(d) A further note concerning Gehazi (8:1–6)

OVERVIEW

This short narrative completes the major portion of stories concerning God’s miracle-working prophet. Though Elisha is not part of the story, his presence is felt in the details. Indeed, the fourfold testimony to his miraculous efforts in raising the Shunammite lady’s son is the focus of the account. We meet again not only the Shunammite but also Gehazi, who is now in a position both to aid the lady’s cause and to testify of Elisha’s miracle in her behalf. Thus the story forms an addendum to that of 4:8–37.

1Now Elisha had said to the woman whose son he had restored to life, “Go away with your family and stay for a while wherever you can, because the LORD has decreed a famine in the land that will last seven years.” 2The woman proceeded to do as the man of God said. She and her family went away and stayed in the land of the Philistines seven years.

3At the end of the seven years she came back from the land of the Philistines and went to the king to beg for her house and land. 4The king was talking to Gehazi, the servant of the man of God, and had said, “Tell me about all the great things Elisha has done.” 5Just as Gehazi was telling the king how Elisha had restored the dead to life, the woman whose son Elisha had brought back to life came to beg the king for her house and land.

Gehazi said, “This is the woman, my lord the king, and this is her son whom Elisha restored to life.” 6The king asked the woman about it, and she told him.

Then he assigned an official to her case and said to him, “Give back everything that belonged to her, including all the income from her land from the day she left the country until now.”

COMMENTARY

1–2 The Shunammite woman, who previously had confidently told Elisha that she had no particular needs (4:13), had learned through the death and raising of her son to depend on God’s prophet and his judgment; therefore, she had taken his warning seriously and left her house and lands for the duration of the seven-year famine. Gray, 527, suggests that her older husband had probably died by this time and the family estate was being “held in trust by the crown.” Her return within seven years may have aided her legal claim to her property (cf. Ex 21:2; 23:10–11; Lev 25:1–7; Dt 15:1–6; Ru 1:1, 22; 4:3–4).

3 The woman’s intention to appeal (“beg,” NIV) to the king was likely more in the nature of lodging a formal complaint. Although she had come to depend on Elisha’s judgment, she was yet a woman of firm resolve.

4–5 The narrator switches from past background to the present situation. The king who once sought Elisha’s life (6:30–33) now desires to hear more about the wonder-working Elisha, whose prophecy concerning the end of the famine has come true.

Apparently either Gehazi’s “leprosy” has been cured or, like Naaman, his affliction of the skin did not keep him from normal activities, including even an audience with the king. The story hints at the possibility that Gehazi has repented of his sins and has been restored to a place of usefulness for God. The Gehazi who was ineffective in his previous context with the Shunammite is now a source of help to her.

6 In contrast to his father, Ahab, whose greed caused him to appropriate another’s property (1Ki 21), Joram not only restores the woman’s property but also the back income owed to her.

NOTES

1–3 Seven-year famines were not unknown in the ancient Near East (cf. Ge 41:29–32; see also ANET, 31). The verb translated “stay for awhile” (NIV) indicates that the Shunammite woman was only to become a resident alien in a foreign land, with full intention of returning to her own land.

6 For (sārîs, “official”) see Notes on 1 Kings 22:9 and 2 Kings 18:17.

iv. The anointing of Hazael (8:7–15)

OVERVIEW

The account of dynastic succession in Damascus is told in the familiar chiastic pattern.

A Ben-Hadad sends Hazael to Elisha to inquire as to his chances of recovery (vv.7–8).

B Elisha gives Hazael a message that both addresses the fate of the king and includes a prophecy concerning himself (vv.9–13).

A´ Hazael reports back to Ben-Hadad and subsequently assassinates him (vv.14–15).

As so often in biblical narrative, dialogue becomes the chief focus of the account.

7Elisha went to Damascus, and Ben-Hadad king of Aram was ill. When the king was told, “The man of God has come all the way up here,” 8he said to Hazael, “Take a gift with you and go to meet the man of God. Consult the LORD through him; ask him, ‘Will I recover from this illness?’”

9Hazael went to meet Elisha, taking with him as a gift forty camel-loads of all the finest wares of Damascus. He went in and stood before him, and said, “Your son Ben-Hadad king of Aram has sent me to ask, ‘Will I recover from this illness?’”

10Elisha answered, “Go and say to him, ‘You will certainly recover’; but the LORD has revealed to me that he will in fact die.” 11He stared at him with a fixed gaze until Hazael felt ashamed. Then the man of God began to weep.

12“Why is my lord weeping?” asked Hazael.

“Because I know the harm you will do to the Israelites,” he answered. “You will set fire to their fortified places, kill their young men with the sword, dash their little children to the ground, and rip open their pregnant women.”

13Hazael said, “How could your servant, a mere dog, accomplish such a feat?”

“The LORD has shown me that you will become king of Aram,” answered Elisha.

14Then Hazael left Elisha and returned to his master. When Ben-Hadad asked, “What did Elisha say to you?” Hazael replied, “He told me that you would certainly recover.” 15But the next day he took a thick cloth, soaked it in water and spread it over the king’s face, so that he died. Then Hazael succeeded him as king.

COMMENTARY

7–8 The next incident from the Elisha cycle both closes the wars with Ben-Hadad II and initiates the critical circumstances that will culminate in the crucial events of 841 BC (see ch. 9). Ben-Hadad II, the Aramean king (860–842 BC), lay ill. Apparently he was sick enough to fear that his illness might be terminal. Under such circumstances a person will often reach out to unusual sources for help. Ben-Hadad knew all too well of Elisha’s prowess (cf. 6:12–23), so he sent an inquiry to his former antagonist expecting an honest reply.

Once again we see the motif of a ruler’s sending to inquire as to his chances of survival (cf. 1:2). The fact that Elisha was in Damascus and able to move about freely attests to the high respect in which God’s prophet was held. The presence of Elisha in Aramean Damascus would also enable him to fulfill Elijah’s assignment to anoint Hazael as king (1Ki 19:15), though no formal anointing would take place.

9 The exorbitant amount of gifts that Hazael took with him in gaining an audience with Elisha testifies further to Elisha’s importance, as does his portraying of Ben-Hadad as Elisha’s “son.” Granted Elisha’s earlier rejection of Naaman’s extraordinary offer (5:15–16, 26), it may be assumed that these gifts were likewise refused.

10 Although the Kethiv of the MT clearly reports Elisha as saying that Ben-Hadad would not (lō ʾ) live, the ancient versions and modern translations uniformly follow the Qere by reading “[say] to him” (lô; see Notes). If the Qere is read, Elisha is saying that although Ben-Hadad’s illness is not terminal, he will certainly die; therefore, Hazael’s subsequent report to his master is the truth—but not the whole truth (v.14).

11–13 While Elisha’s stare eventually brings embarrassment to Hazael (so the NIV, but see Notes), Elisha himself breaks down and weeps at what he knows Hazael will someday do. Hazael’s denial will prove to have a hollow ring, for subsequent Scripture records that he often oppressed God’s people (8:28; 9:14–15; 10:32–33; 12:17–18; 13:3, 22).

