A Detailed Overview of 1–2 Kings

David Gooding

Myrtlefield House Study Notes

www.myrtlefieldhouse.com

David Gooding has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Author of this work. Copyright © The Myrtlefield Trust, 2019 Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are from the English Revised Version (1885) or from the King James Version. Sometimes Dr Gooding gives his own translations or paraphrases. All rights reserved. Permission is granted to reproduce this document in its entirety, or in unaltered excerpts, for personal and church use only as long as you do not charge a fee. You must not reproduce it on any Internet site. Permission must be obtained if you wish to reproduce it in any other context, translate it, or publish it in any format. Published by The Myrtlefield Trust PO BOX 2216 Belfast, N. Ireland BT1 9YR w: www.myrtlefieldhouse.com e: [email protected] Myrtlefield catalogue no: kgs.030

Contents

Preface 4 1. Overview 5 2. A Record of Disobedience, Apostasy and Judgment 6 3. Major Revivals 7 4. The Problem Raised by the Death of David 8 5. The House of God 10 6. The House: The First Set of Plans 13 7. The History: The Division of the Kingdom After Solomon 15 8. The House: The Second Set of Plans 21 9. The History: The Reigns of Rehoboam, Abijam and Asa of Judah and of Baasha of Israel 22 10. The House: The Third Set of Plans (1) 25 11. The History: The Reign of Ahab of Israel and the Ministry of Elijah 27 12. The House: The Third Set of Plans (2) 30 13. The History: The Ministry of Elisha 32 14. The House: The Fourth Set of Plans 42 15. The History of Israel: From Jehu King of Israel until the Deportation of the Ten Tribes of Israel to Assyria by Shalmaneser King of Assyria 44 16. The History of Judah: From Athaliah to Ahaz 46 17. The House: The Fifth Set of Plans the Furniture for the Court 53 18. The History: From King Hezekiah to King Zedekiah and the Carrying Away of Judah into Exile in Babylon 59 19. Two Revivals 61 20. Epilogue 64 About the Author 65

Preface

The biblical authors used the literary conventions of their day to convey their message. These included structures and patterns that are less obvious to us in an age of typesetting and digital display. David Gooding has brought his considerable experience of reading and teaching ancient literature to bear on the biblical text, and these study notes represent his thinking about the structure, patterns and thought–flow of 1 & 2 Kings. He has often said to groups of Bible students, ‘When it comes to Bible study, there is structure, pattern and thought–flow, and the greatest of these is thought–flow. Here are the thoughts of God expressed. Our job is to follow the thought–flow’. The most important thing to grasp is the way the author develops his argument or message, and discovering the structure and patterns that the text exhibits should always be to that end. The study notes have been developed over a number of years and were distributed at talks he gave in various places publicly and privately. Audio recordings and transcripts of some of these talks are available for free download from myrtlefieldhouse.com. These study notes are not meant to be the last word on 1 & 2 Kings, and may not cover the entire book. They are offered publicly to help Bible students, preachers and teachers to stimulate further thinking about the book, so that its message may be understood.

The Myrtlefield Trust 2019 1

Overview

Major Theme God’s provision for the maintenance and, where necessary, for the restoration of his people: the house of the LORD at Jerusalem, the place where God put his NAME. Major Lesson When the people looked to God and his provision in the house, they prospered. When they neglected, disobeyed and forsook the house, they suffered, and in the end came to disaster. When they repented and looked toward the house, they experienced revival. Major Plans for the House of the Lord 1. Structural details: house, side-rooms, windows, porch (1 Kgs 6:1–10). 2. Special plea for obedience (1 Kgs 6:11–13). 3. Internal decorations and installations; and the inner court (1 Kgs 6:14–38). 4. The king’s house and the great court (1 Kgs 7:1–12). 5. The furniture for the court of the Lord’s house: the two pillars, Jachin and Boaz, and their capitals; the great sea and the ten subsidiary lavers (1 Kgs 7:13–51).

2

A Record of Disobedience, Apostasy and Judgment

The Plans for the House of the Lord The History

1. First set: structural: only ONE house, though 1. Jeroboam of Israel sets up other houses many side-rooms. (1 Kgs 12:25–33). 2. Second set: the special plea for obedience. 2. Baasha of Israel destroys the dynasty of Jeroboam, but persists in Jeroboam’s sin (1 Kgs 15:25–16:7). 3. Third set: chief installation: THE ARK OF THE 3. Ahab of Israel installs Baal as Israel’s chief COVENANT: you shall have no other god but me. God (1 Kgs 16:29–34). 4. Fourth set: the king’s house. 4. a. Jehu of Israel destroys the royal house of Ahab (2 Kgs 9–10). b. Athaliah destroys all the royal house of Judah, except one little boy (2 Kgs 11). 5. Fifth set: 5. a. Ahaz of Judah cut off the borders of the a. The sea and the lavers. bases of the laver; took down the sea off b. The pillars. the oxen and put it on the pavement (2 Kgs 16:17). b. Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon smashes the sea and the pillars and takes the copper to Babylon (2 Kgs 25:13).

3

Major Revivals

First Revival 1 Kings 18 Led by Elijah on Mount Carmel. Issue at stake: who is the true God: Baal or Jehovah? Second Revival 2 Kings 11 Led by Jehoiada, the high priest. Issue at stake: who is the true king: Athaliah or Joash? Third Revival 2 Kings 18 Led by King Hezekiah at the time of the siege of Jerusalem by the forces of the king of Assyria. Issue at stake: is the Lord God just one more god among the many gods of the Gentile nations? Or is he the unique, transcendent, Lord God? Fourth Revival 2 Kings 22 Led by King Josiah upon finding the book of the law in the house of the Lord. Issue at stake: will the nation repent and return to obeying the word of God and all its commandments?

4

The Problem Raised by the Death of David How to Keep Things Going for God

David the King A. David’s Achievements: 1. Rescued the nation by defeating Goliath (1 Sam 17). 2. All the nation loved him (1 Sam 18:1–9, 16, 20, 30). 3. Sympathy created by his enforced flight from Saul (1 Sam 19). 4. His return and unification of the nation (2 Sam 5). 5. His founding of Jerusalem as the nation’s capital city (2 Sam 5). 6. His bringing up of the ark to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6). 7. His conquest of all Israel’s enemies (2 Sam 8). 8. His preparations for the temple (1 Chr 28–29). 9. His poetry and psalms. 10. His organizing and training of the Levites to sing (1 Chr 25). B. The people’s understandable, but unsuccessful, efforts to keep him alive (1 Kgs 1:1–4). C. The immediate instability caused by his approaching death: Adonijah’s attempt to seize the throne (1 Kgs 1:5–53). D. The Davidic covenant (2 Sam 7:11–17): 1. Its promise: to maintain the Davidic dynasty. 2. Fulfilled, in part, through Solomon and his heirs. 3. But note its limiting conditions: a. 2 Samuel 7:14–15; and b. 1 Kings 8:25; 9:4–9. 4. Its full fulfilment only in Christ (see Heb 1:5). E. What happened in history to David’s successors: 1. Some were wise, good and strong, some of the time; but at other times not. 2. None was as good and eminent as David. 3. Some were more bad than good. 4. In the end they were so bad that they brought the nation to disaster at the Babylonian captivity (2 Kgs 25).

Questions Arising 1. If God could raise up one David, why could he not, and why did he not, raise up a succession of great and brilliant men like David? 2. The same question can be asked about church history: a. At the beginning God raised up great powerful men like Peter, Paul, John and James. b. Since the apostles, there have been many good men; but none so powerful as the apostles. c. And there have been many far weaker men; and all too many bad men. d. THEREFORE WE MAY ASK: if God could raise up one Paul, why not a succession of Pauls? God’s Main Provision for His People 1. Not the raising up of a succession of great men but; 2. The building of the house of God at Jerusalem. It was to be the cure for all ills (1 Kgs 8:22–66).

5

The House of God

I. Its Basic Concept: Jacob’s Experience at Bethel

Genesis 28:10–22 Features to Notice:

A. The ladder, or staircase, was not: 1. Let down from heaven, with its bottom reaching to earth, BUT; 2. Set up on earth, with its top reaching to heaven (28:12). B. The angels were ‘ascending’ (i.e. going up from the presence of God) and ‘descending’ (i.e. returning to the divine presence) (28:12). C. The Hebrew preposition, which in some translations is rendered ‘above it’ (i.e. ‘above the staircase’), can also mean, according to context, ‘beside it’. How do we decide which it means here (28:13)? D. Take note what Jacob said when he woke from sleep: Surely the Lord is in this place, and I knew it not (28:16). Jacob had always known that God was in heaven. Now he had learned a new lesson: God was in this place, i.e. here on earth beside Jacob, at the bottom of the staircase (28:17). E. And he said, ’How awesome is this place! This is none other but the house of God’ (28:17). (NB there was no building there!) And he called the place ‘Bethel’, which means ‘house of God’ (28:19). F. And we learn what the function and significance of the house of God was for Jacob, from his next description of it: this is the gate of heaven (28:17). G. In an ancient city the gate (or gates) was not merely the way in and out of the city: it was the place where the elders sat to administer the affairs of the city (See Ruth 4:1–2; Deut 25:7; Amos 5:12, 15). H. The gate of heaven, therefore, was the centre of God’s administration—hence the angels going out from, and returning to, the presence of God. I. And here was God and the centre of his administration right beside Jacob, as he slept, here on earth! J. Note Jacob’s response to this discovery: his confidence in God’s administration of the affairs of his life (Gen 28:20–22).

II. The House of God Which Solomon Built

What it was Not:

A. It was not an expression of God’s omnipresence. B. Solomon (and all the Old Testament) believed, of course, in God’s omnipresence (cf. Ps 139). C. But in building the house of the Lord at Jerusalem, Solomon was NOT saying, ‘God is in this place just as he is in every other place in the world’. It was the one place on earth where God had chosen, and of which he had said, My name shall be there (1 Kgs 8:29, 44). D. That is why the Israelites, wherever they were on the face of the earth, were instructed to pray towards this place (1 Kgs 8:29–30, 33, 35, 38, 42, 44, 48).

III. Solomon’s Theological Problem

A. The problem stated: how could the infinite, transcendent Lord dwell on earth? Behold heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain you; how much less this house that I have built! (1 Kgs 8:27). B. The problem ‘solved’ in Solomon’s time (1 Kgs 8:10–11). 1. The cloud filled the house . . . the glory of the Lord filled the house. 2. God put his name there (1 Kgs 8:29). C. The problem fully solved by the eventual incarnation of the Son of God. 1. Note when Scripture talks of the incarnation, it is NOT saying that Jesus was simply one instance of how God dwells in every human being just as he dwelt in Jesus (John 1:14). 2. At and through the incarnation, all the fullness of the Godhead dwelt in him [Christ] bodily (Col 2:9). 3. You could point to Jesus, as John Baptist did, and say ‘God is in him’, in a sense that he is in no other person, and in no other place anywhere else on earth. 4. The ‘cloud’ came and overshadowed him (Luke 9:34); and his disciples (2 Pet 1:16–18). 5. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of the one and only from the Father (John 1:14). D. The problem solved for us since our Lord’s ascension. 1. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them (Matt 18:20). 2. Note the context of this saying of our Lord: life under the Lord’s administration in the kingdom of God (Matt 18:15–35). E. The problem solved worldwide at the second coming and Christ’s millennial reign. Verily, verily, I say unto you, you shall see the heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man (John 1:51).

IV. The Function of the House of the Lord for God’s People in Solomon’s Day

1 Kings 8:27–53

A. It was the place where earth and heaven were linked: see the phrase: when they pray towards this house, hear in heaven your dwelling place (8:30–36, 38–39, 42–45, 48–49).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 12

B. It was the direction they looked to for God’s forgiveness. 1. Note this repeated reference to God’s forgiveness. 2. It reminds us of our Lord’s teaching that we need forgiveness as often as we need our daily bread (Luke 11:3–4). 3. We are not thinking here of the forgiveness which we receive when we first come as sinners to Christ (see Acts 10:43; 13:38–39; Rom 4:6–8; Heb 10:17–18). 4. We are thinking of life as servants in the kingdom of God, subject to the rule and discipline of Christ’s heavenly Father (see Matt 18:21–35; 1 Cor 11:29–32; Heb 12:4–13). C. It was the place where God’s day-to-day government of his people would be known in dealing with cases of sin and injustice between individual Israelites (1 Kgs 8:31). D. It was the place they could look to for forgiveness, recovery and restoration when God had had to discipline his people by: 1. Allowing defeat by their enemies (8:33). 2. Afflicting them with drought because of their sin. 3. Thus bringing them to confess God’s name i.e. his character (8:33). 4. Thus teaching them the good way in which they should walk (8:36). E. It was the place of recourse, when famine, pestilence, blasting, mildew, locust or caterpillar, enemy sieges of cities within their land, plague and sickness, had brought individuals, or the whole nation, to know every one of them the plague of his own heart—a place of recourse where each one might: 1. Find forgiveness. 2. Become aware that the Lord knows each one’s heart, and deals with each one accordingly. 3. And learn to fear and reverence the Lord all the days of their life in their God-given inheritance (8:37–40). F. It was the place to which non-Israelites should be attracted, find God as a reality, and as one that answers prayer; and so come to know God’s name, i.e. his character, and worship him (8:41–43). G. It was the place to which Israel might appeal for success against the enemies against whom God sent them (8:44–45). H. It was the place to which they could look for restoration when sin against the Lord had resulted in exile to far away foreign lands, so that their captors might have compassion on them, and God, who had originally brought the nation out of Egypt into their inheritance, might bring them back again—and this on the ground that it was God himself who had chosen them originally from among all the nations to be his inheritance, according to his own word to and through Moses (8:46– 53). 6

The House: The First Set of Plans 1 Kings 6:1–10

I. Details

A. Its place in history: four hundred and eighty years after the Exodus (6:1). B. Dimensions: (in cubits) (6:2–3): a. Of the house itself: length sixty, breadth twenty, height thirty. b. Of the porch, or vestibule: breadth twenty, depth ten. C. Windows: (probably openings in the wall, broad on the inside, narrow on the outside) (6:4). D. Side rooms (6:5–6). E. Preparation of stone: all hewing and shaping done at the quarry: no iron tool used in its assembling (6:7). F. Door and stairs for the side rooms (6:8). G. Ceiling and roofing materials: a. for the house itself (6:9); b. for the side rooms (6:10). Note: the ceiling of the first storey would be the floor of the second; the ceiling of the second, the floor of the third.

