished from the beside the candlesticks deserters who had fled to the Chaldaeans, and was of gold, gold, what was of silver, silver, the captain of the guard took away,” is a יֶתֶ ר הָעָ ם in Jer. 52:15, or יֶתֶ ר הֶהָ מון = הָאָ מון comprehensive description of the objects in Jer. 39:9, the rest of the inhabitants הַ נִשְּׂאָרִ ים carried away. To this there is appended a is the people remark in v. 16 concerning the quantity of the יֶתֶ ר הָעָ ם הנש׳ בָעִ יר of Jerusalem; or left in Jerusalem (warriors and non-warriors), brass of the large vessels, which was so great

2 KINGS Page 132 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study that it could not be weighed; and in v. 17 a three superintendents of the Levites, whose supplementary notice respecting the artistic duty it was to keep guard over the temple, and is therefore were among the principal officers of הָעַמּודִ ים וגו׳ .work of the two pillars of brass placed at the head absolutely: as for the pillars, the sanctuary. etc., the brass of all these vessels was not to be 2 Kings 25:19. From the city, i.e., from the civil weighed. In Jer. 52:20, along with the brazen authorities of the city, Nebuzaradan took a who was ,(סָרִ יס) sea, the twelve brazen oxen under it are king’s chamberlain אֲשֶ ר mentioned; and in the description of the pillars commander of the men of war. Instead of of brass (vv. 21ff.) there are several points who , ראֲשֶ הָ יָה ֹפ׳ we find in Jer. 52:25 הּוא ֹפָקִ יד alluded to which are omitted in our books, not only here, but also in 1 Kings 7:16ff. For the fact had been commander, with an allusion to the itself see the explanation given at pp. 70–74. fact that his official function had terminated The omission of the twelve oxen in so when the city was conquered. “And five condensed an account as that contained in our (according to Jeremiah seven) men of those who text does not warrant the inference that these saw the king’s face,” i.e., who belonged to the words in Jeremiah are a spurious addition king’s immediate circle, de intimis consiliariis made by a later copyist, since the assumption regis, and “the scribe of the commander-in- that Ahaz sent the brazen oxen to king Tiglath- chief, who raised the people of the land for pileser cannot be proved from 2 Kings 16:17 military service,” or who enrolled them. has the article, which is omitted הַסֹֹּפֵ ר we must read Although שָֹלש אַמָ ה see p. 289). Instead of) are שַ ר הַצָבָ א five cubits, according to Jer. 52:22 and in Jeremiah, the following words , שהָמֵ אַ מֹּת at the end of the governed by it, or connected with it in the עַ ל־הַשְּׂ בָכָ ה Kings 7:16. The 1 is the שַ ר הַצָבָ א .(.verse is very striking, since it stands quite construct state (Ewald, § 290 d does commander-in-chief of the whole of the וְּׂכָאֵ לֶ ה וגו׳ alone, and when connected with a more precise הַמַצְּׂבִ א וגו׳ not appear to yield any appropriate sense, as military forces, and which ,שַ ר הַצָבָ א and not of ,הַ סֹֹּפֵ ר the second pillar was like the first not merely definition of with regard to the trellis-work, but in its form needed no such definition. “And sixty men of and size throughout. At the same time, it is the land-population who were found in the possible that the historian intended to give city.” They were probably some of the especial prominence to the similarity of the two prominent men of the rural districts, or they pillars with reference to this one point alone. may have taken a leading part in the defence of 2 Kings 25:18–21 (cf. Jer. 52:24–27). The the city, and therefore were executed in Riblah, principal officers of the temple and city, and and not merely deported with the rest of the sixty men of the population of the land, who people.—The account of the destruction of the ,in v. 21 וַיִגֶל יְּׂהּודָ ה were taken at the destruction of Jerusalem, kingdom of Judah closes with Nebuzaradan sent to his king at Riblah, where “thus was Judah carried away out of its own they were put to death. Seraiah, the high priest, land;” and in vv. 22–26 there follows merely a is the grandfather or great-grandfather of Ezra brief notice of those who had been left behind the scribe (Ezra 7:1; 1 Chron. 5:40). Zephaniah, in the land, in the place of which we find in Jer. a detailed account of the number of 40–52:28 כֹּהֵ ן .in Jer ; כֹּהֵןמִשְּׂ נֶ ה) a priest of the second rank .see at 2 Kings 23:4), is probably the those who were carried away :הַמִשְּׂ נֶ ה same person as the son of Maaseiah, who took a 2 Kings 25:22–26. Installation of Gedaliah the prominent place among the priests, according governor. His assassination, and the flight of the to Jer. 21:1; 29:25ff., and 37:3. The “three people to Egypt.—Much fuller accounts have keepers of the threshold” are probably the