14–15 Elisha’s assurances to Hazael that he would be the next king of Damascus may have given to him the pretext that he had a mandate to be carried out. The next day brought the opportunity to carry out the nefarious deed. Having smothered the king, he assumed the throne.

The instrument of death appears to have been either a thick cloth (NIV) or a sieve-like covering that could be used as a mosquito net, which “when dipped in water would act as a cooler for the person in bed” (Hobbs, 102).

NOTES

10 For the writing of (lō ʾ) where (lô) is intended, see GKC, par. 103g. The fact that the focus of attention in these verses is dialogue rather than narrative illustrates well Robert Alter’s contention, 65–66, that in Hebrew narrative the authors were often more concerned with how the characters in the story reacted to the situation than the flow of action.

11 The MT is unclear as to who did the staring and who was ashamed. The NIV is probably correct in assuming a change of subject. Since Elisha is the subject of v.10, it is likely that the staring is his and that it caused Hazael to become embarrassed.

Alternatively, either Elisha or Hazael could be the subject of both actions. If Elisha, his steady gaze finally brought him such a sense of shame at what Hazael would someday do that he broke into tears. If Hazael, he stared at the prophet, in whose presence he was already uncomfortable, until the realization of what Elisha was hinting at made him embarrassed.

12 For the barbaric picture described here, see Note on 15:16.

13 For the dog as a figure of abasement, see Note on 1 Kings 14:11.

15 Hazael is often mentioned in the records of Shalmaneser III. Hazael’s usurpation is duly noted in that Hazael is called “son of a nobody.” See further Luckenbill, 1:246; Wiseman, 1 & 2 Kings, 214. Gray, 528, 532, denies that any assassination took place. He suggests that Ben-Hadad died in his sleep and that his death was discovered when an attendant came in to change the netted covering the next morning. Such an interpretation, however, not only leaves Elisha’s prophecy unfulfilled but also has Elisha telling Hazael to deliver a lie to Ben-Hadad.

c. Interlude: The reigns of Jehoram and Ahaziah of the southern kingdom (8:16–29)

OVERVIEW

Before completing the major section detailing Elisha’s ministry, the narrator shifts attention to two contemporary kings in the southern kingdom. The section divides naturally into two straightforward narratives, the first dealing with Jehoram (vv.16–24) and the second with Ahaziah (vv.25–29). Both units proceed in standard fashion: accession notice with spiritual evaluation (vv.16–19, 25–27), historical note (vv.20–22, 28–29), and closing formula (vv.23–24). No closing formula is included for Ahaziah because his demise is taken up in the next chapter (9:27–29).

The historical note in each case deals with wartime events. Jehoram unsuccessfully attempted to quell an Edomite rebellion (vv.20–22); Ahaziah went to visit Joram, king of Israel, who had been wounded in renewed Aramean-Israelite hostilities at Ramoth Gilead (vv.28–29). These verses in turn provide the setting for the following account (9:1–37).

16In the fifth year of Joram son of Ahab king of Israel, when Jehoshaphat was king of Judah, Jehoram son of Jehoshaphat began his reign as king of Judah. 17He was thirty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem eight years. 18He walked in the ways of the kings of Israel, as the house of Ahab had done, for he married a daughter of Ahab. He did evil in the eyes of the LORD. 19Nevertheless, for the sake of his servant David, the LORD was not willing to destroy Judah. He had promised to maintain a lamp for David and his descendants forever.

20In the time of Jehoram, Edom rebelled against Judah and set up its own king. 21So Jehoram went to Zair with all his chariots. The Edomites surrounded him and his chariot commanders, but he rose up and broke through by night; his army, however, fled back home. 22To this day Edom has been in rebellion against Judah. Libnah revolted at the same time.

23As for the other events of Jehoram’s reign, and all he did, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Judah? 24Jehoram rested with his fathers and was buried with them in the City of David. And Ahaziah his son succeeded him as king.

25In the twelfth year of Joram son of Ahab king of Israel, Ahaziah son of Jehoram king of Judah began to reign. 26Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem one year. His mother’s name was Athaliah, a granddaughter of Omri king of Israel. 27He walked in the ways of the house of Ahab and did evil in the eyes of the LORD, as the house of Ahab had done, for he was related by marriage to Ahab’s family.

28Ahaziah went with Joram son of Ahab to war against Hazael king of Aram at Ramoth Gilead. The Arameans wounded Joram; 29so King Joram returned to Jezreel to recover from the wounds the Arameans had inflicted on him at Ramoth in his battle with Hazael king of Aram.

Then Ahaziah son of Jehoram king of Judah went down to Jezreel to see Joram son of Ahab, because he had been wounded.

COMMENTARY

16–19 The synchronism of v.16 records the year of Jehoram’s assumption of full power of state (see the Note on 1:17). Jehoram’s ungodly character is noted along with the primary factor in the spiritual apostasy: his marriage to Ahab’s daughter (v.18; cf. ch. 11). Indeed, the royal marriage of the two houses of Israel and Judah was to spell catastrophe for Judah. Already Athaliah’s influence was felt in Jehoram’s murder of the royal house (cf. 2Ch 21:4) and the subsequent introduction of Baal worship (1Ki 16:29–33; 2Ki 11:17–18; 2Ch 24:7). Both Jehoram and Ahab, his father-in-law, were dominated by strong willed femmes fatales, by whom they would fall both spiritually and physically (cf. 1Ki 21:25–26; see Josephus, Ant. 9.96 [5.1]).

The Chronicler (2Ch 21:11) adds that Jehoram “caused the people of Jerusalem to prostitute themselves and . . . led Judah astray” according to the religion of the Canaanites. Further, he notes that after his father’s death Jehoram slew all his brothers and any possible claimant to the throne (2Ch 21:2–4). Despite Jehoram’s spiritual and moral bankruptcy, God honored the covenant with the house of David (v.19; cf. 2Ch 21:7) and did not destroy the kingdoms.

God’s promise to David is a testimony to divine faithfulness. Although some members of the Davidic line might abrogate the benefits of the Davidic covenant (cf. 2Sa 7:11b–16 with Ps 89:19–37), God’s promise will continue. The full terms in that covenant are to be realized in the new covenant centered in the Greater David (Ps 110; Jer 31:31–37; 33:15–16; Eze 37:21–28; Mt 27:64; Ac 2:29–36; Rev 11:15, etc.).

20–22 The narrator reports the results of Jehoram’s folly in the form of two military engagements, to which the Chronicler adds a third. (1) Edom revolted successfully in a rebellion that nearly cost Jehoram his life while attempting to suppress it (vv.20–22a; cf. 2Ch 21:8–10a). (2) Simultaneously Libnah revolted (v.22b; cf. 2Ch 21:10b). (3) The Philistines and Arabians launched a massive attack that reached Jerusalem itself and cost the king all his sons except Ahaziah (cf. 2Ch 21:16–17 with 22:1).