II. Comment

A. The dating: the building of the house of the Lord was the great climax and goal of Israel’s redemption out of Egypt. 1. See Exodus 15:13, 17. 2. See 1 Kings 8:15–16, 20–21. 3. Compare 1 Kings 8:2, 65–66. The feast in the seventh month would have been the Feast of Tabernacles (cf. Lev 23:33–43) at which, having arrived in the land and reaped its full harvest, they called to mind the long journey from Egypt through the desert to reach their inheritance. B. Chief feature: there was only ONE house. 1. There was not a house of the Lord in every city in the land, but only in Jerusalem (cf. 1 Kgs 8:16). 2. At the house in Jerusalem there were many side-rooms, but only ONE house. 3. The side-rooms were not arranged in wings running out at right angles to the house: each side room had equal contact with the house.

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 14

4. The purpose of the side rooms was to accommodate the work of the priests and Levites in making the showbread, storing oil, wine, flour, incense, musical instruments, vestments, treasury, etc. C. The shaping of the stonework. For this to work successfully there must have been a master plan to which all the stonemasons adhered (6:7).

III. Reflection on the Fact That God Never Intended That There Should be More Than One House of the Lord Throughout the Length and Breadth of the Land

A. This stems from the fact that the house of the Lord was the centre of God’s administration and government of his people. It was, for Israel, their divine ‘headquarters’. By definition, there could not be several, different headquarters. B. Compare the fact that for all eternity there will be only one holy city, new Jerusalem, and only one tabernacle of God (Rev 21). C. Similarly Hebrews 12:22–24 speaks of only one city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem to which we are said to have come. D. Similarly in the days of Christ’s flesh, there was on earth only ONE Jesus Christ, whose body was the temple in whom all the fullness of the Godhead dwelled bodily (John 2:19–21; Col 2:9). E. The terminology of the New Testament is consistent with this: 1. The New Testament talks of: a. The Church (singular) i.e. all believers from Pentecost to the Lord’s coming (e.g. Eph 5:25); and b. The churches (plural), as in all the churches of the saints (e.g. 1 Cor 14:33). 2. By contrast, the New Testament never speaks of the bodies of Christ, but always and only of the body of Christ. 3. Similarly the New Testament never speaks of the houses of God, but only of the house of God (e.g. 1 Tim 3:15). 4. By definition the Church can have only one head; and all the churches, throughout the whole world, have only one headquarters, and that is Christ. 5. Like the priests and Levites in their side rooms round the house of the Lord, we all have many different ministries to do for the Lord; but we, each and every one of us, have direct access to headquarters at all times and in all places. 6. Compare the situation of the seven churches in Asia Minor. Each church had to listen to what the Lord said both to it and to the other six, but no church was asked to control or interfere with another. Each church was directly responsible to the Lord; all the churches were focussed on him (Rev 1:3). 7. Of course, the members of a church are to obey those that have the rule over them and submit to them, that is, to their God-appointed elders; just as in Israel the people were expected to obey their God-appointed king. But both members and elders are subject to Christ; and elders, like the kings of Israel, are responsible to represent God’s government aright (Heb 13:17). 7

The History: The Division of the Kingdom After Solomon 1 Kings 12:1–15:25

I. The Source of the Division

1 Kings 11:1–43

A. Solomon’s divided heart: his false loves; his compromise with his foreign wives’ idolatry; his building religious ‘high places’ for them (11:1–8). B. God’s judgment on Solomon’s sin: God gave ten tribes to Jeroboam for him to rule over them (11:9– 11). C. Yet God remained faithful to David (11:12–13; 31–40). D. While Solomon was dilly-dallying with his wives, Jeroboam was industrious, and had charge of all the labour of the house of Israel (i.e. the ten tribes), and thereby gained their respect and loyalty (11:28). E. The prophet Ahijah informed Jeroboam of God’s intention to give him rule over the ten tribes (11:29–39). Lesson: if leaders allow their hearts to be divided, and their energies diverted from the work of the Lord, they must not be surprised if God gives the leadership of his people to others who are prepared to do the work.

II. The Appeal of the Ten Tribes to Solomon’s Son, Rehoboam

1 Kings 12:1–24

A. Your father made our yoke grievous: now therefore make the grievous service of your father and his heavy yoke which he put on us lighter, and we will serve you (12:4) B. Note the term ‘yoke’: it is a metaphor for the king’s rule, and the service which he demands from his subjects. C. The people’s plea was not rebellious: they were willing to serve Rehoboam; they were simply protesting against Solomon’s unscriptural tyranny.

III. Rehoboam’s Foolish Decision

1 Kings 12:12–24

A. My father made your yoke heavy but I will add to your yoke: my father chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions (12:14). This was a misrepresentation of God’s government of his people).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 16

B. Result: the ten tribes seceded from the house of David (12:16). C. Rehoboam’s first foolish attempt to stop them: he sent to them Adoram who was in charge of the forced labour gangs (Hebrew: hammas); whereas Jeroboam had been in charge of the lighter levy duties (Hebrew: sêḇel) (see 5:13–14). D. It is no wonder that Israel stoned him and killed him (12:18). E. Rehoboam’s second foolish attempt: he prepared his army to fight the ten tribes and force them to serve him; but God forbade him (12:21–24). Lesson: You cannot win the loyal service of the people of God by harsh demands and force. So let us now listen to our Lord on this topic of the yoke.

IV. The King Messiah and His Easy Yoke

Matthew 11:25–30

A. Notice our Lord’s delight in his Father’s sovereign action (11:25). B. Notice our Lord’s unique authority as the revealer of the Father to mankind (11:27). C. Notice that when he speaks of his yoke, he is speaking as a king about his kingly rule. D. Notice that his pronouncement settles forever the question whether the king’s yoke ought to be light or heavy. E. Notice that to those who labour and are heavy laden, he first offers rest, and then his yoke (11:28). F. Notice that if we are to learn from him, we must accept his yoke. We cannot ask him to teach us, all the while leaving it open whether or not we will obey him when he commands us. G. But as a king he is meek and lowly in heart—not an arrogant, proud, cruel tyrant. H. Those who take his yoke, therefore, find rest for their souls. I. For his yoke is easy and his burden is light. J. The Jewish rabbis sometimes spoke of their teaching as a yoke, in the sense that it laid down the laws which people had to obey. K. Notice the false yoke of teaching which some (believers?) wanted to place on the necks of the Gentile believers (Acts 15:10).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 17

V. The Reason Why Christ’s Disciples Find His Yoke Easy

The Lesson Taught on the Two Sabbath Days of Rest

Matthew 12:1–13

A. Two statements of comparative greatness. 1. First Sabbath: one greater than the temple is here (12:6). 2. Second Sabbath: How much then is a man of more value than a sheep (12:12). B. 1. First Statement: shows us the greatness of Christ, his deity and his right to be ceaselessly served. In a word, it shows us how we are to think of him. 2. Second Statement: shows us how he thinks of us, how he values us. 3. When the wonderful fact grips our heart that he, being so great, values us so much, it makes it easy to accept his yoke and serve him ceaselessly. C. The lesson of the first Sabbath (12:1–8) 1. The Pharisees accuse Christ of breaking the Sabbath by allowing his disciples to work on the Sabbath (12:1–2). 2. First answer: the case of King David: the need to preserve God’s anointed king takes precedence over ceremonial laws (12:4). 3. Second answer: a. In the world outside the temple people were allowed to work six days for themselves; but on the Sabbath they had to cease from their own work and to devote one day to God. b. But the priests in the temple could not cease from work on the Sabbath: the service of God must continue seven days a week. c. One greater than the temple is here, i.e. in the cornfield. Christ is God incarnate. He must be served ceaselessly (12:6). d. Notice that for the believer, this does not lessen the standard of the law: the law said that a man could work six days a week for himself, but must devote one day a week to God. The demand of Christ is that we serve him every day of the week. e. One greater than the temple is here: it casts a glow of sacredness over every task. D. The lesson of the second Sabbath (12:1–8). 1. The law certainly taught that normally a man must cease work on the Sabbath and keep the Sabbath unto the Lord. 2. The Pharisees held that to heal a man on the Sabbath was work, and therefore was forbidden. 3. Yet they held that it was permissible to rescue a sheep from danger on the Sabbath. 4. Christ insisted that a man was of more value than a sheep; and therefore it was permissible to heal a man on the Sabbath. 5. But Christ’s question: How much then is a man of more value than a sheep? can be fully answered only by the value he put on us when he died for us at Calvary. Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 18

VI. Jeroboam’s Enormous Sin

He Set up Other Houses and Interposed Another Headquarters between the People and God 1 Kings 12:26–33

A. His motivation (12:26–27). 1. He was afraid that if he let the people go up to offer sacrifices in the house of the Lord at Jerusalem, he would lose control of them: their heart’s loyalty would return to the house of David. 2. In other words, God had given Jeroboam rule over the ten tribes; but Jeroboam could not trust God to keep them loyal to him. 3. Therefore he must stop them having direct access to God in Jerusalem in order to maintain his own control over the people. B. How he sold this deprivation of their freedom to the people (12:28). 1. It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem. 2. In other words, he represented God’s way as being too hard, too demanding; and presented to them an ‘easier’ way. 3. This sounded like another instance of the ‘easy yoke’ as distinct from the ‘hard yoke’. But it was utterly false. 4. A very common danger. When people have suffered under unscriptural legalism: a. They rightly seek relief and freedom; b. But instead of forsaking legalism and returning to Scripture, they abandon legalism and Scripture as well; and substitute the false ease, and false freedom, of doing simply what they please regardless of God’s word. C. Jeroboam’s idolatry (12:28–30). 1. He did not abandon the doctrine of deliverance from Egypt. 2. But he substituted an idolatrous expression of God, the deliverer, in stark disobedience to God’s commandment. But people like this kind of thing: they prefer sight to faith; they find the visual ‘easier’ (Exod 20:4). 3. Note that though they felt it was ‘too much’ to go to the house of the Lord at Jerusalem, they flocked to the idolatrous worship in Dan, in the far north (12:29–30). D. Jeroboam’s unscriptural practices (12:31–33). 1. Building idolatrous shrines on high places like the pagans. 2. Setting up an unscriptural priesthood. 3. Setting up a festival like the Feast of Tabernacles in Judah, but deliberately changing the date from the seventh month to the eighth month. 4. Instituting false sacrifices performed by an unscriptural priesthood. E. Some warning lessons from history. 1. From later Judaism (cf. Mark 7): a. Inventing non-scriptural manmade traditions (7:3–5, 7). b. Adding these traditions to the word of God (7:7). c. Setting aside God’s word in order to keep manmade traditions (7:8). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 19

d. Negating God’s commandments and forbidding people to keep them (7:12). 2 From the history of Christendom: a. The demand of the political rulers to control the people not only in secular matters but in religious and spiritual things (cf. Constantine). b. The creation of great religious organizations which then arrogate to themselves the function of being the earthly headquarters of the church. c. Forbidding the people to come direct to the Bible, or even direct to God, and insisting on placing unscriptural intermediaries between the people and God, so as to maintain control over the people. d. The creation of idolatrous rituals and shrines.

VII. The Function of the Ministry of the Prophets

1 Kings 13:1–14:20

A. The young man of God (13:1–34; cf. 1 Tim 6:11). 1. He denounced Jeroboam’s idolatrous altar (13:2–5). 2. He warned of the future judgment that would come upon the false priesthood. 3. He demonstrated the limit of the political power which God had entrusted to Jeroboam, by paralysing and then healing his hand (13:4–6). B. The young man deceived, slain and silenced (13:7–32). 1. It was right that the young man should go to Bethel at the Lord’s command, and deliver God’s word of protest. 2. But the young man was forbidden to accept hospitality: he must not compromise God’s word by giving the impression that he was in any sense part of Jeroboam’s system (13:7–10). 3. Explanation: a. Jeroboam had put himself and his false religious headquarters between the people and God, in an attempt to stop God having direct contact and communication with the people. b. The young man was a prophet, i.e. one through whom God would speak directly to the people. c. To give the impression that he in any way accepted, or was part of, Jeroboam’s system, was to compromise the source of his own prophetic authority. C. The sad figure of the old, renegade and compromised prophet (13:11–32). 1. He had been prepared to ‘fit into’ Jeroboam’s system. 2. He used his supposed ‘maturity’ and seniority and ‘wisdom’ to deceive the young man into thinking that he had had a message from an angel telling the young man to accept hospitality. 3. But he was later impelled by God to foretell the inevitable consequence of the young prophet’s disobedience: the lion would silence him. Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 20

VIII. God’s Judgment on Jeroboam’s Persistence in His Sin

1 Kings 13:33–14:20

A. Jeroboam had cut off the people from God and his word; but now, with his son’s illness, he attempted to get a favourable message from God through Abijah the prophet by disguising his wife’s, and therefore his own, identity. B. He had deceived the people: now he would try to deceive God. He must have thought that God was blind and could not see what was going on outside. C. But there were windows in the house of God (6:4)! D. He had to learn: the word of God is living and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart. And there is no creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and laid open before the eyes of him with whom we have to do (Heb 4:12–13). 8

The House: The Second Set of Plans 1 Kings 6:11–13

A. At first sight these verses might seem to be out of place, because they are not a ‘plan’ or a ‘description’ of the house that Solomon built. B. On the other hand they are introduced by the phrase, addressed to Solomon, concerning this house which you are building . . . The statement which they make, therefore, was obviously relevant to the building of the house of the Lord. C. The message conveyed and underlined: 1. The establishment of the promise which God made to David regarding his son, Solomon, and his subsequent successors on the throne of David, depended on obedience to God’s statutes, and the putting into practice of God’s commandments and principles of justice (6:12). 2. And, at the same time, God’s continuing to dwell among his people, and his not forsaking them, likewise depended upon similar obedience (6:13). D. Let us, therefore, give special heed to the call of the New Testament: 1. That we be faithful to the gospel of God . . . concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David, according to the flesh (Rom 1:1–3). 2. That we remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, of the seed of David, according to my gospel (2 Tim 2:8). 3. That we listen obediently to what the root and offspring of David testifies to the churches (Rev 22:16).

