TEXT [Commentary]

6. Jehoshaphat and Ahab (22:1-9)

1 For three years there was no war between Aram and Israel. 2 Then during the third year, King Jehoshaphat of Judah went to visit King Ahab of Israel. 3 During the visit, the king of Israel said to his officials, “Do you realize that the town of Ramoth-gilead belongs to us? And yet we’ve done nothing to recapture it from the king of Aram!”

4 Then he turned to Jehoshaphat and asked, “Will you join me in battle to recover Ramoth-gilead?”

Jehoshaphat replied to the king of Israel, “Why, of course! You and I are as one. My troops are your troops, and my horses are your horses.” 5 Then Jehoshaphat added, “But first let’s find out what the LORD says.”

6 So the king of Israel summoned the prophets, about 400 of them, and asked them, “Should I go to war against Ramoth-gilead, or should I hold back?”

They all replied, “Yes, go right ahead! The Lord will give the king victory.”

7 But Jehoshaphat asked, “Is there not also a prophet of the LORD here? We should ask him the same question.”

8 The king of Israel replied to Jehoshaphat, “There is one more man who could consult the LORD for us, but I hate him. He never prophesies anything but trouble for me! His name is Micaiah son of Imlah.”

Jehoshaphat replied, “That’s not the way a king should talk! Let’s hear what he has to say.”

9 So the king of Israel called one of his officials and said, “Quick! Bring Micaiah son of Imlah.”

NOTES

22:1 For three years. This refers to the campaigns against Aram described back in ch 20 of the MT (ch 21, LXX). Note that with this verse, LXX (Codex Vaticanus) reverts back to the so-called “Kaige” recension (see “Canonicity and Textual History” in the Introduction for details concerning the various recensions found in the LXX of 1–2 Kings).

22:2 King Jehoshaphat. He is first mentioned in passing in Asa’s burial notice (15:24). Jehoshaphat’s formal accession formula will be found in 22:41-42 (MT). (For the placement of this formula in the Old Greek at 16:28a [Rahlfs’s enumeration], and also in the Kaige recension [= MT] in 22:41-42 of the present chapter, see the note on 16:28.) Cogan (2001:489) sees a formal state visit in view here, during which plans for a joint ­offensive against Aram were being discussed. (For a formal introduction to King Jehoshaphat, including the meaning of his name, see the note on 22:41.)

22:3 Ramoth-gilead. The Levitical city and city of refuge (Josh 20:8; 21:38; cf. Deut 4:43) located in the border area between Israel and Aram (probably Tell Ramith, which is 4 miles [7 km] south of Ramthah near the modern border with Syria and the ancient King’s Highway). The term Ramoth means “heights,” which would fit well with Tell Ramith’s prominent location as a height over the surrounding plain of Gilead (ABD 5.621, following Glueck 1943:10-13).

22:4 You and I are as one. Possibly parity in status is in view here (Cogan 2001:489), although Seow (1999:160-161) argues effectively that Jehoshaphat plays a subservient role throughout this narrative (cf. 22:30). In any case, the previous era of warfare between Israel and Judah has come to an end (apparently at Jehoshaphat’s initiative; cf. 22:44).

22:5 what the LORD says. It is imperative to know what is the will of Yahweh (= “the LORD”; see endnote 4 of the Introduction). This is especially the case in the area of holy war (concerning the crucial role of the prophet in initiating holy war, see the commentary on 1:5-27). But it will often be ambiguous as to whether the various prophets we meet in this chapter are prophets of Yahweh or of Baal or of Asherah (or of some syncretistic combination of the three). And it will be somewhat unclear as to whether it is the will of Yahweh (for us) always to know the will of Yahweh! (For further comments on this conundrum, which we also face from time to time, see the commentary on 22:10-28.)

22:6 about 400 of them. An allusion to the 400 prophets of Asherah mentioned back in 18:19 may be what is in mind here, but we cannot be certain—the reference is too vague. In any case, this number once again represents a large and impressive contingent.

22:7 Is there not also a prophet of the LORD here? Again, there is some ambiguity in the original Hebrew; as Cogan (2001:490) notes, the LXX omits the word “another” (or “also”) (‘od [TH5750, ZH6388]), both here and in 22:8, probably to indicate more clearly that all the other prophets were not to be categorized as prophets of Yahweh (cf. the Vulgate; also Josephus Antiquities 8.15.4.402). But our narrator here is more subtle than this (see notes on 22:5; 22:8).