The location of Zair (v.21) is uncertain, though the context dictates that it was either on the border between Judah and Edom or not far from it. The Hebrew verb translated “crossed over” (“went,” NIV) suggests an Edomite locale. Libnah was situated in southwestern Judah (Jos 15:42) close to Lachish and the Philistine border (2Ki 19:8).

Due to the economic importance of established trade routes, Judah’s clashes with Edom usually triggered Philistine and Arabian military activities with Judah (2Ch 21:16; 26:6–7; 28:17–19; cf. Joel 3:4–8, 19; Am 1:6–8; Ob 11–14). It is not certain whether the Philistine-Arab attack of 2 Chronicles 21:16–17 occurred precisely at the time of Libnah’s revolt, but the two events most certainly were related to each other and to the Edomite rebellion.

23–24 The closing formula makes no mention of Jehoram’s death from an incurable disease in the bowels (cf. 2Ch 21:15, 18–19). Nor does it note that although he was buried in the City of David, he was excluded from the royal sepulcher (2Ch 21:20b).

25–26a Ahaziah succeeded his father, Jehoram, in the critical year 841 BC. He was not to survive the momentous waves of political events that were to inundate the ancient Near East in that year. Indeed in 841 BC Shalmaneser III of Assyria (859–824 BC) at last was able to break the coalition of western allies with whom he had previously fought a long series of battles (853, 848, 845). While all these complex details were part of God’s teleological processes in the government of the nations and his dealing with Israel, doubtless the longstanding controversy and the growing specter of Assyrian power could be felt in the political intrigues that brought about the death of Ben-Hadad II of Damascus and the downfall of the Omride dynasty in Israel. Before 841 had ended Hazael would be master of Damascus (where Shalmaneser had set him up after having defeated him in battle), the pro-Assyrian Jehu would initiate the fourth dynasty in Israel (chs. 9–10), and the wicked Athaliah would sit as usurper on the throne of Judah (ch. 11).

26b–29 Ahaziah, too, was under the paganistic spell of wicked Athaliah (v.26b; cf. 2Ch 22:3–5) and perpetuated the Baalism that his father had fostered (v.27). Likewise, at the first opportunity he joined with Ahab’s son Joram in renewed hostilities with the Arameans in Ramoth Gilead (v.28; 1Ki 22:1–40). Once more the battle went badly for Israel and Judah, for in that battle King Joram was sorely wounded and returned to Jezreel for rest and recovery from his wounds (v.29; cf. 9:14–16). The chapter ends with a concerned Ahaziah on his way to visit Joram in Jezreel. He would not return to Jerusalem alive (cf. 9:16, 24–29).

The mention of Joram and Ahaziah at Jezreel recalls Ahab’s sin there in the matter of Naboth’s vineyard and Elijah’s denunciation of the royal house (1Ki 21:1–24). It also provides the setting for the carrying out of Elijah’s prophecy detailed in the next chapter.

NOTES

18 Jehoram is the first king of Judah to be cited as walking “in the ways of the kings of Israel.” His son Ahaziah (vv.26–27) would be similarly condemned. In both cases the link with Ahab through Jehoram’s marriage to Athaliah is put forward as a primary cause of their evil spiritual deportment.

22 Although Amaziah later attacked Edom (14:7), it was never again under Judah’s control.

23 Second Chronicles 21:12–15 records a letter of divine judgment from Elijah the prophet to King Jehoram. Archer, 225–26, argues persuasively that Elijah may actually not have been yet translated into heaven before the accession of Jehoram of Judah. See also M. J. Selman, 2 Chronicles (TOTC; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 435–36.

25 For details as to political relations between Shalmaneser III of Assyria and Syro-Palestine, see Hallo, 157–62; Michael C. Astour, “841 BC: The First Assyrian Invasion of Israel,” JAOS 91 (1971): 383–89; A. R. Green, “Sua and Jehu, The Boundaries of Shalmaneser’s Conquest,” PEQ (1979): 35–39. See also comments on 10:32–33.

26 Ahaziah doubtless was twenty-two when he began to reign, not forty-two as 2 Chronicles 22:2 affirms in a reading that preserves an ancient scribal slip. Note the similar problem in 2 Kings 24:8 (cf. 2Ch 36:9–10).

The NIV correctly translates (bat ʿomrî) as “the granddaughter of Omri” (cf. v.18), her patrilineage being traced back to the founder of Israel’s third dynasty. The Hebrew words for “son” and “daughter” often have nuances such as “grandson” (e.g., Ge 31:28) and “granddaughter” (as here). See further the discussion in TDOT, 2:149–53, 333–36. The precise relationship of Athaliah to Ahab and Jezebel has been variously debated by scholars, with differing conclusions being drawn, such as Athaliah’s being (1) the daughter of Omri (Gray), (2) the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel (Keil), or (3) simply the daughter of Ahab (but not of Jezebel; Bright). For details, see Jones, 446–47.

d. Postlude: the anointing of Jehu and the death of Joram of the northern kingdom (9:1–37)

OVERVIEW

The account of the transition from the third to the fourth dynasties in the northern kingdom also brings to a conclusion the major narrative concerning Elisha’s great ministry (see Note on v.1). The two are inextricably bound together.

This chapter begins with Elisha’s delegating a member of the prophetic band to carry out Elijah’s divine commission to anoint Jehu as Israel’s king (see 1Ki 19:16). This delegate is instructed to go to Ramoth Gilead to perform the task. (It should be noted that the mention of Ramoth Gilead links this narrative to the preceding one [cf. 8:28].) Apparently also the younger prophet was to deliver the full ramifications of Elijah’s assignment (cf. 1Ki 19:17) and then to flee immediately (2Ki 9:1–10).

The rest of ch. 9 (vv.11–37) tells of Jehu’s carrying out of that assignment. It proceeds in three phases. (1) Jehu’s men learn that he has been anointed as Israel’s king, and they duly crown him as such (vv.11–15). (2) The means of Jehu’s taking kingly power are then detailed in the second phase. Jehu not only puts Joram to death but also pursues and wounds Ahaziah, the king of Judah (vv.16–29). (3) The final unit recounts the execution and demise of Jezebel (vv.30–37). All three sections are linked together by the Hebrew haššālôm, “Is it well/peace?” (vv.11, 17–19, 22, 31)—a question that takes on an increasingly dramatic tone.

i. Elisha’s anointing of Jehu (9:1–10)

1The prophet Elisha summoned a man from the company of the prophets and said to him, “Tuck your cloak into your belt, take this flask of oil with you and go to Ramoth Gilead. 2When you get there, look for Jehu son of Jehoshaphat, the son of Nimshi. Go to him, get him away from his companions and take him into an inner room. 3Then take the flask and pour the oil on his head and declare, ‘This is what the LORD says: I anoint you king over Israel.’ Then open the door and run; don’t delay!”

4So the young man, the prophet, went to Ramoth Gilead. 5When he arrived, he found the army officers sitting together. “I have a message for you, commander,” he said.

“For which of us?” asked Jehu.

“For you, commander,” he replied.