9

The History: The Reigns of Rehoboam, Abijam and Asa of Judah and of Baasha of Israel 1 Kings 14:21–16:8

I. Rehoboam and Judah

1 Kings 14:21–15:24

A. We have just seen how Jeroboam of Israel deliberately disobeyed the principle that there should be only one house of God for all God’s people. As a result, not only did God denounce his sin, but after his death his son, Nabab, was overthrown by a conspirator; and so Jeroboam’s dynasty was cut short. B. The resultant position and responsibility of Rehoboam and Judah. 1. The secession of the ten tribes had left Judah a very tiny state among the surrounding Gentile nations, and now constantly threatened by an oft-times hostile Israel. 2. Yet the king and people of Judah still had the awesome responsibility of maintaining Jerusalem as the city which the Lord had chosen out of all the tribes of Israel to put his name there. How would they discharge this responsibility (14:21)? C. The behaviour of the people of Judah (14:21–24). 1. Outwardly and formally they maintained the correct position: the right house of the Lord and the Lord’s chosen city. But in practice: a. They engaged in worse idolatry and paganism than their fathers (14:22–23). b. They perpetrated worse immorality and ritual prostitution than the pagan nations whom God had driven out because of similar immorality, before giving the land to Israel. c. They thus provoked the Lord (cf. 1 Cor 5:1; 10:20–22). D. The position of Rehoboam, king of Judah. 1. King David was unique among all the kings and emperors of the world. He was the Lord’s anointed. Of him would come one day the Messiah (cf. Luke 1:32–33). 2. King David had spoken of God as my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my high tower, and my refuge; my saviour, you save me from violence . . . you have also given me the shield of your salvation (2 Sam 22:3, 36). 3. Similarly the people of God sang of the Lord’s anointed king as their shield (Ps 89:18). 4. As an expression of this divinely provided protection, Solomon had made three hundred ceremonial shields of gold, which the king’s guards used to carry when the king went in procession from the palace to the house of the Lord (14:27–28).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 23

5. But now because of the rank disobedience of both the king and the people, God allowed the king of Egypt to invade the country and remove all the treasures of the house of the Lord, of the king’s palace, and the three hundred golden shields. 6. So Rehoboam made substitute shields of bronze. In other words: Rehoboam was responsible to present the unique position of the royal house of David among the nations; but rank compromise with idolatry lessened his protection from pagan invasion (14:27). 7. They still held an outward form of godliness, but they had denied the power thereof (2 Tim 3:5).

II. Abijam

1 Kings 15:1–8

1. Nothing good is said about Abijam in Kings. Second Chronicles 13:3–21 records a victory he won over Jeroboam on the basis of a valid argument on the topic of God’s covenant with the house of David. But it is possible to argue well for a scriptural position in theory, and yet for one’s heart not to be right with the Lord. And that is what Kings points out about Abijam. His heart was not perfect with the Lord as David’s heart had been (15:3). 2. The successful continuance of the royal house was owing practically entirely to his ancestor, David’s, faithfulness to God, and not to his own (15:4–5). 3. Sometimes a generation lives on the results, not of its own spiritual good health, but on the benefits of the spirituality of a past generation. This is dangerous.

III. Asa

1 Kings 15:9–24

A. Asa’s reign was a great improvement over Abijam’s. Note this fact! B. Asa was not one hundred percent perfect; but his heart was right and he did his best to please the Lord as did his ancestor David (15:14). C. In his time the contemporary king of Israel, Baasha, tried to make it impossible for any of the ten tribes to go up to Jerusalem and tried to isolate Asa and Judah completely. In this Baasha was worse than Jeroboam who had merely taught Israel that they need not go up to Jerusalem (15:17). D. With this we may compare mediaeval Christendom, which not only taught people that they need not approach God direct themselves, or read the Bible for themselves, but tried to make it utterly impossible for them to do so; and tried to strangle all reform. E. Asa successfully thwarted Baasha’s scheme. F. But it is doubtful whether he was right to call on the Syrians to fight against Israel (15:8–21). G. And it is sad to see how Asa and Judah had to expend so much energy to demolish what Baasha had built, and to rebuild it in another place according to a different plan and purpose (15:22). H. It is likewise sad to see how much energy has had to be spent, not on evangelizing the world, but in refuting the erroneous practices and false doctrines of unfaithful Christendom. I. When the house of the Lord was being built, the masons in the quarries had all worked to the same master plan. But by the time of Asa, Israel and Judah were certainly not building according to the same God-given plan (see 6:7 and comment on p.14). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 24

IV. Baasha of Israel

1 Kings 15:27–16:14

A. So serious had been Jeroboam’s sin, that God allowed Baasha to conspire against, and utterly destroy, Jeroboam’s house (15:27–30). B. One might have thought, therefore, that Baasha, having been used to punish Jeroboam’s disobedience to God’s plan, would have striven all the more to obey God. Instead he not only continued in Jeroboam’s disobedience to God, but did even worse than Jeroboam. And so Baasha’s dynasty was annihilated by another conspiratorial uprising, such as Baasha had perpetrated on Jeroboam’s house (16:1–14). C. It is the melancholy fact that Israel never repented of the sin wherewith Jeroboam caused Israel to sin, right up to the time when they were carried away into exile by the Assyrians. 10

The House: The Third Set of Plans (1) 1 Kings 6:14–22

I. The Central Feature of the House of the Lord

The Ark of the Covenant of the Lord in the Most Holy Place.

A. The ark was the symbolic throne of God: the ark of God, which is called by the name, even the name of the Lord of hosts, that sits upon the cherubim (see 2 Sam 6:2). B. It was called the ark of the covenant, because it contained the two tablets of the law, which formed the basis of the covenant that God made with Israel through Moses after they came out of Egypt (1 Kgs 8:9). C. For the sake of comparison, consider the form of the covenants made by the ancient Canaanite emperors with their vassal kings: 1. An announcement of who the emperor is: e.g. ‘I am Supilu-Liummu’. 2. A reminder of what the emperor has done to and for the people. 3. A prohibition on making a covenant with any other emperor. 4. A list of do’s and don’ts. 5. A calling on the pagan gods to witness the agreement of the people to the covenant. 6. A list of the curses that would fall on disobedience to the covenant. 7. Provision for the covenant to be stored in a safe place. 8. A command that the vassal king must from time to time remind the people of the terms of the covenant, by reading it out before them. D. God’s covenant with Israel had a similar form (Exod 20:2–17): 1. Who God is: I am the Lord your God. 2. What God has done for the people: Who brought you up out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 3. The prohibition on other gods: You shall have no other gods but me. 4. A list of do’s and don’ts: You shall . . . you shall not. 5. A calling on heaven and earth to witness the making of the covenant and the consequences of disloyalty (Deut 4:26). 6. A list of blessings and cursings (Deut 28:1–29:1). 7. The tables of the covenant to be stored in the ark (Deut 10:1–8). 8. A re-reading and exposition of the covenant by Moses before the people just before their entry into Canaan (Deut 5–8). 9. The old covenant was, therefore, the instrument of God’s government of his ancient people.

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 26

E. The counterpart for us: the new covenant. The new covenant also is an instrument of government by which the Lord rules his people nowadays. Consider: 1. The very first term of the covenant: I will put my laws into their mind, and on their heart also will I write them (Heb 8:10). 2. The superiority of the writing of the new covenant compared with that of the old (2 Cor 3:2– 3). 3. Its practical application to our daily living (1 Cor 11:23–32). 4. Its call for us to cooperate with the Lord. 5 The glory of its assured forgiveness (Heb 10:16–18). 6. The reminder of Judas’ betrayal (1 Cor 11:23).

II. The Golden Altar of Incense

1 Kings 6:19–22

A. Its purpose: the burning of incense at the time of prayer (cf. Luke 1:8–10; Rev 8:3–4). B. It was an invitation to cooperate with the Lord in his government of his people.

III. The Decorative Motif of the House

1 Kings 6:29

A. Cherubim = the living creatures (cf. Ezek 1:5–28; 10:1–20, particularly v. 20). B. Palm trees (or, palmettes). C. Open flowers (or, rosettes). D. The above represent life, in its variety and beauty. E. They proclaimed that the resident in the house was the living God. F. How people ought to behave in the house of God, which is the church of the living God (cf. 1 Tim 3:15). G. God is the source of all life within the universe (John 1:1–4; 5:21, 26). H But note, God is not to be identified with the created universe, nor with its processes. 1. God is holy, i.e. separate from, distinct from, all else. 2. In the beginning [of the universe] the Word [already] was. Take note, it does not say that in the beginning the Word became, or came to be. 3. The universe, by contrast, came to be, was made, by him (John 1:1–4). 4. God upholds all things; but all things are not God. Pantheism is false (Heb 1:2–3; Col 1:15–17). 5. The universe will grow old, like a worn out garment; but God never will (Heb 1:10–12). I. Beware of the tendency among certain modern cosmologists and physicists to revert to the old Stoic idea that there is an intelligence behind the universe; but that that intelligence is part of the stuff of the universe. 11

The History: The Reign of Ahab of Israel and the Ministry of Elijah 1 Kings 16:29–22:40

I. The Gravity of Ahab’s Sin

1 Kings 16:29–34

A. Ahab’s sin was worse than Jeroboam’s. 1. Jeroboam still claimed the historical event of the deliverance from Egypt as the basis of his religious system, though he idolatrously proclaimed two golden calves as the gods that delivered Israel (1 Kgs 12:28). 2. Ahab was a complete apostate: he made no pretence of holding the historic faith of Jehovah, the Lord God of Israel, and went over to the worship of Baal. HE THEREFORE BROKE THE VERY FIRST STIPULATION OF THE COVENANT: YOU SHALL HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME. B. The nature of Baal-worship. 1. Baal was the god of the storm, and the god of fertility. 2. Baal was, therefore, the deification of the forces of nature. C. The similarity between ancient pagan idolatry and modern atheistic materialism. 1. Atheists reject belief in a personal God Creator. 2. But, of course, they can see that they themselves neither created themselves, nor do they control the forces that created them and that will eventually destroy them. 3. If asked what these ultimate forces are that brought the universe and humankind into existence and that will eventually destroy them, they will reply: the forces of nature: energy, the weak atomic power, the strong atomic power, gravity, electromagnetism, biochemistry, etc. They do not call these forces gods, but they might as well; according to them these forces produced, and now control them; they do not control these forces. These forces are to them the ultimate powers in the universe. In other words, the modern atheists, like the ancient pagans, in rejecting the one true God Creator, inevitably are driven to deify the forces and processes of nature. D. In Ahab’s time, Hiel the Bethelite defied God’s curse on Jericho (the first and chief stronghold of paganism destroyed by Joshua) and rebuilt it, but found that the curse was real and operative (16:34; see Josh 6:26). E. Beware: the modern revivals of paganism in the New Age Movement, Gaia, the Mother Earth Goddess, Celtic spirituality, etc.

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 28

II. The Ministry of Elijah

1 Kings 17:1–2 Kings 2:18

A. His experience of God as the living God (cf. the decorative motif of the house of the Lord). 1. There is no record that Elijah ever went to the house of the Lord in Jerusalem. 2. But notice his repeated expression: As the Lord, the God of Israel, lives, before whom I stand (17:1; 18:15). 3. His experience of God: a. in the transport of the means of life (17:2–6). b. in the miraculous maintenance of the means of life (17:8–16). (1) And note specially the widow woman’s desperate plight that led her to dare to put her faith in Elijah and in God’s word and so experience the miracle of God’s provision. (2) Contrast the attitude of the people in the synagogue at Nazareth (Luke 4:16–30). c. in the miraculous renewal of life itself (17:17–24). B. His praying (cf. the golden altar of incense, 1 Kgs 6:21–22). 1. He prayed that it might not rain (17:1; Jas 5:17). 2. He prayed for the revivification of the widow’s dead son (17:20–22). 3. He prayed for Israel on Mount Carmel, and the fire and the rain came from heaven (18:36–39, 42–45; Jas 5:18). 4. He prayed against Israel on Mount Horeb (19:13–14; Rom 11:2–4). C. His contest with the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18). 1. The test to be applied: the God that answers by fire, let him be God (18:24). 2. The futility of calling on Baal, i.e. the physical forces and processes of the universe: there was no voice, nor any that answered (18:26). 3. The voice of God: fire from heaven accepting the sacrifice proclaims who the true God is (18:30–39); and there follows the ending of the drought by the rain from heaven (18:44–45). 4. Compare the voice of God’s self-declaration at Calvary and then at Pentecost. D. His praying on Mount Horeb against Israel (1 Kgs 19). 1. On Mount Carmel Elijah had ‘preached the gospel’ to Israel: God had accepted the sacrifice offered on their behalf; he was prepared to turn their heart again, accept their repentance, renew their relationship with him, the one true God, and bless them by sending the rain (1 Kgs 18:37). 2. In spite of all this, Jezebel and Ahab, as the leaders of Israel, officially reject Elijah and threaten to murder him (1 Kgs 19:2). 3. Elijah flees to Horeb, the mount of God, on which Moses had stood to receive the law amid fire, cloud and thick darkness (1 Kgs 19:8; Deut 4:10–40). 4. When, therefore, Elijah prayed on the ground of the law, against Israel who had rejected the ‘gospel’, the inevitable result was the pronouncement of God’s judgment (1 Kgs 19:13–18). 5. Note the still, small voice was not a message of peace. It pronounced the severe sweeping judgment of God (1 Kgs 19:12, 17). 6. But it included the promise that in spite of the judgment, God would spare a remnant of seven thousand loyal believers (1 Kgs 19:18). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 29

7. This severe judgment was eventually carried out on the royal house of Ahab by Jehu (2 Kgs 9:1–10:28). 8. Compare the fact that after Calvary and Pentecost thousands of Jews were converted to Christ. But the leaders of the Jewish nation persisted in their rejection of Christ and in their persecution of the apostles (Acts 2–5). Therefore, says Paul, the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost (1 Thess 2:14–16). 9. But note that God has not cast Israel away permanently and forever. The fact that God has left a remnant in this age, as he did in Elijah’s day, is a pledge that all Israel will one day be saved (Rom 11:1–26).