2 KINGS Page 133 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study been handed down to us in Jer. 40–44 of the that Johanan had warned Gedaliah against the events which are but briefly indicated here. treachery of Ishmael, and that when Gedaliah 2 Kings 25:22, 23. Over the remnant of the was slain by Ishmael, having disregarded the people left in the land Nebuchadnezzar placed warning, he put himself at the head of the Gedaliah as governor of the land, who took up people and marched with them to Egypt, his abode in Mizpah. Gedaliah, the son of notwithstanding the dissuasions of Jeremiah Ahikam, who had interested himself on behalf (Jer. 41:15ff.). Instead of “Johanan the son of of the prophet Jeremiah and saved his life (Jer. Kareah,” we have in Jer. 40:8 “Johanan and 26:24), and the grandson of Shaphan, a man of Jonathan the sons of Kareah;” but it is uncertain has crept into the text of Jeremiah וְּׂ יונָתָ ן whom nothing more is known (see at 2 Kings whether merely through a יְּׂהוחָ נָ ן had his home in Jerusalem, and, as we from the previous ,(22:12 may infer from his attitude towards Jeremiah, mistake, and this mistake has brought with it had probably secured the confidence of the the alteration of into (Ewald), or whether בְּׂ נֵי בֶ ן Chaldaeans at the siege and conquest of has dropped out of our text through an וְּׂ יונָתָ ן Jerusalem by his upright conduct, and by what he did to induce the people to submit to the oversight, and this omission has occasioned the Thenius, Graf, etc.). The) בן into בני judgment inflicted by God; so that alteration of Nebuchadnezzar entrusted him with the former supposition is favoured by the oversight of those who were left behind in the circumstance that in Jer. 40:13; 41:11, 16, land—men, women, children, poor people, and Johanan the son of Kareah alone is mentioned. even a few princesses and court-officials, whom In Jer. 40:8 (Chethîb ) stands before ֹעיֹפי ּובְּׂ נֵיֹעוֹפַ י they had not thought it necessary or worth according to which it was not Seraiah ,הַ נְּׂטֹֹּפָתִ י ,.while to carry away (Jer. 40:7; 41:10, 16), i.e he made him governor of the conquered land. who sprang from Netophah, but Ophai whose Mizpah is the present Nebi Samwil, two hours to sons were military commanders. He was called the north-west of Jerusalem (see at Josh. Netophathite because he sprang from Netopha 18:26).—On hearing of Gedaliah’s appointment in the neighbourhood of Bethlehem (Neh. 7:26; as governor, there came to him “all the captains Ezra 2:22), the identity of which with Beit Nettif of the several divisions of the army and their is by no means probable (see at 2 Sam. 23:28). in Jeremiah; he יְּׂזַנְּׂיָהּו is written יַאֲ זַבְּׂ יָהּו men,” i.e., those portions of the army which had The name been scattered at the flight of the king (v. 5), was the son of the Maachathite, i.e., his father and which had escaped from the Chaldaeans, sprang from the Syrian district of Maacah in the and, as it is expressed in Jer. 40:7, had neighbourhood of the Hermon (see at Deut. dispersed themselves “in the field,” i.e., about 3:14). we have in Jer. 40:7 וְּׂהָאֲ נָשִ ים the land. Instead of 2 Kings 25:24. As these men were afraid of the and their men,” vengeance of the Chaldaeans because they had“ ,וְּׂאַ נְּׂשֵיהֶ ם the clearer expression in our text receives its more fought against them, Gedaliah assured them on וְּׂ הָאֲ נָשִ ים whilst precise definition from the previous word oath that they had nothing to fear from them if they would dwell peaceably in the land, be Of the military commanders the .הַחֲ יָלִ ים submissive to the king of Babel, and cultivate following are mentioned by name: Ishmael, etc. the land (cf. Jer. 40:9 and 10). “Servants of the is explic., “and indeed Chaldees” are Chaldaean officials who were ,יִשְּׂמָעֵ אל before וְּׂ the) Ishmael”). Ishmael, son of Mattaniah and subordinate to the governor Gedaliah. grandson of Elishama, probably of the king’s 2 Kings 25:25. In the seventh month, i.e., secretary mentioned in Jer. 36:12 and 20, of hardly two months after the destruction of royal blood. Nothing further is known about the Jerusalem, came Ishmael with ten men to other names. We simply learn from Jer. 40:13ff. Gedaliah at Mizpah, and murdered him together

2 KINGS Page 134 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study with the Jews and Chaldaeans, whom he had 44). In the verse before us we have simply a with him as soldiers to do his bidding and for brief allusion to the eventual result of the whole his protection. This occurred, according to Jer. affair. “Because they were afraid of the 41:1ff., when Gedaliah had received them Chaldaeans,” namely, that they might possibly hospitably and had invited them to eat with take vengeance upon them for the murder of him. Ishmael was instigated to commit this the governor. murder by the Ammonitish king Baalis, and 2 Kings 25:27–30. Jehoiachin delivered from Gedaliah had previously been made acquainted prison, and exalted to royal honours (cf. Jer. with the intended crime and put upon his guard 42:31–34).