6Jehu got up and went into the house. Then the prophet poured the oil on Jehu’s head and declared, “This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: ‘I anoint you king over the LORD’s people Israel. 7You are to destroy the house of Ahab your master, and I will avenge the blood of my servants the prophets and the blood of all the LORD’s servants shed by Jezebel. 8The whole house of Ahab will perish. I will cut off from Ahab every last male in Israel—slave or free. 9I will make the house of Ahab like the house of Jeroboam son of Nebat and like the house of Baasha son of Ahijah. 10As for Jezebel, dogs will devour her on the plot of ground at Jezreel, and no one will bury her.’” Then he opened the door and ran.

COMMENTARY

1 The scene of Jehu’s anointing would be that same Ramoth Gilead where the Israelite troops remained stationed in prolonged confrontation with the Damascene Arameans.

2–5 Much as Moses’ work was carried on by Joshua, so Elijah’s tasks were carried on by Elisha. As Elisha, who had been Elijah’s assistant, carried out his commission, so Elisha in turn sends a fellow from the sons of the prophets to complete the assignment. The full details of Elisha’s charge are omitted here but are probably reflected in the speech of the young prophet (vv.6–10).

6–10 As the first two dynasties were brought to an end by divine judgment (cf. 1Ki 14:10–11; 15:29–30; 16:3, 7–8, 11–12; 19:17; 21:21–24), so would the third. The speech of the prophet is not a mere editorial insertion as some suggest; rather, it provides further information as to the charge Elisha gave to him.

NOTES

1 Chapters 9 and 10 are commonly taken as comprising one unit describing Jehu’s seizure of power and the establishment of the fourth dynasty. For example, in an interesting study F. O. Garcia-Treto (“The Fall of the House: A Carnivalesque Reading of 2 Kings 9 and 10,” JSOT 46 (1990): 47–65) points out the presence of the word “house” (eighteen times) as a leitmotif depicting not only the crowning of Jehu but also alluding negatively to the house of David.

However, I have chosen to link ch. 9 to the ministry of Elisha for several reasons. (1) Jehu’s anointing is ultimately a carrying out of the divine commission to his tutor Elijah. (2) Chapter 9 records the end of the third dynasty and its reigning king, Joram, during whose time Elisha ministered. (3) Verses 14b–15a provides a distinct flashback to 8:28–29a. (4) Geographically the events of ch. 9 begin where ch. 8 concluded. Understood in this way, the story of Jehu’s coup d’état again displays characteristics of both historical and prophetic narrative.

Admittedly ch. 9 has affinities with ch. 10, but it also has strong links with ch. 8. Arguably ch. 9 could be termed a hinge chapter—one that both looks backward to what has preceded and forward to what lies ahead. In this regard it functions much like Jeremiah 25. For details, see my remarks in “Of Bookends, Hinges, and Hooks: Literary Clues to the Arrangement of Jeremiah’s Prophecies,” WTJ 51 (1989): 109–31.

5 The fact that Jehu and his officers were “sitting together” (NIV) has been taken by some (Gray, 540; Jones, 455–56) to indicate that they were already plotting Joram’s overthrow.

ii. Jehu’s coup d’état (9:11–37)

11When Jehu went out to his fellow officers, one of them asked him, “Is everything all right? Why did this madman come to you?”

“You know the man and the sort of things he says,” Jehu replied.

12“That’s not true!” they said. “Tell us.”

Jehu said, “Here is what he told me: ‘This is what the LORD says: I anoint you king over Israel.’”

13They hurried and took their cloaks and spread them under him on the bare steps. Then they blew the trumpet and shouted, “Jehu is king!”

14So Jehu son of Jehoshaphat, the son of Nimshi, conspired against Joram. (Now Joram and all Israel had been defending Ramoth Gilead against Hazael king of Aram, 15but King Joram had returned to Jezreel to recover from the wounds the Arameans had inflicted on him in the battle with Hazael king of Aram.) Jehu said, “If this is the way you feel, don’t let anyone slip out of the city to go and tell the news in Jezreel.” 16Then he got into his chariot and rode to Jezreel, because Joram was resting there and Ahaziah king of Judah had gone down to see him.

17When the lookout standing on the tower in Jezreel saw Jehu’s troops approaching, he called out, “I see some troops coming.”

“Get a horseman,” Joram ordered. “Send him to meet them and ask, ‘Do you come in peace?’”

18The horseman rode off to meet Jehu and said, “This is what the king says: ‘Do you come in peace?’”

“What do you have to do with peace?” Jehu replied. “Fall in behind me.”

The lookout reported, “The messenger has reached them, but he isn’t coming back.”

19So the king sent out a second horseman. When he came to them he said, “This is what the king says: ‘Do you come in peace?’”

Jehu replied, “What do you have to do with peace? Fall in behind me.”

20The lookout reported, “He has reached them, but he isn’t coming back either. The driving is like that of Jehu son of Nimshi—he drives like a madman.”

21“Hitch up my chariot,” Joram ordered. And when it was hitched up, Joram king of Israel and Ahaziah king of Judah rode out, each in his own chariot, to meet Jehu. They met him at the plot of ground that had belonged to Naboth the Jezreelite. 22When Joram saw Jehu he asked, “Have you come in peace, Jehu?”

“How can there be peace,” Jehu replied, “as long as all the idolatry and witchcraft of your mother Jezebel abound?”

23Joram turned about and fled, calling out to Ahaziah, “Treachery, Ahaziah!”

24Then Jehu drew his bow and shot Joram between the shoulders. The arrow pierced his heart and he slumped down in his chariot. 25Jehu said to Bidkar, his chariot officer, “Pick him up and throw him on the field that belonged to Naboth the Jezreelite. Remember how you and I were riding together in chariots behind Ahab his father when the LORD made this prophecy about him: 26‘Yesterday I saw the blood of Naboth and the blood of his sons, declares the LORD, and I will surely make you pay for it on this plot of ground, declares the LORD.’ Now then, pick him up and throw him on that plot, in accordance with the word of the LORD.”

27When Ahaziah king of Judah saw what had happened, he fled up the road to Beth Haggan. Jehu chased him, shouting, “Kill him too!” They wounded him in his chariot on the way up to Gur near Ibleam, but he escaped to Megiddo and died there. 28His servants took him by chariot to Jerusalem and buried him with his fathers in his tomb in the City of David. 29(In the eleventh year of Joram son of Ahab, Ahaziah had become king of Judah.)

30Then Jehu went to Jezreel. When Jezebel heard about it, she painted her eyes, arranged her hair and looked out of a window. 31As Jehu entered the gate, she asked, “Have you come in peace, Zimri, you murderer of your master?”

32He looked up at the window and called out, “Who is on my side? Who?” Two or three eunuchs looked down at him. 33“Throw her down!” Jehu said. So they threw her down, and some of her blood spattered the wall and the horses as they trampled her underfoot.

34Jehu went in and ate and drank. “Take care of that cursed woman,” he said, “and bury her, for she was a king’s daughter.” 35But when they went out to bury her, they found nothing except her skull, her feet and her hands. 36They went back and told Jehu, who said, “This is the word of the LORD that he spoke through his servant Elijah the Tishbite: On the plot of ground at Jezreel dogs will devour Jezebel’s flesh. 37Jezebel’s body will be like refuse on the ground in the plot at Jezreel, so that no one will be able to say, ‘This is Jezebel.’”