III. God’s Judgment on Ahab Personally

A. God through his prophets preached the ‘gospel’ to Ahab by demonstrating that the God of Israel is the true God, as distinct from the Syrians’ pagan concepts of God. God does this by giving Ahab victory over the Syrians twice. But in spite of this, Ahab insists that there is no real difference between him and the Syrians, and refuses to execute God’s judgment on the Syrians (1 Kgs 20, see especially vv. 1–4, 13, 28, 32–34, 42–43). B. Ahab and Jezebel abuse their royal power by having Naboth judicially murdered, thus denying his right to his God-given inheritance and to life itself (1 Kgs 21). C. Ahab, knowing what the truth is, refuses to receive it. God, therefore, sends him a strong delusion that he should believe the lie; and Ahab falls in battle (1 Kgs 22). D. Compare the principle of God’s judgment (2 Thess 2:8–12). 12

The House: The Third Set of Plans (2) 1 Kings 6:22–38

Here we should notice three major features of the house: I. The two olive-wood cherubim in the Most Holy Place (6:23–28); and the cherubim, palm trees and open flowers on the walls of the house (6:29). II. The floor of the house: overlaid with gold both in the Most Holy Place, and in the Holy Place (6:30). III. The doors of the house: A. Into the Most Holy Place (6:31–32); B. Into the Holy Place (6:33–35).

I. The Two Olive Wood Cherubim

These are not to be confused with the two golden cherubim on the ends of the mercy seat (Exod 25:18). A. Cherubim are elsewhere described as ‘living creatures’ (Ezek 10:20). B. They are closely associated with the throne of God (cf. Rev 4:6–9). In Ezekiel 1 and in Revelation 4, the throne of God rests on the cherubim. In the house of the Lord, the throne, i.e. the ark, was placed under the outstretched wings of the two olive-wood cherubim (1 Kgs 8:6–7). C. As the olive-wood cherubim stood looking out from the throne-room, they saw cherubim, palm trees and open flowers, carved on the walls all the way round both the Most Holy Place, and the Holy Place. It was a question of life answering to life. D. It symbolized a basic principle of God’s government: 1. God governs, not simply by laying down rules or by issuing commands, but by imparting life. 2. Analogy: God gets apple trees to bear apples, by putting life in them. 3. So with us today: God gets us to obey him, by imparting to us and within us the life of his Spirit (Rom 8:2, 12–17; Gal 5:16–18).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 31

II. The Floor of the House

1 Kings 6:30

A. It was altogether appropriate that the floor in the Most Holy Place beneath God’s symbolic throne should be overlaid with gold. B. It is surely astonishing that when a priest stood outside, in the Holy Place, offering incense before God at the time of prayer, he too stood on gold! C. Granted that the gold in the Most Holy Place may have been pure gold (i.e. if verse 20 refers not merely to the walls but to the floor as well). But in any case the metal was the same: the floor of the Holy Place was not covered with, say, bronze, or left as bare wood. D. The symbolism points us to the position and standing God gives us in his presence: with Christ in the heavenly places (cf. Eph 2:6).

III. The Doors into the Most Holy Place, and into the Holy Place

1 Kings 6:31–35

A. The house of the Lord was a comparatively small building: about thirty metres long, by ten metres wide, by fifteen metres high; much smaller than a normal cathedral (the royal cubit was about fifty centimetres) (see 1 Kgs 6:2). B. But it is no exaggeration to say that when a priest left the outside world and passed through the door into the Holy Place—and even more so, when the high priest passed through the door into the Most Holy Place—he entered a bigger world than he left outside. For inside, earth merged with heaven (see 1 Kgs 8:10–11, 29–30). C. So today every believer has through Christ access in one Spirit unto the Father, and boldness to enter into the [most] holy place . . . through the veil . . . (Eph 2:18; Heb 10:19–20). 13

The History: The Ministry of Elisha 2 Kings 1:1–9:10

I. Its Background and Context

A. Judgment Pronounced on Israel

1. At God’s instructions Elijah anointed Elisha on the basis of this prophetic announcement: him who escapes from the sword of Hazael shall Jehu slay, and him that escapes from the sword of Jehu shall Elisha slay (1 Kgs 19:17). 2. This enigmatic statement raises the question: whom did Elisha slay, and in what sense did he slay them? 3. But without doubt this is part of God’s judgment on Israel in general, and on the royal house of Ahab in particular. 4. That judgment on Ahab’s house was announced to Ahab; but upon his contrition the destruction of his house was postponed until his son’s days (1 Kgs 21:20–29). 5. The judgment was actually executed on the house of Ahab by Jehu; and by Hazael (2 Kgs 9–10; 12:17–21; 13:1–4, 22). 6. Elisha, therefore, ministered during a period of grace, between the pronouncement of God’s judgment and its execution, but always against the background of that coming judgment.

B. Elijah’s First ‘Ascension’ 2 Kings 1:1–18

1. Elijah intervened to denounce King Ahaziah’s gross insult to God in sending messengers to enquire of Baal-zebub, the god of Ekron, what the outcome of his illness would be. And after this denunciation, Elijah departed . . . and, behold, he sat on the top of the hill (1:3–4, 9). 2. Perhaps King Ahaziah had anticipated the stern, but truthful, reply he would receive from Elijah’s God (you . . . shall surely die) and had hoped for a more lenient reply from Baal-zebub. 3. Anyway, Ahaziah sent a captain with fifty soldiers to Elijah with the demand: O Man of God, the king has said, come down (1:9). 4. Notice the presumptuous illogicality of the king’s demand: if Elijah was in truth a man of God (as, of course, he was), and the very mouthpiece of God himself, it was not for King Ahaziah to command Elijah to do anything, least of all to come down. 5. Elijah’s reply: the vindication of the fact that he was a man of God: if I be a man of God, let fire come down from heaven, and consume you and your fifty (1:10).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 33

6. In spite of this Ahaziah sent another captain plus fifty soldiers with an even stronger demand: O man of God, thus has the king said, ‘Come down quickly’. And the same judgment fell on them (1:11– 12). 7. Ahaziah sent a third captain with fifty soldiers. But this captain humbled himself before the man of God, sought for, and obtained, mercy (1:13–15). 8. Comment: a. To modern minds, Elijah’s action may seem severe, or even savage. But we should remember that idolatry and blasphemy are capital sins, according to Old Testament; our God is a consuming fire (see Heb 12:26–29). b. It was not the purpose of our Lord’s coming into the world to condemn the world and execute the judgment of God. Christ, therefore, rebuked his disciples for wanting to call down fire from heaven to consume the people who did not receive Christ (John 3:17; Luke 9:54–55). c. But our Lord himself pointed out what the logical implications of his resurrection and ascension would be: The Holy Spirit will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness and of judgment: of sin, because they believe not on me; of righteousness, because I go to the Father . . . of judgment, because the prince of this world has been judged (John 16:8–11; cf. 2 Thess 1:7–10).

C. Elijah’s Second ‘Ascension’ 2 Kings 2:1–18

1. In the full knowledge that Elijah was going to be taken up from him, Elisha asked for a double portion of Elijah’s spirit (a double portion was the right of the firstborn) (2:9). 2. The condition for receiving this double portion: if you see me when I am taken from you (2:10). 3. Elisha, therefore, persisted in following Elijah, and saw him taken up (2:11–12). 4. Compare the record of our Lord’s ascension (Acts 1:6–11): a. Notice the emphasis on the fact that the apostles saw the Lord ascending: as they were looking . . . a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they were looking steadfastly . . . why stand you looking . . . shall so come . . . as you beheld him going into heaven. b. The ascension is not a myth. It was an historical, physical event witnessed by human eyes. c. It was also symbolic: Christ’s physical ascent upwards from earth was also symbolic of his being raised to the highest position: at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens (Heb 8:1). d. During the forty days Christ had appeared physically to his disciples from time to time, suddenly, and then just as suddenly disappeared. The special manner of his ‘disappearing’ at the ascension indicated that the former series of appearings were now at an end. e. Note: while Luke’s narrative says that the apostles saw Christ physically ascending up into the sky, Luke does not say that they saw him cross over from our universe into heaven: at that point a cloud received him out of their sight (Acts 1:9). f. The ascension at the beginning and the second coming at the end, set the framework and context of our witness for the Lord (Acts 1:8, 11). g. We need to set our mind’s eye on Christ, seated at the right hand of God (Col 3:1). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 34

D. The Authentication of Elisha as Elijah’s Successor 2 Kings 2:13–25

1. The Spirit of Elijah Rested on Elisha (2 Kgs 2:13–15) a. Elisha took up the mantle that fell from the ascending Elijah, which enabled him to do what Elijah had done: to smite and part the waters of Jordan to allow him to pass over on dry ground (2:13– 14). b. Jordan was the main boundary that ancient Israel had to cross in Joshua’s day to get into their inheritance. c. Elijah had crossed this boundary as he left his earthly, for his heavenly, inheritance. d. Elisha, empowered by Elijah’s spirit is enabled to repeat, at the personal level, the ancient miracle by which Israel had originally entered their inheritance; though, note, it was the God of Elijah that did the miracle (2:14). e. Compare at the Christian level: (1) Behold, I send forth the promise of my Father upon you: but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high (Luke 24:49). (2) He who believes on me, the works that I do shall he do also . . . because I go to the Father, and whatever you ask in my name, that will I do (John 14:12–13). (3) That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, becoming conformed to his death; if by any means I may attain to the resurrection from the dead (Phil 3:10–11). 2. The Validation of Elisha’s Report of Elijah’s Ascension (2 Kgs 2:15–18) a. Elisha had claimed to be an eyewitness of Elijah’s ascension into heaven. b. But some of the sons of the prophets (i.e. the younger professional prophets) were not too ready to believe Elisha’s witness. They advanced an alternative theory: the Spirit had taken Elijah up and then cast him on some mountain, or into some valley (2:16; cf. Philip’s experience, Acts 8:39–40). c. So they sent out a search party, but all in vain: no body was ever found (2:17–18). 3. Three Defining Miracles Attesting Elisha as a Prophet of God (2 Kgs 2:19–25) a. A miracle of grace: healing the waters of Jericho and removing the curse of the broken covenant (2:19–22). (1) Having just crossed back over Jordan, Elisha was now at Jericho (2:15). (2) The city’s situation was pleasant; but the water was bad and the land ‘miscarried’ (in Hebrew this term is used of people, animals, vines and fruits trees, or of the land in general) (2:19; see Hos 9:14; Gen 31:38; Mal 3:14). (3) Israel was warned that such sicknesses wherewith the Lord has made it sick (i.e. the land, Deut 29:21–27), are the result of Israel’s sin in breaking God’s law and thus bringing on themselves the curse of the broken covenant (cf. Jer 17:6). (4) Elisha ‘heals’ the water and thus removes the curse. The remarkable thing is that he did it by putting salt in the water (as a purifying agent?). Contrast: but the swamps and the marshes shall not be healed; they shall be given up to salt (Ezek 47:11). b. A miracle of judgment: pronouncing the curse of the Lord on God-rejecters (2:23–25). (1) Note the people who jeered Elisha were not little children. A similar phrase is used of the ‘young girl’ old enough to be a servant to Naaman’s wife (5:2). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 35

(2) These youths came out of Bethel: the headquarters of Israel’s idolatry (2:23). (3) To mock and reject a prophet of the Lord was regarded as tantamount to rejecting the Lord himself and carried the extreme penalty (cf. Lev 24:10–16; Deut 18:18–19). (4) Compare John 12:48 and Matthew 10:14–15. (5) Go up you bald-head may imply that they were rejecting and mocking Elisha’s account of Elijah’s ascension (2:23). (6) Like Christ, Elisha exercised a ministry of life, deliverance, restoration and salvation, and did so in a period of grace. But he did so against the background of coming judgment for those who rejected God’s mercy, grace and salvation. c. A miracle which demonstrated that the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of trial and to keep the unrighteous unto the day of judgment, meanwhile being punished (2 Pet 2:9). (1) (a) First let us try to understand the principle enunciated in 2 Peter 2:9. (i) In this chapter Peter cites the flood. This was a temporal judgment which God brought on the ungodly world in the course of history. When he did so, God saved Noah and his family from this temporal judgment. Those who perished under this temporal judgment are held like prisoners in a remand prison, and will come up for final judgment at the great white throne (2:5; Rev 20:4–15). (ii) In this chapter Peter also cites the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. That also was a temporal judgment in the course of history. Those who perished in it will come up for final judgment at the great white throne (Matt 11:24). (iii) It would have been better if Lot had remained a pilgrim (nomad) like Abraham. Instead he chose to move his tent to the grassy plain, and then took a house in Sodom itself, even though the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners against the Lord exceedingly (Gen 13:12–13; 19). (iv) Now Scripture tells us that Lot was a ‘righteous’ man, i.e. he had been justified by faith just like Abraham had been, even though by close association with the men of Sodom, his behaviour became seriously reprehensible (2 Pet 2:7–8; Gen 19:4–9). (v) Nonetheless, because he was a ‘righteous’ man, and because of Abraham’s intercessions, when God brought destruction on Sodom and Gomorrah, he first rescued Lot from the impending judgment (Gen 19:29; 2 Pet 2:7, 9; Gen 19:10–25). (b) Now let us consider the case of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah. (i) He was (on the whole) a good, God-fearing king (see 1 Kgs 22:43). (ii) But he acted very foolishly in regard to the house of Ahab, king of Israel. a) He let his son Jehoram marry Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab, granddaughter of Omni (2 Kgs 8:18, 26). b) He let Ahab cajole him into joining him in a military campaign against the Aramaeans, and nearly perished in battle—but God heard his prayer and saved him (1 Kgs 22:1–4, 29–33). c) In spite of that Jehoshaphat joined king Ahaziah ben Ahab in a co-operative shipbuilding exercise. But God allowed the ships to be destroyed; whereupon Jehoshaphat refused to continue this joint exercise with Ahaziah ben Ahab (2 Chr 20:35–37; 1 Kgs 22:48–49). (iii) But in spite of all this, Jehoshaphat allowed himself to be persuaded to join king Jehoram ben Ahab in an expedition to suppress a rebellion by the king of Moab. As Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 36

a result Jehoshaphat nearly perished along with the king of Israel and the king of Edom; and would have done so, but God, through Elisha, did a miracle to save him (2 Kgs 3). (2) The Campaign against Moab (3:1–27). (a) Jehoram ben Ahab, king of Israel, was evil: not so bad as Ahab and Jezebel (he did not himself join in Baal-worship, but allowed it to continue in his realm); but he unrepentantly persisted in the sin of Jeroboam (2 Kgs 3:3). (b) Notice that Moab rebelled against the king of Israel, not against the king of Judah (3:4– 6). (c) It was therefore nothing to do with Jehoshaphat, king of Judah; but once more he allowed himself to be cajoled by Jehoram ben Ahab, king of Israel, to identity himself and his people with the evil king of Israel, and to join the campaign (3:7). (The king of Edom was a vassal to Jehoshaphat.) (d) Notice that they decided strategy and tactics without consulting the Lord (3:8). (e) The strategy seemed obviously right and sensible—to avoid going through Ammon in direct confrontation with Moab’s newly fortified cities in the north, and to attack Moab from its less well fortified south-eastern border (3:8). (f) But it involved a seven day circuitous journey through the Negeb—and this led to near disaster through dehydration (3:9). (g) Jehoram, king of Israel, prompted maybe by his bad conscience, feared that the Lord had brought the three kings together to have Moab destroy them. Actually Jehoram was destined to perish under the judgment of God through Jehu (3:10; cf. 1 Kgs 21:29; 2 Kgs 9:21–26). (h) Jehoshaphat asked to enquire of a prophet of the Lord; and they were taken to Elisha (3:11–12). (i) Elisha denounced Jehoram’s idolatrous and sinful family, and declared that if it had not been for Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, he would not so much as look at Jehoram (3:13–14). (j) It is clear, then, that the miracle of deliverance from defeat by dehydration was performed not for the king of Israel’s sake, but solely for the sake of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah. (k) They were told that water would be provided; and so it was—probably by a distant storm, leading to a flash flood, the water of which was eventually caught in the trenches they were told to dig (3:17, 20). (l) In addition Elisha made a double prediction: (i) The first part: that the Lord would deliver Moab into their hands (3:18). (ii) The second part: what they would then do to the Moabites and to their land (3:19). (m) But note, part two was not a command from God. We can be sure of that, because God forbade the cutting down of fruit trees by an attacking army; and God would never command people to act contrary to his word. Part two was simply a prediction of what the Israelites would do to Moab, when God delivered Moab into their hands (Deut 20:19). (n) Notice, also, that in verse 19 the prediction was that they should smite (i.e. attack, damage) every city: not that they would conquer and destroy every city. (o) The Moabites, however, misinterpreted the red glow of the water, took the initiative, and over-confidently attacked Israel (3:22–24). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 37