—In the thirty-seventh year after his by Johanan, but had put no faith in the deportation Jehoiachin was taken out of prison information (Jer. 40:13–16). by Evil-merodach when he came to the throne. ,in the year of his becoming king ,בִשְּׂ נַת מָ לְּׂ כו Kings 25:26. After Ishmael had performed 2 this deed, and had also treacherously murdered probably immediately after he had ascended a number of men, who had come to the temple the throne, for it was no doubt an act of grace at with a sacrifice from Shechem, Shiloh, and to ,נָשָא אֶ ת־רֹּאש .the commencement of his reign Samaria, he took the Jews who were at Mizpah prisoners, with some kings’ daughters among lift up a persons’ head, i.e., to release him from them, intending to take them over to the prison and exalt him to civil honours and Ammonites; but as soon as his deed became dignities (cf. Gen. 40:13). On the coincidence of known, he was pursued by Johanan and the rest the thirty-seventh year of Jehoiachin’s of the military chiefs and was overtaken at imprisonment and the commencement of the Gibeon, whereupon those who had been led reign of Evil-merodach see the remarks at 2 away by him went over to Johanan, so that he Kings 24:12. Instead of the 27th day of the was only able to make his escape with eight month, the 25th is given in Jeremiah, again men and get away to the Ammonites (Jer. 41:4– through the substitution of similar numeral ,אֱ וִילמְּׂ רֹּדַ ְך :Johanan then went with the rest of the letters (see at v. 8). Evil-merodach .(15 military commanders and the people whom he Εὔι λ Μ ώδ χ or Εὐι λ ωδέκ (LXX); had brought back into the neighbourhood of Ιλλ όδ , possibly a copyist’s error for Bethlehem, with the intention of fleeing to Ιλ όδ κ , in the Can. Ptol., and in other Egypt for fear of the Chaldaeans. There they did forms also: see M. v. Nieb. Gesch. Ass. p. 42, and indeed have recourse to the prophet Jeremiah, Ges. thes. p. 41; compounded from the name of to inquire of him the word of the Lord; but they the Babylonian god Merodach (see at 2 Kings did not allow themselves to be diverted from 20:12) and the prefix Evil, which has not yet their intention by the word of the Lord which been explained with certainty. He reigned two he announced to them, that if they remained in years, according to Berosus in Jos. c. Ap. i. 20, the land they need not fear anything from the and the Can Ptol.; and according to the verdict king of Babel, but if they went to Egypt they of Berosus, τὰ τῶν άτων νό ω κ ὶ should all perish there with sword, hunger, and λ ῶ ; and was murdered by his brother-in- pestilence, or by the prediction that the Lord law Neriglissor. The statement in Jos. Ant. x. 11, would also deliver Pharaoh Hophra into the 2, to the effect that he reigned eighteen years, hand of Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 42). They went to and that of Alex. Polyh. in Euseb. Chron. arm. i. Egypt notwithstanding, taking the prophet p. 45, that he reigned twelve years, are himself with them, and settled in different cities evidently false. of Egypt, where they gave themselves up to 2 Kings 25:28. “He spake kindly to him (cf. Jer. idolatry, and did not suffer themselves to be 12:6), and set his throne above the throne of drawn away from it even by the severe the kings who were with him in Babel.” This is judgments which the prophet Jeremiah not to be understood literally, as signifying that predicted as sure to fall upon them (Jer. 43 and

2 KINGS Page 135 By C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch a Grace Notes study he assigned him a loftier throne than the other that Jehoiachin died before Evil- merodach; for kings (Hitzig, Thenius), but figuratively: loco the favour shown to him might be continued by honestiore eum habuit (Ros.). The “kings with Evil-merodach’s successor. We cannot make him” were dethroned kings, who were kept at any safe conjecture as to the motives which the court like Jehoiachin to add to its splendour, induced Evil-merodach to pardon Jehoiachin just as Cyrus kept the conquered Croesus by his and confer this distinction upon him. The side (Herod. i. 88). higher ground of this joyful termination of his 2 Kings 25:29, 30. “And he (Jehoiachin) imprisonment lay in the gracious decree of God, changed his prison garments,” i.e., took them off that the seed of David, though severely and put other regal clothing on (cf. Gen. 41:42). chastised for its apostasy from the Lord, should “And ate continually before him all his life,” i.e., not be utterly rejected (2 Sam. 7:14, 15). At the ate at the king’s table (cf. 2 Sam. 9:7). Moreover same time, this event was also intended as a a daily ration of food was supplied to him by comforting sign to the whole of the captive the king for the maintenance of his retainers, people, that the Lord would one day put an end of v. to their banishment, if they would acknowledge כָ ל־יְּׂמֵי חַ יָיו who formed his little court. The that it was a well-merited punishment for this 30, upon which Thenius throws suspicion sins that they had been driven away from without any reason, refers to Jehoiachin like before His face, and would turn again to the that in v. 29; for the historian intended to show Lord their God with all their heart. how Jehoiachin had fared from the day of his elevation to the end of his life. At the same time, we cannot infer from this with any certainty