COMMENTARY

11 The word translated “madman” is a strong one used of madness in general (Dt 28:34) and of David’s feigned madness at Gath (1Sa 21:12–15). As in the case of Shemaiah’s contempt for Jeremiah (Jer 29:24–28), so here the word displays the disdain in which God’s faithful prophets were often held (Hos 9:7).

12–13 The officers’ cloaks were laid for Jehu, the steps of the house probably serving as a makeshift throne, with Jehu probably sitting on the top ones. The strewing of garments was a mark of homage or respect. In this way a greater King was welcomed with strewn garments upon his entering Jerusalem (Mt 21:8). Even a dead king could be shown respect by the use of a cloak: Alexander wrapped the fallen body of his enemy Darius in his own cloak before sending it to Persepolis for burial (see W. W. Tarn, Alexander the Great [Boston: Beacon, 1979], 58–59).

14–16 The mention of Ahaziah’s visiting of Joram at Jezreel not only reminds us of the existing situation (cf. 8:29b) but also provides a link with the succeeding narrative (vv.30–37).

17–20 Although the narrator reports Joram’s response to the approach of Jehu and his troops, what happens outside Jezreel is largely seen through the eyes of the lookout and the dialogue between Jehu and Joram’s messengers.

21 The meeting between Jehu, Joram, and Ahaziah on the land that once belonged to Naboth provides a touch of dramatic irony. The reader is thus prepared for the fulfillment of prophecy concerning the house of Ahab.

22–24 The third recording of the question as to whether Jehu had come in peace provides another example of the narrator’s use of threefold repetition (see comments on 3:9–14). The royal query was greeted in a still rougher manner than the two preceding questions. Joram’s espousal of the idolatry and witchcraft instituted by Jezebel had rendered impossible any talk of “peace.” Joram realized Jehu’s reply meant that a coup d’état was taking place. Having warned Ahaziah of the treachery, Joram attempted to flee but was struck dead in his chariot by Jehu’s well-aimed arrow. Joram, the final king of the third dynasty, comes to an end similar to that of his infamous father, Ahab (1Ki 22:34–35).

25–26 In fulfillment of Elijah’s prophetic threat (cf. 1Ki 21:19–24), which apparently Jehu and his chariot officers had heard, Jehu instructed his aide to throw Joram’s fallen body onto Naboth’s field. The variance between Jehu’s words and 1 Kings 21:19, 21–24 may be accounted for by noting that Jehu was merely repeating the substance of Elijah’s words in such a way as to accredit himself as God’s avenging agent. Since apparently Jehu was close enough to hear these words, he must have enjoyed a close relationship with the throne that lasted after Ahab’s death, so he was left in charge of the Israelite forces after Joram was wounded.

27–29 The circumstances of Ahaziah’s flight, capture, death, and burial have been much discussed. Taken at face value, the account in 2 Kings reports that Ahaziah was wounded on the ascent to Gur and died in Megiddo, from where his body was taken to Jerusalem for burial. Second Chronicles 22:8–9 seems to indicate that Ahaziah was overtaken in Samaria, where he had sought refuge with relatives, and was brought to Jehu and executed, his body being interred with honor by Jehu’s men.

One way of reconciling the problem is to suggest that although Ahaziah was wounded at the ascent to Gur, he was apprehended by Jehu’s men in Samaria (where he lay recovering from his wounds) and then taken to Megiddo, where he was put to death. His body was then given to his servants, who took it to Jerusalem for burial in the royal tomb (v.28; cf. 2Ch 22:9). Whereas the author of Kings emphasized Ahaziah’s flight and eventual execution in Megiddo, the Chronicler laid stress on his arrest. The accounts, therefore, are supplementary, not contradictory.

30–31 Jezebel mockingly greeted Jehu with the same question that had been used by Joram and his messengers: “Is it well?” (“Have you come in peace?” NIV). Doubtless the queen had received the full details of what had happened. The question, therefore, drips with sarcasm as her reference to Jehu as “Zimri” (a traiterous usurper) shows. The mention of Zimri may also mask her suggestion that Jehu’s usurpation will also be short-lived.

32–34 After Jezebel’s death and with cold disdain, Jehu dined in Jezebel’s own house while her body lay trampled under horses’ hoofs in the street. Jehu’s callous treatment of Jezebel is later tempered by Jehu’s reminding himself that she was a king’s daughter. As such she deserved a proper burial. He failed to recognize her as Israel’s queen, however, for he considered her the idolatrous root of Israel’s apostasy (cf. v.22).

35–37 Elijah’s prophecy of Jezebel’s demise is told in all its grisly horror. As in the former instance (vv.24–26), so once again Jehu expands the report of Elijah’s words. Like Ahab (1Ki 22:38), dogs were actively involved in denigrating Jezebel’s abandoned corpse.

NOTES

11 As Gray, 542, points out, this passage is often cited along with such passages as Jeremiah 29:26 to show that ecstasy was an essential feature of Hebrew prophecy. This theory is sometimes utilized to reduce the OT prophets to the level of the wicked excesses of heathen diviners. For criticism of this theory, see Leon Wood, The Prophets of Israel (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979), 37–56; see also Notes on 3:15.

12 The word translated “that’s not true” intends a deliberate lie. Here, however, it was probably used hyperbolically and in good sport by Jehu’s fellow officers who, though having little use for God or his prophets, nonetheless wanted to know what had really happened. One is reminded of the question put to Alexander after his consultation with the oracle at Siwah (see U. Wilken, Alexander the Great [New York: Norton, 1967], 121–29).

13 The word translated “bare steps” denotes an otherwise unknown architectural term. Some suggest that it may mean a landing on the steps (Gray, 543; Cohn, 67). For the blowing of the trumpet and the shouting of “Long live the king,” see 1 Kings 1:34 (cf. 2Ki 11:12).

14b–15a Although these words are set off as a separate paragraph in the MT, there is no need to treat them as a redactor’s intrusion. Nor should they be viewed as the original introduction to the reign of Jehu, which, though omitted at 9:1, was adapted by the editor from 8:28–29a and subsequently reintroduced here presumably to “account for the absence of Joram” (Gray, 543). Rather, the narrator here reminds his readers of the circumstances that necessitated Jehu’s swift move against Jezreel.

18 D. J. Wiseman (“‘Is It Peace?’” 319–21) suggests that the whole incident from Elisha’s anointing to Joram’s questions reflects terminology drawn from international protocol and negotiations. If so, for Joram the negotiations failed.

20 “Like a madman” is derived from the same root as the word used for madness in v.11. The phrase has caused great problems so that the versions have rendered it variously. The LXX uses the term with the idea of a peculiar alternating motion, the Vulgate with a word meaning an (hostile) approach, and the Peshitta with a word meaning “hastily.” Interestingly, the Targum translates it “quietly” (a concept found also in Josephus, Ant. 9.117 [6.3]), hence “marched slowly and in good order.”