(p) Thereupon the Israelites responded with such ruthless destruction—including the cutting down of fruit trees—that eventually the Moabites were filled with such disgust and violent animosity against Israel, that in desperation they took a stand at Kir-hareseth; and there was great wrath against Israel—and Israel was obliged to retreat and return to their own land (3:26–27). (q) Conclusion: (i) The intervention of God through Elisha distinguished between ‘righteous’, but foolish, Jehoshaphat and the evil king of Israel. (ii) It saved Jehoshaphat from perishing as a result of his unwise association with an evil king whom God had appointed to eventual destruction. (iii) But at the same time, it did not give victory to the evil king of Israel. Instead God allowed that king’s own ruthless, and unscriptural, devastation of Moab’s territory to lead to Israel’s suffering great wrath, and having to retreat.

II. Elisha’s Life-Giving, Life-Sustaining, Life-Empowering Miracles

2 Kings 4:1–44

A. A comparison with the provision symbolized in the house of the Lord 1. Recall the cherubim, palm trees and open flowers in the house of the Lord (1 Kgs 6:23–29). 2. They pointed to the fact that God is the Living God; and that he governs, not just by laying down laws, but by imparting life and developing life’s potential. 3. As far as we know, Elisha never visited the house of the Lord in Jerusalem; but his miracles in 2 Kings 4 have all to do with life and the necessities for its maintenance: 1. oil; 2. fertility; 3. restoration of life; 4. neutralising poison in food; 5. miraculously multiplying good quality food. B. The miracle of the oil supply (4:1–7). 1. The situation: the danger of debt leading to slavery (4:1). 2. The solution: the latent resources: a pot of oil (4:2). 3. The condition for experiencing the miracle: faith. a. There is no doubt that a genuine miracle was involved: just as with the barrel of flour and the cruse of oil in the case of the widow of Zarephath (1 Kgs 17:8–16). b. But in each of these cases the widow concerned was required to act in faith on the basis of God’s word through the prophet. 4. The outcome: the supply of oil was limited only by the number of vessels that were presented for filling. Slavery was avoided (4:6–7). 5. Analogy: a. All believers are debtors (cf. Rom 1:14–15; 8:12–13). b. But it is not God’s intention that fulfilling our debt of responsibility should make slaves of us (Rom 8:15). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 38

c. We cannot fulfil our responsibilities simply in the power of the flesh: for that will make slaves of us. d. But we have no need to try: we have an unlimited resource: the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:14– 17). e. But notice: Then Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit and said to them [the Sanhedrin] . . . Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit precisely at the moment he needed to be filled to accomplish a special task and to meet a particular need. And so it is with us (Acts 4:8). C. The miracle of the conception of new life (2 Kgs 4:8–17). 1. This, too, was a genuine miracle, as was the conception and birth of Isaac to Sarah and Abraham (Gen 16–21). 2. Notice, however, the process: first the promise of God to the woman through Elisha; then the woman’s ascertaining that the promise was the truth and no lie; then on the basis of the woman’s faith, the new life conceived (4:16–17). 3. It was exactly so with Abraham and Sarah (Rom 4:16–22). 4. Analogy: The analogy, this time, is the same as the one which Paul draws between Abraham and Sarah’s experience and ours (Rom 4:23–25; Gal 4:28). D. The miracle of life from the dead (2 Kgs 4:18–37). 1. Notice the woman’s faith that only Elisha could perform this miracle (4:22, 27, 30). 2. Gehazi was Elisha’s servant, and he was given Elisha’s staff of office to lay on the child’s face. 3. But the mere staff of office, the mere command of authority, provoked no response (4:31). 4. Only personal contact with Elisha imparted life to the dead (4:32–37). 5. Analogy: The gift of new life, at the spiritual level, comes not through mental assent to a theological formula, but by faith in, and personal contact with, the living Christ (John 5:25–26; 6:65). E. The miracle of neutralising the poison in the food of the sons of the prophets (2 Kgs 4:38–41). 1. The ‘sons of the prophets’, mentioned in 2 Kings, seem to have been a company of ‘junior’ professional prophets, among whom Elisha would have been recognized as a greater prophet. 2. Some inexperienced prophet with the best of intentions added a lot of poisonous herbs to the pot of stew being prepared for dinner, not realising these herbs were poisonous (4:38–39). 3. Elisha’s ‘cure’ was to counteract the poison by adding a good deal of healthy meal to the stew. 4. Analogy: Theological students, teachers and preachers sometimes pick up—perhaps from their theological colleges or universities—ideas which, without their knowing it, are poisonous; and they begin to feed these ideas to their fellow-believers without realising the implications. A clear example in the New Testament is the false doctrine that some were teaching to the church at Corinth, namely, that there was no such thing as bodily resurrection. Consider also, the false recipes for sanctification and spirituality listed by Paul. This kind of unintentional poison must be neutralised by positively feeding God’s people with the wholesome word of God, the bread of life (1 Cor 15; Col 2:8–23). F. The miraculous multiplying of a seemingly inadequate food supply (2 Kgs 4:42–44). In this miracle, as in so much else, Elisha resembles the Lord Jesus. Compare the miracle performed by Christ in using a boy’s five loaves and two small fish to feed five thousand (John 6:1–15). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 39

III. Elisha’s Treatment of Naaman the Leper

2 Kings 5:1–19

A. Recall what we saw earlier about the floor in the house of the Lord (1 Kgs 6:30). 1. The floor of the Holy Place, where the priest stood at the altar of incense before God, was covered with gold just like the floor of the Most Holy Place. 2. At the climax of the Naaman story, Naaman asks for two loads of Israelite earth, so that henceforth when he stands to sacrifice to the Lord, his altar may be erected on sacred soil (5:17). B. The process through which Naaman was required to go to obtain healing. 1. Naaman was a noble, dignified, courageous, military man, credited with victories, honoured by the king of Aram—but a leper (5:1). 2. He went to Israel for healing. a. He was prepared to pay handsomely for it (5:5). b. He was expecting to be treated by no less a person than the king of Israel (5:6–7). c. When sent to the prophet, he expected to be the centre of an impressive ceremony (5:11). 3. In consequence he felt mortally insulted, when: a. Elisha did not even come out of his house to meet him (5:10). b. He told him to dip seven times in Jordan, which he felt was a miserable ditch compared with the rivers of his own country (5:12). c. If he had been asked to do some great thing, he would gladly have done it, but to immerse himself, in full view of his servants, in Jordan was humiliating (5:13). d. But what he was forgetting was: (1) That it was not the prophet that was to heal him. (2) He had to do with the transcendent, only, all-glorious God of majesty before whom Naaman, for all his supposed dignity, was an unclean leper. (3) If he would be cleansed, he must first own his uncleanness, humble himself, and baptise himself in Jordan. 4. When, however, he humbled himself and immersed himself in Jordan: a. God cleansed him. b. His flesh became like that of a little child. It was like a new birth (5:14). c. He came to know God as the unique Lord God of all the earth (5:15). d. He was given, free of all charge, not only healing, but also a new standing and ground of acceptance before God (5:17). e. He also discovered that now he had a conscience (that he didn’t know before) about the idolatrous State-worship of Rimmon. His first reaction was to ask pardon for what he felt was unavoidable (though only external) compromise. Perhaps God who had cleansed him taught him a better attitude later (5:18). 5. Analogy: Baptism: the symbol of radical repentance, death and burial as the way to resurrection life (Rom 6). C. Gehazi’s Sin (5:20–27). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 40

1. He compromised the gospel by allowing Naaman to think that he could pay for healing, and so continuing in Naaman a false sense of self-sufficiency and pride. 2. He felt that godliness, and preaching the gospel, were a way of making money (1 Tim 6:5). 3. He became infected with the same uncleanness as Naaman had suffered before his cleansing (5:27).

IV. Elisha and Three ‘Escape’ Stories

2 Kings 6:1–7:20

A. Recall what we earlier saw about the doors of the house of the Lord (1 Kgs 6:31–35). 1. Into the Most Holy Place, and 2. Into the Holy Place. a. To leave the outside world and to enter these doors was to enter a bigger world than you left outside; for in the house of the Lord earth merged with heaven, and in the Most Holy Place, man entered the presence of the Lord. b. Each of the three following stories shows how people found escape from cramped conditions and sieges into the larger experience of freedom, life and wealth. B. Elisha and the desire of the sons of the prophets for more room to dwell in (6:1–7). 1. Young people often feel they need a larger experience than their elders seem to enjoy. 2. Note Elisha went along with their desire to build themselves a larger environment. 3. But one man’s axe-head flew off its staff and sank in the river. That put an end to his building anything, let alone a larger dwelling place. 4. But Elisha made the iron to swim; i.e. he had the power to overcome the pull of gravity (6:6). 5. If you have the power to overcome gravity, you need not feel cramped in! 6. Analogy: a. Sometimes people feel their experience in the church is too cramped and narrow— which, of course, in some cases, is true. b. But the way to escape into larger experience is not to leave the church and go off into the world (the world proves eventually to be a very small place), nor to bring the world into the church. c. The way into a larger spiritual experience is through the colossal power of God exerted towards us when he raised Christ from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places . . . and raised us up with him and made us to sit with him in the heavenly places . . . (Eph 1:15–2:6). C. Elisha and the siege at Dothan (2 Kgs 6:8–23). 1. Elisha’s servant could see only the horses, and the chariots and the great host of the enemy encircling them (6:15). 2. But in fact there was a far larger and far more powerful force surrounding both Elisha and the enemy (6:16–17). 3. So Elisha prayed Lord, open his [the young man’s] eyes, to see this greater spiritual force.

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 41

4. Analogy: We too need constantly to pray that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give us a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him; having the eyes of our heart enlightened, that we may know . . . (Eph 1:16–2:6). D. Elisha and the breaking of the siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:24–7:20). 1. Elisha proclaimed the Lord’s word that the siege would be lifted and the famine would be ended tomorrow (7:1). 2. The king’s aide-de-camp refused to believe: if the Lord should make windows in heaven, might this thing be? (7:2). 3. He obviously did not believe that there were any ‘windows’ in heaven. He lived in a this- world-only closed system. 4. The word of the Lord came true of course. He it was that caused the Aramaeans to hear a vast noise and flee in panic (7:6–7). 5. But the special interest lies in the attitude of the lepers that proved the key to the ending of the famine. a. Inside the city, people in their desperate effort to keep alive and not die were reduced to cannibalism (6:24–33). b. The lepers, by contrast, faced the fact that they were going to die whatever they did (7:3– 4). c. And once they were prepared to die, they discovered that there was abundant provision both for them and for the city. It sent them back to the city as evangelists (7:8–20). 6. Analogy: a. The prince of this world tries to make people think that there is no world but this world, and then besieges them with the fear of death (Heb 2:14–15). b. Our Lord delivers those who trust him from the slavery induced by fear of death (Heb 2:14–15). c. But there is another world, as our Lord demonstrated to the apostles on the Mount of Transfiguration. Moreover, this present age will not last forever: it will give way to the age to come (Matt 16:27–17:8). d. In the light of this we must be prepared to ‘lose’ our life (Matt 16:25). For the fact is: (1) Whoever would save his life shall lose it; (2) Whoever shall lose his life for my sake shall find it. e. Compare also Colossians 2:3, 9, 20; 3:1–4; John 12:23–24. 14

The House: The Fourth Set of Plans 1 Kings 7:1–12

I. The King’s House = The Palace Buildings

The king’s house was a complex of buildings comprising: A. The house of the forest of Lebanon: a grand, majestic room containing the king’s throne, where the royal ceremonials were conducted and where some of the king’s treasures were kept (7:2–5; 10:14– 20). B. The porch of pillars: a similarly grand room, perhaps an ante-room to A. above, where royal receptions were held (7:6). C. The porch of the throne where he might judge: the king’s bench-division of the law-courts (7:7). D. The king’s own private apartments (7:8). E. The queen’s palace (7:8). F. All these in a great court surrounded by a wall (7:12). Comment: The king’s house was a twin unit of government with the house of the Lord (cf. 1 Cor 15:25– 28).