22:8 I hate him. We know by now whom King Ahab especially “hates”: the prophet ­Elijah (cf. 18:17 and 21:20). So it is with some surprise that we hear here for the first time the name “Micaiah son of Imlah,” who is further described as the prophet who never prophesies “anything but trouble” for Ahab. Possibly this surprise reference indicates the independent nature of the present text over against the extensive Elijah/Elisha traditions that surround it (cf. its appearance in 2 Chr 18:1-34, which lacks all the Elijah material up to and beyond this point); but in any case, it certainly demonstrates the masterful art of indirection displayed here by the author (or, at least, the editor) of these various prophetic texts. And, as noted below in the commentary, Ahab himself here also unwittingly fulfills the role of a true prophet.

Micaiah son of Imlah. This individual is only mentioned here and in the Chronicles ­parallel (2 Chr 18:1-27). The name Micaiah means “Who is like Yah(weh)?” and the name Imlah (especially as it is spelled in the Hebrew of 2 Chr 18:7-8) probably means “May he [Yahweh] fill” (the womb?).

COMMENTARY [Text]

Some time ago, DeVries (1978:25-51; cf. 1985:263-266) argued plausibly that the Micaiah material in 22:1-37 represents a composite of two originally independent narratives (cf. Jones 1984:360-362). Nonetheless, the view taken here will be that the present narrative(s) represents a coherent discussion of King Ahab’s last days (see the first note on 20:1 for other views) as he campaigned in coalition with King Jehoshaphat of Judah against the Arameans to retake Ramoth-gilead. (Note that a particularly good, recent rehearsal of the many historical and narratological issues surrounding this text may be found in Sweeney 2007:254-258.)

In 22:1-28 we see prophet versus king versus another king; north versus south; true prophet versus false prophet. All these conflicts are to be found throughout the present passage, but perhaps the most immediate lesson to be found in these first nine verses of the chapter is that God-seeking leaders must stand their ground against less-God-seeking leadership. King Jehoshaphat is abruptly introduced as in coalition with Ahab in 22:2 without any prior formal accession formula (that is to be found in 22:41-50, in strict Deuteronomistic chronological order), and as a king who may not have had much choice in the matter (cf. the note on 22:4), but one who still was able to stand his ground, insisting that an unambiguous prophet of Yahweh be found, and, more importantly, heeded. This will, of course, cause some short-term discomfort to King Ahab, but it will prove to bring long-term benefits (maybe not for Ahab, who himself can “prophetically” predict the prophet’s message; 22:8) at least to Jehoshaphat and to the future leadership of both kingdoms. We too must stand our ground in the presence of our less godly superiors, even at the risk of public discomfort, or else the results may prove disastrous indeed. Better some discomfort now than a great disaster later.

One ironic contrast illustrated briefly in this chapter is the difference between “prediction” and true prophecy. Ahab can make accurate predictions; in 22:8 he mutters that Micaiah never says anything good about him (cf. 22:7-18). But it is Micaiah who will prove to be a true prophet of God, for it is he who can see and hear the divine deliberations taking place concerning the fate of Ahab and of his kingdom (see 22:19-23). And, more to the present point, it is the positive word from a true prophet of God that is required for the initiation of holy war, and a king should not avoid this obligation (cf. Halpern’s conclusions, as described in the commentary on 1:5-27). Interestingly, Cogan (2001:490) cites the present chapter as the earliest reference to the consultation of prophets (instead of priests) prior to battle (he contrasts Num 27:21 and 1 Sam 30:7-8). I suspect, however, that the need for the prophetic word is not all that new in Ahab’s era (cf. 1 Sam 13:2-14, where Saul’s transgression is probably against Samuel the prophet, rather than Samuel the priest), and I further suspect that both Ahab and Jehoshaphat knew this requirement quite well (whence the 400 prophets Ahab summoned). In any case, Jehoshaphat insisted upon a clearly authentic word from Yahweh through the prophet; and as Jeremiah sardonically reminded his wavering audience some 250 years later (see Jer 28:8-9), the “ancient prophets” often warned of war, disaster, and disease—and as for anyone who dares prophesy “peace,” the burden of proof rests upon those words coming true. Thus, the default position, if you will, is pessimism; optimists must prove the divine inspiration of their words! And that, as we will see, was unlikely to take place in the days of Ahab.