22 (z^enûnîm, “idolatry”; lit., “harlotries”) and (k^ešāpîm, “witchcraft, sorceries”; cf. Akkad. kišpu [“witchcraft, sorcery”] from kašāpu [“to bewitch, cast a spell”]) designate the heinous nature of Jezebel’s reign. Spiritual whoredom had allured Israel’s religious devotees into demonic practices.

29 For the apparent discrepancy in the details relative to Ahaziah’s accession to the throne, see Note on 8:26 and the remarks of Archer, 206.

30 Jezebel’s adornment may have been intended to create a queenly appearance in the face of impending death and served as a royal burial preparation. Jezebel was in her “upper chamber,” with the whole upper story probably forming the royal quarters, much in the style of the Syrian bit ḥillāni (“house with windows”), which had attached balconies with latticework screens (see Note on 1:2; also Note on 1Ki 17:19). For the figure of the woman at the window, cf. Judges 5:28; see also Aharoni and Avi-Yonah, 85; R. Patterson, “The Song of Deborah,” Tradition and Testament, ed. John and Paul Feinberg (Chicago: Moody Press, 1981), 141.

34 Jehu sat at the king’s table, not “as if nothing untoward had happened” (Montgomery, 403), but as attesting his right to the royal domain and as a mark of communion between the local officials and the new king.

E. The Era of the Fourth Dynasty (10:1–15:12)

1. The Reign of Jehu in the Northern Kingdom (10:1–36)

OVERVIEW

The account of Jehu’s reign is given in three broad movements. In place of the usual accession statement we are exposed to the bloody details of his ruthless extermination of all potential rivals to his newly gained throne (vv.1–17). This section contains details of three bloody purges: the killing of seventy of Ahab’s sons (vv.1–11), that of forty-two relatives of the Judahite king Ahaziah (vv.12–14), and that of the remainder of Ahab’s relatives (vv.15–17).

The central portion of the chapter gives details of Jehu’s deceitful murdering of the priests of Baal and the destruction of the temple of Baal in Samaria (vv.18–27). A final section (vv.28–36) contains three short units dealing with the character of Jehu’s religion (vv.28–31), his difficulties with the Aramean Hazael (vv.32–33), and the usual final notices concerning his reign (vv.34–36). Thematic links between the first two units may be seen in Jehu’s murderous activities and the appearance of Jehonadab ben Recab. The second unit links with the third in Jehu’s attention to Baalism.

1Now there were in Samaria seventy sons of the house of Ahab. So Jehu wrote letters and sent them to Samaria: to the officials of Jezreel, to the elders and to the guardians of Ahab’s children. He said, 2“As soon as this letter reaches you, since your master’s sons are with you and you have chariots and horses, a fortified city and weapons, 3choose the best and most worthy of your master’s sons and set him on his father’s throne. Then fight for your master’s house.”

4But they were terrified and said, “If two kings could not resist him, how can we?”

5So the palace administrator, the city governor, the elders and the guardians sent this message to Jehu: “We are your servants and we will do anything you say. We will not appoint anyone as king; you do whatever you think best.”

6Then Jehu wrote them a second letter, saying, “If you are on my side and will obey me, take the heads of your master’s sons and come to me in Jezreel by this time tomorrow.”

Now the royal princes, seventy of them, were with the leading men of the city, who were rearing them. 7When the letter arrived, these men took the princes and slaughtered all seventy of them. They put their heads in baskets and sent them to Jehu in Jezreel. 8When the messenger arrived, he told Jehu, “They have brought the heads of the princes.”

Then Jehu ordered, “Put them in two piles at the entrance of the city gate until morning.”

9The next morning Jehu went out. He stood before all the people and said, “You are innocent. It was I who conspired against my master and killed him, but who killed all these? 10Know then, that not a word the LORD has spoken against the house of Ahab will fail. The LORD has done what he promised through his servant Elijah.” 11So Jehu killed everyone in Jezreel who remained of the house of Ahab, as well as all his chief men, his close friends and his priests, leaving him no survivor.

12Jehu then set out and went toward Samaria. At Beth Eked of the Shepherds, 13he met some relatives of Ahaziah king of Judah and asked, “Who are you?”

They said, “We are relatives of Ahaziah, and we have come down to greet the families of the king and of the queen mother.”

14“Take them alive!” he ordered. So they took them alive and slaughtered them by the well of Beth Eked—forty-two men. He left no survivor.

15After he left there, he came upon Jehonadab son of Recab, who was on his way to meet him. Jehu greeted him and said, “Are you in accord with me, as I am with you?”

“I am,” Jehonadab answered.

“If so,” said Jehu, “give me your hand.” So he did, and Jehu helped him up into the chariot. 16Jehu said, “Come with me and see my zeal for the LORD.” Then he had him ride along in his chariot.

17When Jehu came to Samaria, he killed all who were left there of Ahab’s family; he destroyed them, according to the word of the LORD spoken to Elijah.

18Then Jehu brought all the people together and said to them, “Ahab served Baal a little; Jehu will serve him much. 19Now summon all the prophets of Baal, all his ministers and all his priests. See that no one is missing, because I am going to hold a great sacrifice for Baal. Anyone who fails to come will no longer live.” But Jehu was acting deceptively in order to destroy the ministers of Baal.

20Jehu said, “Call an assembly in honor of Baal.” So they proclaimed it. 21Then he sent word throughout Israel, and all the ministers of Baal came; not one stayed away. They crowded into the temple of Baal until it was full from one end to the other. 22And Jehu said to the keeper of the wardrobe, “Bring robes for all the ministers of Baal.” So he brought out robes for them.

23Then Jehu and Jehonadab son of Recab went into the temple of Baal. Jehu said to the ministers of Baal, “Look around and see that no servants of the LORD are here with you—only ministers of Baal.” 24So they went in to make sacrifices and burnt offerings. Now Jehu had posted eighty men outside with this warning: “If one of you lets any of the men I am placing in your hands escape, it will be your life for his life.”

25As soon as Jehu had finished making the burnt offering, he ordered the guards and officers: “Go in and kill them; let no one escape.” So they cut them down with the sword. The guards and officers threw the bodies out and then entered the inner shrine of the temple of Baal. 26They brought the sacred stone out of the temple of Baal and burned it. 27They demolished the sacred stone of Baal and tore down the temple of Baal, and people have used it for a latrine to this day.

28So Jehu destroyed Baal worship in Israel. 29However, he did not turn away from the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, which he had caused Israel to commit—the worship of the golden calves at Bethel and Dan.

30The LORD said to Jehu, “Because you have done well in accomplishing what is right in my eyes and have done to the house of Ahab all I had in mind to do, your descendants will sit on the throne of Israel to the fourth generation.” 31Yet Jehu was not careful to keep the law of the LORD, the God of Israel, with all his heart. He did not turn away from the sins of Jeroboam, which he had caused Israel to commit.

32In those days the LORD began to reduce the size of Israel. Hazael overpowered the Israelites throughout their territory 33east of the Jordan in all the land of Gilead (the region of Gad, Reuben and Manasseh), from Aroer by the Arnon Gorge through Gilead to Bashan.