II. The King’s House = The Royal Family and Reigning Dynasty

See, For Instance, 1 Kings 12:16

A. In this sense, the dynasty is always called ‘the house of David’, since he was the founder of the dynasty. B. It is no exaggeration to say that King David and his royal house have proved to be unique in the whole of human history: for this reason—that one of his descendants, a member of his royal house, turned out to be Jesus, the Messiah, Son of God. C. It was not that Jesus happened to be born of a line that could be traced back to someone in ancient history who happened to be a king. D. It was that David was appointed by the transcendent Lord of the universe to be his anointed king, the one through whose royal line the Messiah, Son of God, should enter our world, as the inheritor of David’s throne: He shall be . . . called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father, David (Luke 1:32). E. Moreover, in making a covenant with David to the effect your house and your kingdom shall be made sure for ever before you: your throne shall be established for ever. God explained how that should be secured: talking of David’s son and heir, he said: I will be his father, and he shall be my Son (2 Sam 7:14, 16).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 43

F. This promise was partially fulfilled in David’s son, Solomon; but looking back on this promise in the light of Christ’s resurrection, it is evident that in him the original promise was fulfilled in the highest possible sense: God was his father in a unique sense; and Jesus was the one and only Son of the Father; he was and is God incarnate (see Heb 1:5). G. Some will object that this interpretation of Christ’s Sonship was invented by the early Christians. But that is not so. 1. King David himself, in one of his psalms, refers to the Messiah as my Lord (Ps 110:1). 2. This must mean, as Christ himself pointed out, that David himself recognized that the Messiah would be more than simply a physical descendent of his. For what monarch would refer to a physical son of his as ‘my Lord’ (Matt 22:41–46)?

III. The Fact That Jesus Christ is of the Seed of David is an Integral Part of the Gospel

A. The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David (Matt 1:1). B. The gospel of God . . . concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David, according to the flesh (Rom 1:1, 3). C. Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, of the seed of David, according to my gospel (2 Tim 2:8). D. The Lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, has overcome, to open the book (Rev 5:5). E. The gospel is not a philosophy: it is a message about a person who came into our world at the climax of a deliberately ordered process in history.

IV. The Root of Jesse Has a Special Attraction for Us Gentiles

A. Again he says, rejoice, you Gentiles, with his people. And again, praise the Lord, all you Gentiles; and let all the peoples praise him. And again, Isaiah says, there shall be the root of Jesse, and he who arises to rule over the Gentiles; on him shall the Gentiles hope. Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing (Rom 15:10–13; Isa 11:10 (LXX)). B. Paul’s experience at Antioch in Pamphylia (Acts 13:44–48). C. No other Jew, in the whole of history, has led so many millions of Gentiles to faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as has the Lord Jesus, the root and offspring of David. 15

The History of Israel: From Jehu King of Israel until the Deportation of the Ten Tribes of Israel to Assyria by Shalmaneser King of Assyria 2 Kings 9:1–17:41

I. God’s Judgment on the House of Ahab

A. The judgment pronounced by God on the house of Ahab was eventually carried out by Jehu and by Hazael (1 Kgs 19:15–16; 19:21–20:29; 2 Kgs 8:7–15; 9:1–10:31; 13:3–7, 22). B. Jehu killed: 1. King Joram ben Ahab of Israel (9:16–26). 2. King Ahaziah ben Jehoram of Judah (9:27–28). 3. The seventy sons of Ahab (10:1–10). 4. All that remained of the house of Ahab in Jezreel, and all his great men, and his familiar friends, and his priests, until there be none left remaining (10:11). 5. The relatives of Ahaziah ben Jehoram of Judah (10:12–14). 6. All the priests and worshippers of Baal; and he destroyed the temple of Baal.

II. God’s Assessment of Jehu

2 Kings 10:29–31

A. In spite of his zeal to execute judgment on others, he persisted in the idolatrous worship instituted by Jeroboam (10:29). B. For executing God’s judgment on Ahab’s house, God promised Jehu that Jehu’s dynasty would last four generations (10:30). C. But in spite of that promise Jehu made no attempt to keep the law of the Lord, the God of Israel, with all his heart: he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam, wherewith he made Israel to sin (10:31). D. Moreover his zeal for punishing the house of Israel was excessive: see God’s statement through Hosea (Hos 1:4–5). E. Compare God’s similar assessment of the king of Assyria: 1. God used Assyria as the rod of his anger to chastise his people (Isa 10:5–6). 2. But the king of Assyria acted out of his own evil motives to indulge in excessive destruction (Isa 10:7). 3. Therefore, when God’s chastisement of his people was over, God said he would punish the king of Assyria for his excessive boastful cruelty (Isa 10:12–19).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 45

III. The Persistence of All the Subsequent Kings of the House of Jehu in the Sin of Rehoboam I.

A. Jehoahaz (13:1–2) B. Jehoash (13:10–11) C. Jeroboam II (14:24) D. Zechariah (15:8–9) Followed by kings that did not belong to Jehu’s house: E. Menahem (15:17–18) F. Pekahiah (15:23–24) G. Pekah (15:27–28) And after them the last king of Israel: H. Hoshea, who, though he was not so bad as the kings of Israel that preceded him, did evil in the sight of the Lord (17:1–2). As a result of this persistence in idolatry, and in the long list of evil practices listed in 2 Kings 17, God at long last allowed the Assyrians to carry the Israelites into exile: The Lord was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight . . . rejected . . . and afflicted them . . . as he spoke through all his servants the prophets (17:18, 20, 23).

IV. Yet Notice the Patience and Longsuffering of God with Israel Before He Removed Them into Exile

A. In the reign of Jehoahaz: And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel . . . and Jehoahaz sought the Lord, and the Lord listened to him, for he saw the oppression of Israel . . . and the Lord gave Israel a saviour (13:3–5). B. In the reign of Jehoash: through Elisha God promised, and gave, the next king, Jehoash, three victories over the Aramaeans . . . the Lord was gracious to them and had compassion on them, and had respect unto them, because of his covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and would not destroy them, neither did he cast them from his presence as yet (13:14–15, 23). C. In the reign of Jeroboam II: Jeroboam restored the border of Israel . . . according to the word of the Lord . . . For the Lord saw the affliction of Israel, that it was very bitter . . . neither was there any helper for Israel. And the Lord did not say that he would blot out the name of Israel from under heaven; but he saved them by the hand of Jeroboam II, the son of Jehoash (14:25–27). D. Compare God’s lament: How shall I give you up, Ephraim? . . . How shall I make you as Admah? How shall I set you as Zeboim? My heart is turned within me, my compassions are kindled together (Hos 11:8).

V. The Hope of Israel’s Return:

A. Read again of the provision for Israel’s forgiveness and return from exile (1 Kgs 8:46–53). B. Compare Christ’s tears over Jerusalem (Luke 19:41–44). C. The assurance of Israel’s eventual salvation (Rom 11:25–27). 16

The History of Judah: From Athaliah to Ahaz 2 Kings 11:1–16:20

I. Preliminary Note

A. Let us recall the details of the description of the king’s house (1 Kgs 7:1–12). 1. The house of the forest of Lebanon: the throne room and treasure hall, which appears to have been joined to, 2. The great vestibule, or reception hall; 3. The king’s bench-division of the law courts; 4. The king’s own palace; 5. The queen’s apartments. B. As we survey the history of the Judaean kings that now follows, we shall have occasion to think about these various parts of the king’s house.

II. Athaliah, the Queen’s Apartments and the Throne Room

A. Athaliah was the daughter of Ahab, the grand-daughter of Omri (2 Kgs 8:18, 26). B. She married Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat; her son by him was Ahaziah (2 Kgs 8:16–18, 26). C. Athaliah had a brother who also was called Jehoram (or, Joram). He was the son of Ahab; not to be confused with her husband, Jehoram (or Joram), the son of Jehoshaphat. D. Jehu killed Athaliah’s brother Jehoram, who was then king of Israel, and also Athaliah’s son, Ahaziah, who at the time had become king of Judah (2 Kgs 8:26; 9:24, 27–28). E. And when Athaliah saw that her son, Ahaziah, was dead, she destroyed all the seed royal of the house of David (except one: see below); usurped the throne herself and reigned over the land for six years (2 Kgs 11:1–3). F. She was the wickedest queen ever to occupy the queen’s apartments in the king’s house. Murderess of the whole royal line of the house of David (except one), she doubtless sat herself on the throne of the kings in the great throne room. G. The one member of the house of Judah that escaped murder by Athaliah, was a little child called Joash. His aunt Jehosheba stole him away and, with the help of Jehoiada, the high priest, hid him and his nurse in a bedchamber in the house of the Lord for six years (11:2–3).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 47

III. The Overthrow of the Usurper, Athaliah, and the Establishment of the True King, Joash, on the Throne of the Kings The steps in the procedure were: A. In the seventh year the high priest collected members of the king’s bodyguard whom he could trust and showed them the king’s son (11:4). B. Then he organized guards to achieve the maximum security, equipping them with the spears and shields that had been King David’s; and then they stood Joash by one of the pillars in the porch of the house of the Lord (11:5–11, 14). C. There they crowned Joash, gave him the testimony, anointed him king, clapped their hands and said, God save the king (11:12). D. Athaliah came to the house of the Lord and cried ‘treason’; but her hold on the people had been broken by the revelation of the true king; and she was executed (11:13–16). E. Then Jehoiada made a covenant between the Lord on the one hand and the king and the people on the other, that they should be the Lord’s people. And that involved also a covenant between the king and the people, which signified that the king would rule the people according to the principles laid down by God, and that on those terms the people would obey him (11:17; see Deut 17:14–20). F. Then they destroyed the house of Baal (11:18). G. Finally, in a great procession, they brought the king down from the house of the Lord to the king’s house, and sat him on the throne of the kings (11:19). Comment: In the light of this historical event, it is interesting to notice what has happened, and will yet happen.

IV. Jesus, the Anointed, of the Seed Royal, of David’s House According to the Flesh

A. As a child: Herod the Great tried to have him killed (Matt 2:1–23). B. At his trial and crucifixion: (another) Herod, the Sadducees, Pharisees and rulers of the people (but not all Jews everywhere) and Pilate gathered together against the Lord and his anointed, God’s holy servant, Jesus—and had him killed (Acts 4:27). 1. Notice that King David had prophesied about this event (Ps 2; and the comment in Acts 4:24– 28). 2. Notice also: you denied the holy and righteous one, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you, and killed the author of life (Acts 3:14–15). C. At his resurrection and ascension. 1. Hidden from our eyes in the house of the Lord: a. Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things (Acts 3:21). b. Note King David himself prophesied of Christ’s resurrection (Acts 2:25–31). c. King David also prophesied of Christ’s ascension (Ps 110:1). 2. Shown to the eye of faith: . . . your life is hid with Christ in God (Col 3:1–4). 3. Proclaimed king: God has made him both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 48

4. The covenant: a. Luke 22:7–20. b. 1 Corinthians 11:23–32. D. At his coming and sitting on the throne of his father, David. 1. Luke 1:32. 2. Israel as a whole shall recognize their true king (Zech 12:10; Rom 11:26). 3. Believers shall form his bride, his queen; see the ‘enthronement–Psalm’ (see Rev 19:7–9; 21:2, 9; Ps 45, and especially vv. 10–11).

V. King Joash: the Relation of the King’s House to the House of the Lord

The main feature of Joash’s reign, as recorded in 2 Kings, was his repairing of the house of the Lord (2 Kgs 12:4–16). A. This was both understandable and commendable. 1. He owed his very life, and subsequently his throne, to the shelter and protection it gave him for six years, and to the loyalty of the high priest, Jehoiada. 2. But in a profounder sense, he owed his position as king to God. It was God who appointed him, and to God he owed first obedience. 3. And it was wise of him to encourage the people’s zeal for the throne of the Lord: the more the people sought and used the house, the more they would be loyal to him. B. It is true that after Jehoiada died Joash went into grievous spiritual decline, abandoned the Lord’s house, and had Jehoiada’s son, the prophet, stoned to death (see 2 Chr 24:17–22). 1. But 2 Kings does not mention this: not because it wants to hide this information from us; it refers us to such additional information in other history books (2 Kgs 12:19). 2. And 2 Kings does record to Joash’s discredit that, after all the money he had collected for repairing the Lord’s house, he robbed the Lord’s house and the king’s house of their accumulated treasures in order to buy off Hazael king of Aramaea (12:17–18). 3. And 2 Kings records also that he was assassinated by his servants. He had devalued the Lord’s house and the king’s house; his servants devalued him (12:20; 2 Chr 24:25–26). C. But 2 Kings concentrates mostly on the first part of Joash’s reign, because it shows what the true relationship was between the king’s authority and power and the Lord’s authority and power. D. Consider, in this respect, our Lord’s relationship to the Father. 1. As Son of God he rightly claims the same divine honours as the Father (John 5:23). 2. But his own obedience to the Father was perfect (Heb 5:8–10; Phil 2:5–11). 3. And never did he try to divert people’s loyalty from the Father in order to capture it for himself. He was not in competition with the Father. He recognized that his disciples who believed on him, were given to him by the Father. He asked the Father to keep them for him (John 17:6, 11, 15).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 49

VI. King Amaziah: His Administering of the Law Compare the Porch of the Throne Where He Might Judge (1 Kgs 7:7) A. Amaziah is specifically commended for his just legal decisions (2 Kgs 8:5–6). 1. He executed his servants who had assassinated his father. 2. But he did not put the children of the murderers to death for their fathers’ sin. Normal Assyrian practice in cases like this was that the whole family would be held responsible and executed. But the law of God given through Moses forbade putting children to death for the sin of their father; and Amaziah, as king and judge, submitted to, and was guided by, God’s law. The king himself was not above the law (Deut 24:16). B. Amaziah’s exceedingly foolish error of judgment (2 Kgs 14:8–14). 1. His victory over Edom seems to have gone to his head. Unprovoked, and without just cause, he challenged Jehoash, king of Israel (who was far more powerful than he) to battle (14:7–8, 10). 2. Jehoash, who did not want to fight Judah, remonstrated with him; but he would not listen (14:9–11). 3. The result was: a. The army of Judah was routed (14:12). b. Worse still: Jehoash king of Israel took Amaziah king of Judah, the son of Joash, the son of Ahaziah—notice how this listing of the royal pedigree of Amaziah underlines the humiliation of the royal house of David, as the king of Israel took the Judaean king back to his capital city, Jerusalem, and broke down the northern wall of the city and thus left the city defenceless on the side facing the kingdom of Israel (14:13). c. The king of Israel also took the golden vessels in the house of the Lord and in the king’s house—thus impoverishing both. d. And he took hostages, to make sure that the king of Judah behaved himself. 4. So now Amaziah was king of Judah by grace and favour of Jehoash the king of Israel! And though he lived fifteen years after the death of Jehoash, he seems not to have recovered strength. What is more, Jehoash’s successor, Jeroboam II, was even stronger than Jehoash had been. The lesson to be learned 1. Amaziah was successful when he allowed his exercise of power to be controlled by God’s word. 2. But success created in him illusions of grandeur and power that brought him to ignominious defeat, and damaged God’s house and God’s people, and made the rightful claim of the house of David look ridiculous. Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 50

VII. King Azariah (Elsewhere Spelled Uzziah: see 2 Kings 15:32) and the Question of the King’s Palace

2 Kings 15:1–7

A. To a great extent this king did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, though not completely (15:3– 4). B. But the Lord smote him with a serious skin disease (not necessarily leprosy); and verse 5 calls attention to the place where he had to dwell as a consequence of his disease: he dwelt in a separate house (15:5). 1. The exact meaning of the Hebrew, here translated as a separate house is unclear. 2. But what is clear is that Azariah could no longer discharge his responsibilities; and his son, Jotham, was ‘over the house’, i.e. in charge of the palace, and, presumably, occupied the king’s apartments. It may be that Azariah had to spend the rest of his days, relieved of all royal and public responsibilities, in a private house at a distance from the city. 3. Second Chronicles 26 records in detail the fact that Azariah (Uzziah) was an exceedingly successful king until he was strong and his heart was lifted up so that he did corruptly (2 Chr 26:16). 4. But 2 Kings is not concerned with Azariah’s initial success (though, of course, it does not intend to deny it). Rather, 2 Kings is recording the decline of the house of David. a. King Ahaziah had been killed by Jehu (9:27). b. King Joash had been assassinated by his servants (12:20–21). c. King Amaziah had fled out of Jerusalem to Lachish in an unsuccessful attempt to escape conspirators, who caught up with him and slew him (14:19). d. And now King Azariah (Uzziah) had to vacate his palace; and lived and died in a private house, relieved of all royal responsibilities (15:5). 5. This decline of the house of David is the background to Isaiah 6: In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up . . . my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of Hosts (Isa 6:1, 5).