34As for the other events of Jehu’s reign, all he did, and all his achievements, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel?

35Jehu rested with his fathers and was buried in Samaria. And Jehoahaz his son succeeded him as king. 36The time that Jehu reigned over Israel in Samaria was twenty-eight years.

COMMENTARY

1–5 Jehu’s official letters appear in typical ancient Near Eastern form: (1) addressee (the city officials, the elders or civic leaders, and the guardians charged with the custody of the royal family), and (2) main body of the letter, introduced by the phrase “he says.” Jehu’s message was clearly a challenge to support him or fight. Cohn, 71, suggests that the officials submitted to Jehu because of “their fear to stand against the assassin of two kings.”

6–8 The excessive demands of Jehu’s second letter were also met by the cowardly leaders of Samaria. The piling up of the severed heads of captives at the city gate as a warning against opposing the conqueror is often attested in Assyrian records. Thus, for example, Shalmaneser III reports in his famous Monolith Inscription:

From Hubushkia I departed [to] Sugunia, the royal city of Arame, the Urartian (Armenian), I drew near. The city I stormed (and) captured. Multitudes of his warriors I slew. His booty I carried off. A pyramid (pillar) of heads I reared in front of his city. (Luckenbill, 1:213)

Such grisly acts knew no bounds. On one occasion Ashurbanipal severed the head of his fallen enemy and reported:

I did not give his body to be buried. I made him more dead than he was before. I cut off his head and hung it on the back of Nabû-kâtâ-sabat, (his) twin brother (?). (Luckenbill, 2:312)

Ashur-nasir-pal was particularly vicious in his treatment of the captured enemy. The events of one occasion form a macabre parallel to the account here in 2 Kings:

To the city of Suru of Bit-Halupê I drew near, and the terror of the splendor of Assur, my lord, overwhelmed them. The chief men and the elders of the city, to save their lives, came forth into my presence and embraced my feet, saying: “If it is thy pleasure, slay! If it is thy pleasure, let live! That which thy heart desireth, do!” Ahiababa the son of nobody, whom they had brought from Bit-Adini, I took captive. In the valor of my heart and with the fury of my weapons I stormed the city. All the rebels they seized and delivered them up. Azi-ilu I set over them as my own governor. I built a pillar over against his city gate, and I flayed all the chief men who had revolted, and I covered the pillar with their skins; some I walled up within the pillar, some I impaled upon the pillar on the stakes, and others I bound to stakes round about the pillar; many within the border of my own land I flayed, and I spread their skins upon the walls and I cut off the limbs of the officers, of the royal officers who had rebelled. Ahiababa I took to Nineveh, I flayed him, I spread his skin upon the wall of Nineveh. My power and might I established over the land of Lake. (Luckenbill, 1:144–45)

9–11 Jehu uses duplicity and deception in spreading the responsibility for the execution of Ahab’s sons over the whole populace. Yet he tries to absolve all concerned. He affirms that what he and they have done has the divine sanction of carrying out Elijah’s prophecy against the house of Ahab. For good measure he then orders the seizure and execution of any who might yet remain of Ahab’s descendants in Jezreel, as well as any of Jehoram’s officials, aides, and friends (v.11). Even the state priests who served them are put to death.

12–14 The term translated “relatives” customarily means “brothers.” Since the brothers of Ahaziah had been carried off and killed in the days of Jehoram (2Ch 21:17), however, the term must be used in its extended sense of Ahaziah’s relatives (stepbrothers, nephews, cousins, etc.).

This traveling band appears to have come up the coast and turned eastward to the road that led from Jezreel to Jenin. Since Beth Eked lay east-northeast of Jenin, they must have left the main road, which went on to Samaria, and would have needed to turn southward to reach the Israelite capital. Hobbs, 128, suggests that these forty-two men were really soldiers who were traveling “by an inconspicuous route, to avenge the death of their king and his cousins.” If the traditional understanding is followed, however, the circumlocutious route may have been taken to avoid meeting Jehu. If so, their worst fears were about to be realized.

15–17 On leaving yet another bloody scene, Jehu encountered a mysterious figure, one Jehonadab the Recabite, who, having heard of Jehu’s anti-Baal crusade, had apparently come to meet the new Israelite king. Jeremiah (Jer 35) records that Jehonadab was the leader of an ascetic group who lived an austere, nomadic life in the desert, drinking no wine and depending solely on the Lord for their sustenance. Separatist to the core and strong patriots, they lived in protest against the materialism and religious compromise rampant in Israel. Accordingly, Jehonadab may have seen in Jehu’s reputed desire to purge the nation of its heathenism a hope of national repentance and longing for Yahweh. Thus it may be that Jehonadab and the Recabites had probably been greatly influenced by the ministry of Elisha with Elijah’s words being dramatically fulfilled before their eyes. Like John the Baptist of the NT, Jehonadab had a kind of kingdom hope that in Jehu the fortunes of Israel would soon be restored.

18–24 Jehu’s speech to the assembled populace is filled with deception. Did Ahab serve Baal a little? Jehu would serve him more. While this a fortiori statement does show some accuracy in that Ahab did build a temple for Baal (1Ki 16:32), he could repent when challenged by divine rebuke (1Ki 21:28–29). Further, he gave to his children names containing elements coupled with “Yahweh.”

In order to “serve” Baal, Jehu orders a “great sacrifice.” The irony in this remark is that only too late will the devotees of Baal learn that they are the ones to be sacrificed!

25–27 Although the NIV implies that Jehu himself offered the heathen sacrifice, he may simply have seen to its accomplishment by the proper priests, much as Solomon did at the dedication of the temple (1Ki 8:62–63). The extermination of the priests of Baal is followed by the destruction of his temple. Leaving the bodies of the worshipers in the open and turning the temple ruins into a latrine is reminiscent of the fate of Jezebel, whose body was likewise left on the ground “like refuse” (2Ki 9:37).

28–33 Jehu had exterminated the worship of Baal in Israel (v.28). For this the Lord commended him and promised to him a royal succession to the fourth generation (v.30). Yet Jehu was to prove a disappointment to God, for his reform was soon seen to be political and selfish rather than born of any deep concern for God (v.31). Not only did he fail to keep the law in his heart, he also perpetuated the state cult of the golden calf established by Jeroboam I (v.29). Jehu is commended and rewarded for his faithfulness in carrying out Elijah’s prophecies against Ahab’s wicked house. God’s promise was literally kept; Jehu’s descendants—Jehoahaz, Joash, Jeroboam II, and Zechariah—succeeded him in turn in Israel’s fourth dynasty.

Yet while there is acceptance of the effects of the deed, the man and his motives did not necessarily win divine approval. Jehu’s true heart may be seen in his halfhearted observance of the law, his espousal of Jeroboam’s apostate state religion, and his manipulation of any and all circumstances for his desired, selfish ends. The latter point is amply illustrated by his submission to Shalmaneser III, as recorded by the Assyrian king on his famous Black Obelisk: “The tribute of Jehu, son of Omri; I received” (ANET, 280). Accordingly there is no contradiction in the Lord’s condemnation of Jehu as delivered by Hosea (Hos 1:4).