VIII. King Jotham and the Control of the King’s Palace and the Administering of Justice in the King’s Bench-Division of the Law Courts

2 Kings 15:5, 32–38

A. We have already learned that Jotham had to take over from his father because of his father’s disability. B. We are now told that on the whole he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord; and he also built the upper gate of the house of the Lord, though the people were allowed to continue to sacrifice and burn incense in the high places—an unscriptural practice that always tended to idolatry (15:34–35). C. But highly significant is the remark: In those days the Lord began to send against Judah Rezin the king of Syria [Aramaea] and Pekah the son of Remaliah (15:37). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 51

1. It was a sad thing when the ten tribes of Israel originally seceded from the house of David, and thus left little Judah to maintain the claim of the house of David to be unique among all the kings and kingdoms of the earth. 2. But now the ten tribes of Israel joined forces with Aramaea to attack Judah. It would lead to a crisis under the next king of Judah, Ahaz.

IX. King Ahaz: He Denied Everything That the House of David Was Meant to Stand For

2 Kings 16:11–20

A. Ahaz was evil: he not only walked in the way of the kings of Israel; he practised the extreme pagan religious perversions of the heathen whom the Lord had thrown out before the Israelites (16:3–4). B. Worse was to follow: for when Rezin of Aramaea and Pekah of Israel came up to Jerusalem to war, and besieged Ahab, and Rezin recovered possession of Elath and drove the Jews from it (16:5–6): 1. Ahaz panicked: And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the forest are moved with the wind (Isa 7:2). 2. So God sent Isaiah to assure Ahaz that he would not let Rezin and Pekah’s plan succeed; and to warn Ahaz that unbelief, at this point in time, would be disastrous (Isa 7:3–9). 3. Ahaz, however, would not believe God. So God spoke again to Ahaz and invited him to ask for a miraculous sign to fortify his faith. But Ahaz refused to ask for a sign (Isa 7:10–12). 4. So God said, through Isaiah, hear now, O house of David . . . and gave Ahaz the sign that the Virgin should conceive and bear a son, whose name would be Immanuel = God with us (Isa 7:13–14; Matt 1:23). 5. But still Ahaz refused to believe; and instead he appealed to the King of Assyria to come and save him out of the hands of the king of Aramaea and the king of Israel; and the king of Assyria did so (2 Kgs 16:7–9). C. The significance of Ahaz’s appeal to Assyria. 1. It was political madness. It was like the story of the two mice: when they started to fight each other, the smaller mouse was afraid the bigger mouse would win. So the smaller mouse appealed to the cat to come and kill the bigger mouse and eat it. The cat did so; but when it had eaten the bigger mouse, it then ate the smaller mouse as well. 2. But it was more than political madness: it was spiritual suicide. a. David was the Lord’s anointed, unique among all the kings of the earth, chosen and maintained by the sovereign Lord of heaven and earth. The kings of the house of David were place-holders until the coming of the Messiah. If God could not maintain the house and throne of David, and they had to call on the evil, God-defying kings of Assyria to save them—the house of David would have denied and lost everything it had ever stood for. b. Isaiah, and God through Isaiah, pleaded with Ahaz, king of the house of David, to trust God, to believe in the Messianic hope. But Ahaz refused; he felt that in the context of Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 52

world politics, the messianic hope of the kings of tiny Judah was no longer credible or tenable. He abandoned it altogether. c. And having abandoned faith in God and his promises, Ahaz adopted religious ideas and practices more suited to pagan and, in particular, to Assyrian, ideologies: and changed the altar and the great laver in the house of the Lord in Jerusalem accordingly (16:10–17).

X. Israel’s Subsequent Abandonment of the Messianic Hope

A. Before Pilate: Pilate said . . . ‘Shall I crucify your King?’ The chief priests answered, ‘We have no king but Caesar’ (John 19:15). B. In modern times: 1. Orthodox Jews still look for a coming messiah, though they deny that Jesus is the Messiah. 2. Liberal Jews demythologize, or else deny, any hope of a coming messiah. 3. Atheist Jews have, of course, abandoned all faith in God, let alone in a messiah. 4. Hasidic Jews, however, disagree with the Zionism on which the modern State of Israel is founded. They hold that only the Messiah (when he comes) can restore Israel.

XI. Our Christian Responsibility

A. Large sections of Christendom have abandoned hope in the second coming of Christ and in his messianic kingdom. They hold that in the context of world politics and the giant powers of globalization, belief in a literal second coming of Christ to reign, is fantasy, unreal and incredible. B. We, however, are to hold fast the good confession which Christ witnessed before Pontius Pilate (John 18:33–38). C. We must also listen to the Apostle Paul: I charge you in the sight of God, who quickens all things and of Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed the good confession; that you keep the commandment, without spot, without reproach, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ. In its own times that appearing will be brought about by God, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only has immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable; whom no man has seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power eternal. Amen (1 Tim 6:13–16). D. And we must listen to the Lord Jesus: I Jesus have sent my angel to testify to you these things for the churches: I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright, the morning star . . . Surely, I come quickly (Rev 22:16, 20). E. And we must respond: Amen, come, Lord Jesus (Rev 22:20). 17

The House: The Fifth Set of Plans: The Furniture for the Court 1 Kings 7:13–40

I. Preliminary Observations

1. It is a striking thing that neither in the description of the court furniture, nor in the summary list of items, is any mention made of the bronze altar of sacrifice which stood in the court (the golden altar, which stood in the Holy Place, is mentioned in 7:48) (7:13–51). 2. This does not imply that there was no such altar: it is in fact mentioned in 1 Kings 8:22, 64; and the making of this altar is mentioned in 2 Chronicles 4:1. 3. In the description of the tabernacle, the altar of sacrifice is given more prominence than the laver (Exod 27:1–8, compared with Exod 30:17–21; and Exod 38:1–7, compared with Exod 38:8). The reason is that in the tabernacle emphasis lies on man’s approach to God, and therefore on the blood of the sacrifice which is the basis of man’s forgiveness and acceptance with God (see Heb 9:11–28). 4. But in the description of the house of the Lord in 1 Kings, the emphasis lies on God’s government of his people. Therefore in its description of the court furniture, those things are mentioned and emphasized which are different from the tabernacle, and which have immediate relevance to the behaviour of believers under the government of God.

The Two Sets of Court Furniture

1. a. The two pillars (1 Kgs 7:15). (1) One on the right, called ‘Jachin’ = ‘He (God) will establish’ (7:21). (2) One on the left, called ‘Boaz’ = ‘in the strength’ (of the Lord) (7:21). (3) They seem to have been freestanding, and not part of the structure of the building. b. The two capitals (7:16). (1) One on each of the two pillars. (2) Elements in their ornamentation: (a) Interwoven chains of filigree work, draped seven to each capital (7:17). (b) Pomegranates, set in two strings of a hundred; one string on each capital (7:20; cf. Jer 52:23). (c) A globular, or bowl-shaped, projection (7:20). (d) Lily-work (7:19). (e) The capitals may have been three-tiered, with: (i) Lily-work on the top of the pillars covering the joint between the pillars and their capitals (7:22).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 54

(ii) The globular shaped capital with its filigree work and chains of pomegranates (7:17). (iii) Lily-work on top of the capitals (7:19). (f) Certainly the pillars with their capitals were massively impressive and attractively beautiful, befitting the majesty of the resident within the house. (g) There was nothing quite like them in the tabernacle. 2. a. The bronze sea (1 Kgs 7:23–26). (1) There was a laver in the court of the tabernacle; but this ‘sea’ in the house of the Lord was huge by comparison. It contained a large expanse and volume of water: hence called figuratively the ‘sea’ (7:23). (2) Its function was the same as the laver in the tabernacle: water for the priests to wash their hands and feet before they ministered in the Holy Place or at the altar of sacrifice (Exod 30:17–21). (3) The sea rested on the backs of twelve bronze oxen, set in groups of three, their backs underneath the sea, and their heads protruding outwards, north, south, east and west (7:25). (4) All round the sea, beneath the rim, there were two rows of ornamental gourds, ten to a cubit (7:24). (5) The rim itself, like the rim of a cup, was shaped like the flower of a lily (7:26). (6) Like the pillars and capitals, the sea also was beautiful. b. The ten mobile lavers (1 Kgs 7:27–39). (1) Their practical purpose was to transport water to wherever it was needed in the court. The killing and sacrifice of numerous animals would have required a large and constant supply of water to cleanse the court. (2) The ten stands (on which the ten lavers were transported), their structure, ornamentation, wheels and axle-trees, and the opening on the top of each stand to receive and hold the laver (bowl of water) (7:27–37). (3) The ten lavers (7:38). (4) The stationing of the ten mobile lavers, and of the sea (7:39). Comment: There is no escaping the emphasis on cleansing by water in the court of the house of the Lord.

II. The New Testament’s Use of These Symbols

The New Testament uses these symbolic objects as metaphors. A. The pillars and their capitals: 1. These things I write . . . that you may know how people ought to behave themselves in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim 3:14–15). 2. James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcision (Gal 2:9). 3. The pillars mentioned in Revelation 3:12 seem to be internal, and part of the structure of the temple, and different, therefore, from the court-pillars.

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 55

B. The sea and its water for cleansing: 1. Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word (Eph 5:25–26). 2. Not by works done in righteousness, which we did ourselves, but according to his mercy he saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour (Titus 3:5–6). 3. Let us draw near with a true heart in fullness of faith, having our hearts sprinkled (i.e. with blood) from an evil conscience, and our body bathed with pure water (Heb 10:22; cf. Heb 9:14, 19–22).

III. The Significance of the New Testament’s Use of These Metaphors

A. The metaphorical use of ‘pillar’ points to the need to stand firm and to hold up God’s objective truth before the eyes of all people. B. The metaphorical use of ‘water for cleansing’ points to the need to apply God’s truth subjectively to people’s experience. C. Objective truth is truth that exists and is true, whether people know it or not, like it or not, believe it or not. 1. An example: ‘The sun exists’ is an objective truth. It makes no difference to the sun’s existence whether we think it is too hot or not hot enough, whether we like it or not, whether we can see it or not. It exists independently of us. 2. So ‘God is’ is an objective truth. God’s existence does not depend on whether we believe it or not, like it or not, etc. He exists independently of us. D. Truth applied subjectively. 1. An example: Christ died for the ungodly (Rom 5:6) is an objective truth and a fact of history. But it will do me no good, unless I confess that I am a sinner, believe on Christ and accept him as my Lord and Saviour. E. Notice that we need BOTH to hold objective truth AND to experience applied truth subjectively. 1. Sometimes, in past history, people have held the great objective truths of the gospel: the existence of God, the virgin birth of Christ, his Godhood and manhood, his atoning death, bodily resurrection and ascension, all this without ever subjectively experiencing the new birth through personal repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus. 2. At other times people have emphasized the need for personal spiritual experience, but have forgotten, or lost their hold on, the great objective doctrines of the faith; and as a result they have got lost in the swamps of subjectivism, with nothing objective to hold on to.

IV. The Church as the Pillar and Ground of the Truth

1 Timothy 3:15

A. The church is not the truth, but the pillar and ground of the truth. 1. In the house of the Lord the pillars were there to hold up the beautiful capitals to the view of all who approached; but the pillars were not themselves the capitals. 2. It is the capitals that symbolize the truth, in all its beauty (the lily-work) and its potential fruitfulness (the pomegranates). (The pomegranate was a much-valued fruit in the ancient Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 56

world. Its pulp was used to make a cooling refreshing drink, or sherbet. The erect sepals of its calyx (on top of the fruit) were taken as a pattern for a regal crown.) 3. In mediaeval times, and in some places still today, it is claimed that the church is the truth; that the church gave us the Bible. But that is not true: the church was given the Bible, and stands under the word of God. Christ said: I am the truth; and again, your word is truth (John 14:6; 17:17). 4. Our task, as members of the church, is to stand holding forth the word of life (Phil 2:16). B. We must hold up God’s objective truth in opposition to Postmodernism. 1. Postmodernism is so named to distinguish it from modernism. 2. Modernism used to claim that human reason is the ultimate decider of what is truth and what is not. a. It put itself, therefore, above Scripture. b. If human reason approved of anything in Scripture, it accepted it; what it disapproved of, it rejected. 3. Postmodernism rejects human reason as the ultimate arbiter of truth; but it holds that there is no objective truth, that there is no ultimate criterion of truth. a. It holds, for instance, that there is no one, true, interpretation of a piece of literature, such that all other interpretations are wrong. All interpretations are equally true (or equally wrong). One is entitled to hold one’s own interpretation to be true for oneself. But one must not say that someone else’s different interpretation is not true. 4. Postmodernism holds the same thing about religions: there is no objective truth by which we may decide which religion is true, and which is not. One is entitled to hold one’s own religion; but one must not say that other religions are not true. All are equally true. The only absolute truth for Postmodernists is that there is no absolute truth. 5. As Christians, then, we must stand firm and present to the world God’s absolute objective truth: a. That there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus (1 Tim 2:5). b. That Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life: no one comes to the Father but by him (John 14:6). C. We must hold up God’s objective truth regarding the doctrine of justification by faith. 1. Consider the context in which Paul describes James, Cephas and John as men who were reputed to be pillars (Gal 2:9). a. Some teachers were saying that faith in Christ was not enough for salvation: that except you be circumcised and keep the law of Moses, you cannot be saved (cf. Acts 15:1, 5; Gal 5:2–4). b. Paul was concerned that the truth of the gospel might remain continually with you (Gal 2:5). c. He therefore stood unyieldingly for the truth that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law (Rom 3:28; see also Gal 2:16–3:29). d. And he reports that when it came to the objective doctrinal statement of justification by faith, those who were reputed to be pillars stood firmly with him (Gal 2:9–10; see also Acts 15:7–29). e. Though he has to report that on one occasion at least, Peter, out of fear, gave the impression by his wrong behaviour that he did not believe the objective truth, which in his heart of hearts he did in fact believe (Gal 2:11–21). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 57

2. Nowadays as the result of ecumenism there is a tendency among some evangelicals to fudge the objective doctrine of justification by faith, and to regard people as true believers as long as they have had some charismatic ‘experience’ even though their religious practices show that their faith for salvation is still in their religious rituals. 3. We must, therefore, stand firmly without compromise for the objective truth of justification by faith. D. As Christians we must hold up the objective standard and principles of Christian behaviour. 1. Recall: . . . the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim 3:15). 2. Then notice the context: throughout chapters 1–3 Paul has been giving directions as to how Christians should behave; and in 3:1–13, in particular, he has been laying down the standard of behaviour required of elders and deacons in the church, and of their wives. 3. Now he sums up this teaching: These things I write . . . that you may know how people ought to behave in the house of God . . . pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim 3:14–15). 4. This, then, is the behaviour required of those who are the pillar and ground of the truth. The question is: what, in this context, is the truth? 5. The answer is: the objective pattern and example of the life of Christ. Says Paul: and without controversy great is the mystery of godliness (1 Tim 3:16); and he proceeds to expound six great facts about Christ’s life. 6. The six facts are grouped in three complementary pairs. 7. First pair: a. Manifested in flesh. b. Justified in Spirit. (1) Manifested in flesh points to: (a) The great objective fact that Jesus was the Word of God, God incarnate (see John 1:1, 14). (b) The great objective fact that in our Lord Jesus Christ we have, not merely the abstract theoretical principles of godly behaviour, but perfect godliness manifested in a human life here on earth. (2) Justified in spirit points to: (a) The fact that this perfect life was judged by the world to be worthy of a criminal’s death upon a cross. (b) But God justified him, that is, declared him to be right, by sending the Holy Spirit to convict the world of sin for not believing on him, and of judgment because the prince of this world has been judged (John 16:8–11). (3) The objective facts of the incarnation, cross, resurrection and ascension of Christ have exposed the inadequacy of merely human standards of morality and behaviour. 8. Second pair: a. Appeared to angels. b. Was preached among the nations. Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 58

Together these two statements describe the universal publicity that God has given to his Son’s life on earth. During his life once only did he go outside the borders of Palestine (into Syro-phoenicia) (Matt 15:21); but (1) The angels in heaven watched and considered his life (cf. Job 1:6–9). (2) Since his resurrection and ascension God has seen to it that he has received worldwide publicity. 9. Third pair: a. Believed on in the world. b. Received up in glory. This pair points to the result of the publicity that his life on earth has attracted. In spite of his cross—indeed, because of it: (1) Multimillions, throughout the entire world, convinced that he is the truth, have believed on him; and (2) Heaven has received him in glory; and God has . . . given him the name which is above all names, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on the earth and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:9–11). 10. Therefore, as we fulfil our duty and privilege to hold up before the world this objective revelation of God’s standard of holiness, our manner of life must be progressively conformed to his.

V. The Church Must Submit Herself to the Subjective Cleansing by the Washing of Water with the Word—Typified by the Sea in the Court of the Lord’s House

A. The New Testament speaks of two cleansings: 1. By blood; 2. By water. B. The blood of Christ cleanses our conscience from the guilt of sin and brings us forgiveness (Heb 9:14; 1 John 1:7, 9; Eph 1:7). C. The water cleanses us from what the New Testament calls spots and wrinkles and such things; i.e. wrong attitudes, tempers, envies, jealousies, selfishness, pride, etc. (Eph 5:26–27). D. Christ is not content to forgive our sinful deeds; he is determined to release us from these sinful attitudes and character faults. How else shall he get us to behave in the house of God? E. Such cleansing and release takes place in two stages: 1. The initial stage: the washing of regeneration. This is a once-for-all process and takes place at the new birth (Titus 3:1–6; Heb 10:22). 2. The constantly repeated attention of our heavenly bridegroom, as by his word he exposes to us our character faults and by his grace, love and power, helps us to admit them, confess them to him, and find release from them (Eph 5:25–27). F. Having therefore these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Cor 7:1). 18

The History: From King Hezekiah to King Zedekiah and the Carrying Away of Judah into Exile in Babylon 2 Kings 18–25

A. The final stage of the history of the house of David as recorded in 2 Kings is, on the whole, a very sad story of decline. Its kings, Manasseh, Amon, Jehoahaz, Eliakim (re-named Jehoiakim by Pharaoh-necoh), Jehoiachin and Mattaniah (re-named Zedekiah by the king of Babylon) were all uniformly evil. In the end God allowed, indeed sent, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon to Jerusalem to capture and destroy the city and its house. Not only was the reigning house of David suspended, but Nebuchadnezzar burnt the house of the Lord down to the ground. And amongst all the valuable vessels which the Babylonians looted and took back with them to Babylon, special mention is made of the two pillars and their capitals, the sea and the bases. And the bronze pillars that were in the house of the Lord, and the bases and the bronze sea that were in the house of the Lord, did the Chaldeans break in pieces, and carried the bronze of them to Babylon (2 Kgs 25:13). Lovingly and sorrowfully the historian lingers over the details. The two pillars, the one sea, and the bases, which Solomon had made for the house of the Lord; the bronze of all these vessels was without weight (i.e. they were exceedingly heavy). The height of one pillar was eighteen cubits, and a bronze capital was upon it; and the height of the capital was three cubits; with network and pomegranates upon the capital round about, all of copper; and like unto these had the second pillar with network (2 Kgs 25:16–17). But one can hardly be surprised that the king of Babylon should cut these spiritually significant and artistically beautiful symbols to pieces and loot them, when it was king Ahaz of the royal house of David who first hacked the great and glorious sea off its twelve supporting oxen, and set it on a substitute base of stone (2 Kgs 16:17). B. The enormity of the sin of the final kings of Judah was aggravated by the fact that: 1. Manasseh and Amon deliberately turned their backs on God, and engaged in extreme forms of idolatry, in spite of the spectacular intervention of God to save Jerusalem from the Assyrians through Hezekiah’s stand for the uniqueness of the one true God. With their eyes open, they deliberately rejected the uniqueness of God and the gospel of his salvation (2 Kgs 19:1–34; 21). 2. The kings who followed Josiah would have known, or heard of, the tremendous revival that took place in Josiah’s reign as a result of the rediscovery of the book of the law in the house of the Lord. Moved by their study of this part of God’s word, not only did Josiah and his contemporaries effect a thorough cleansing of the Lord’s house from all expressions of pagan idolatry, but they rediscovered the truth that lay at the foundation and heart of their nation’s very existence: God’s mighty act of redemption in delivering the nation from its slavery to Egypt and its pagan gods and in setting the nation free. Led by Josiah they had celebrated this

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 60

fundamental truth by celebrating the Passover in all its glorious detail according to the Scriptures that they had so recently rediscovered. The Passover, says the historian, had not been celebrated in such triumphant style for centuries (1 Kgs 23:21–23). 3. In spite of this the kings that followed Josiah all deliberately reverted to the idolatry of their ‘unconverted’ ancestors. It is no wonder that since they thus preferred the enslaving idolatry of the Gentiles, God allowed first Egypt and then Babylon to take them into exile and captivity (1 Kgs 23:32, 37; 24:9, 19; 24–25). C. The two ‘revivals’, led by: 1. Hezekiah and Isaiah. 2. Josiah and Huldah. 19

Two Revivals

It is a most encouraging thing to notice that even in this late period of decline God granted two notable revivals. So let us conclude by studying them and noticing what was the basic and pivotal issue in each of those revivals.

I. Hezekiah’s Revival

2 Kings 18:1–19:37

A. The issue at stake: the objective truth of the uniqueness of God (2 Kgs 14–19). B. The occasion: the approach of the massive forces of the great world-power of Assyria. At first Hezekiah tried to buy off Assyria; the Assyrian king took the money, but still attacked Jerusalem (18:13–17). C. The challenge: thrown down by Rabshakeh in the name of ‘the great king, the king of Assyria’ (18:19–37): 1. That it was useless to trust the Pharaoh of Egypt to protect them (18:19–21). 2. That it was even more absurd to put their trust in the Lord their God (18:22). 3. That Hezekiah was deceiving the people: neither let Hezekiah make you trust in the Lord, saying, The Lord will surely deliver us, and this city shall not be given into the hand of the Assyrians (18:29– 30). 4. That life would be better under the Assyrians (18:31–32). 5. That the king of Assyria had captured scores of nations in spite of their gods (18:33). 6. Where are the gods of Hamath, Arpad, Sepharvaim, Hena and Ivvah (18:34)? 7. Who are they among all the gods of the countries that have delivered their country out of my hand? (18:35). 8. Your God is no different from any of the other gods; he will not, he cannot, deliver Jerusalem out of my hand (18:35). Conclusion: give up your stupid stand and your absurd faith in the uniqueness of your God; abandon Jerusalem, come out and surrender to me (18:31–32). D. Isaiah, the Prophet’s response to the words . . . which the king of Assyria . . . has sent to reproach the living God: an announcement I, [God] will put a spirit within him, and he shall hear a rumour, and shall return to his own land; and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land (19:2–7). E. Hezekiah’s Response to the letter brought by messengers from the king of Assyria: 1. He spread the letter before the Lord for God to read (19:14–16)! 2. He confessed his faith in the uniqueness of God as creator and ruler of heaven and earth (19:15).

Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 62

3. He appealed to God to save him and his people out of the land of the king of Assyria that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that you are the Lord God, even you only (19:19). 4. In other words: instead of capitulating and abandoning Jerusalem, Hezekiah TOOK HIS STAND LIKE A PILLAR TO PRESENT THE OBJECTIVE TRUTH OF THE REALITY AND UNIQUENESS OF GOD in the face of the arrogant, blasphemous God-defying, king of Assyria. F. God’s personal response to the blasphemous king (19:20–34): 1. The virgin daughter of Zion, though seemingly weak and defenceless, will not be violated; she will wag her head in derisory contempt as the Assyrian is forced to retreat in humiliation (19:21). 2. God’s denunciation of the Assyrian’s Satan-like boastful pride and determination to ascend to the heights of the mountains . . .; and on that basis of his achievement to exalt his voice and lift up his eyes on high, against the holy one of Israel (19:22–24). 3. God’s reminder to the Assyrian that he has achieved his conquests according to God’s foreknowledge and providential permission and purpose (19:25–26). 4. God’s sentence on the Assyrian: because of his insolence and rage against God, I [God] will put my hook in your nose, and my bridle in your lips, and I will turn you back by the way by which you came (19:28). G. God’s assurance to Hezekiah (19:29–34): 1. The countryside will recover from the devastation caused by the Assyrian armies. 2. A remnant of the house of Judah and of the city of Jerusalem shall survive, take root downward, and bear fruit upward—like the pillars in the house of the Lord (19:30)! 3. The defence of Jerusalem will be brought about: a. By the zeal of the Lord (19:31). b. For the Lord’s own sake. c. For the sake of his servant David (19:34). H. The demise of the King of Assyria (19:35–37): 1. His army decimated by the angel of the Lord (19:35). 2. Himself assassinated in the temple of his god by conspirators including one of his sons (19:37).

II. Josiah’s Revival

2 Kings 22:1–23:27

A. The pivotal point in the revival: the rediscovery of Scripture and its subjective application to life, worship and service (22:8–20). B. Its first effect: 1 Alarm at the discovery of the commandments of God of which they had been ignorant— in some cases for centuries (22:13). 2. Consternation at the condemnation and wrath of God pronounced in this book of the Bible on disobedience to its commandments (22:13). 3. Self-humbling and repentance (22:11, 19). C. God’s response: mercy! And delaying of the inevitable law, that what a man (or a nation) sows, that must he also reap (22:14–20). Study Notes for 1–2 Kings by David Gooding P a g e | 63

D. The form that the revival took: the application of the word of God to the house of the Lord and throughout the nation led to their making: 1. A solemn covenant to obey Scripture (23:2–3). 2. Negatively: to the cleaning out of each and every form of idolatry and religious prostitution (23:4–20). 3. Positively: to the keeping of the Passover, the Jews’ memorial feast recalling God’s initial work of redemption (23:21). 20

Epilogue

A. The end of this age will witness: 1. The rise of a great anti-God world-ruler, who will oppose and exalt himself against all that is called God or that is worshipped; so that he sits in the temple of God, setting himself forth as God (2 Thess 2:4). 2. The joining together of all idolatrous world religions, in an attempt to control the world government of its day (Rev 17). B. Let us in our day: 1. Stand fast, presenting the objective truth of God’s uniqueness and the uniqueness of his Son, Jesus Christ, to the world around. 2. Submit ourselves subjectively to the washing of water by the word, so that when the Lord comes it may be said of us, the marriage of the lamb has come, and his wife has made herself ready; and the Lord will present to himself his glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing (Rev 19:7, Eph 5:27).

About the Author

DAVID W. GOODING is Professor Emeritus of Old Testament Greek at Queen’s University, Belfast and a member of the Royal Irish Academy. He has taught the Bible internationally and lectured on both its authenticity and its relevance to philosophy, world religions and daily life. He has published scholarly articles on the Septuagint and Old Testament narratives, as well as expositions of Luke, John, Acts, Hebrews, the New Testament’s Use of the Old Testament, and several books addressing arguments against the Bible and the Christian faith. His analysis of the Bible and our world continues to shape the thinking of scholars, teachers and students alike.