It is small wonder, therefore, that God allowed Hazael systematically to plunder and reduce the size of Israel. Although defeated by Shalmaneser III of Assyria in 841 BC, this Aramean king managed to retain his independence, and since his former ally Israel was now ruled by a pro-Assyrian king, he looked menacingly southward. Hazael took advantage of Shalmaneser’s primary occupation with affairs in the east during the years 839–828 BC and final six years of revolt at home (827–822) to afflict Jehu (841–814) and his son Jehoahaz (814–798) severely. Not only was Israelite Transjordan lost to Hazael’s forces, but the Aramean king, on the death of Jehu, was also able to march unchecked into Israel and Judah (cf. 12:18). How appropriately Elisha had wept (8:11–12)! Only the appearance of a new, strong Assyrian king (Adad-Nirari III, 841–783 BC) would check Hazael’s relentless surge (see Note on 13:4–5).

34–36 Whatever other “achievements” Jehu may have accomplished are passed over in silence by the narrator, who moves quickly to a typical presentation of final details concerning the end of the king’s reign.

NOTES

1 Retaining the “officials of Jezreel” read by the MT could indicate that before Jehu had come from Megiddo to Jezreel, those officials in Jezreel entrusted with the care of the royal children had taken their wards and fled to Samaria. The letters thus addressed per se to “the officials of Jezreel” (i.e., the place where they often served and from which they had just come) would be intended for all the officials of Samaria (cf. v.5). Such an address would make the leaders of Samaria aware that Jehu meant business and yet indicate that their lives were not in jeopardy—Jehu simply wanted the royal survivors. Thus construed, “Jezreel” would not necessarily be viewed as a textual error (cf. Keil, 346).

More usually, however, “Jezreel” is emended to “Israel”; or the phrase is altered so as to read “to the officials of the city, to the elders, etc.” This latter suggestion has the support of some ancient MSS and versions and appears to be demanded by the reply in v.5. The difficulty of preserving the sense of the MT may argue for the alternative reading. Moreover, those addressed in v.1 are those who reply in v.5.

The problem is further complicated by the word (s^epārîm, “letters”). While one may argue for the sending of just one letter (the m of the MT being viewed as an enclitic m, as with Montgomery, 408; cf. LXX), most versions follow the MT in reading “letters.” Josephus (Ant. 9.125 [6.5]) suggests that Jehu wrote two letters, one to those who cared for the children and one to the officials of Samaria.

2 (w^eʿattâ, “and now”) is the usual means in ancient correspondence for introducing the demands or decision of the writer. Obviously the contents of the letter are greatly abbreviated. The author of Kings records only the barest essential data necessary to his account. Accordingly, the elaborate attempts of A. Alt (“Der Stadtstaat Samaria,” in Kleine Schriften zum Geschichte des Volkes Israel [Munich: Beck, 1959], 3:285–88; see further G. Buccellati, Cities and Nations of Ancient Syria [Rome: Universita di Roma, 1966], 187–91), who relies heavily on the three diplomatic letters of exchange here to detect a distinction between the city-state and the kingdom of Israel with the capital at Jezreel, is at best tentative. For representative examples of ancient Near Eastern correspondence, see A. Leo Oppenheim, Letters from Mesopotamia (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1967).

8 Josephus (Ant. 9.127 [6.5]) suggests that the men bearing the severed heads arrived while Jehu and his friends were eating supper! If so, one is reminded of the Assyrian relief showing the king feasting with his queen while the head of his vanquished enemy hangs in a nearby tree (ANEP, 156, pl. 451).

15 The term “son of Recab” became a tribal designation for the ascetically minded Recabites (Jer 35:1–16). So faithful had the later Recabites been to the precepts laid down by Jehonadab that Jeremiah could announce their exemption from the coming Chaldean invasion (Jer 35:17–19).

According to 1 Chronicles 2:55, Recab came from a Kenite clan. Because Hobab, the father-in-law of Moses, was also a Kenite (Nu 10:29), Keil, 349, suggested that “the Recabites were probably descendants of Hobab, since the Kenites the sons of Hobab had gone with the Israelites from the Arabian desert to Canaan, and had there carried on their nomad life (Judg. i. 16, iv. 11, 1 Sam xv. 6).” F. S. Frick (“The Rechabites Reconsidered,” JBL 90 [1971]: 279–87) suggests that the term (rkb) was associated with chariots. Accordingly, Jehu was especially happy to have the backing of such a man.

Based on strictly biblical information, however, traditional scholarship has held that the Recabites were people noted not only for their abilities in metalworking and crafts but also for their orthodoxy. As craftsmen and tradesmen, the nomadic Kenites were known in the period of the monarchy to have lived extensively in southern Judah, though the events in Judges 4–5 demonstrate that some of them had previously migrated northwest into Galilee—a fact that authenticates Jehonadab’s more northerly connections.

25 For (rāṣîm, “guards”; lit., “runners”) and (šālišîm, “officers”), see Note on 1 Kings 14:28.

2. The Reign of Athaliah in the Southern Kingdom (11:1–20)

OVERVIEW

The account of Athaliah’s usurpation and brief reign is told in straightforward narrative. (1) Athaliah seizes the throne and puts to death all possible known rivals. Meanwhile, godly Jehosheba, the wife of the high priest Jehoiada, rescues one prince, the boy Joash (vv.1–3). (2) In the seventh year Jehoiada lays careful plans to replace the usurper with the rightful boy king (vv.4–8). (3) The plot is successful, and Joash is crowned and anointed king (vv.9–12). (4) Too late Athaliah learns of the plot and is seized and put to death (vv.13–16). (5) Jehoiada leads the people in covenantal renewal and the purging of Baalism, and Joash is duly installed on the throne of Judah (vv.17–20).

1When Athaliah the mother of Ahaziah saw that her son was dead, she proceeded to destroy the whole royal family. 2But Jehosheba, the daughter of King Jehoram and sister of Ahaziah, took Joash son of Ahaziah and stole him away from among the royal princes, who were about to be murdered. She put him and his nurse in a bedroom to hide him from Athaliah; so he was not killed. 3He remained hidden with his nurse at the temple of the LORD for six years while Athaliah ruled the land.

4In the seventh year Jehoiada sent for the commanders of units of a hundred, the Carites and the guards and had them brought to him at the temple of the LORD. He made a covenant with them and put them under oath at the temple of the LORD. Then he showed them the king’s son. 5He commanded them, saying, “This is what you are to do: You who are in the three companies that are going on duty on the Sabbath—a third of you guarding the royal palace, 6a third at the Sur Gate, and a third at the gate behind the guard, who take turns guarding the temple—7and you who are in the other two companies that normally go off Sabbath duty are all to guard the temple for the king. 8Station yourselves around the king, each man with his weapon in his hand. Anyone who approaches your ranks must be put to death. Stay close to the king wherever he goes.”

9The commanders of units of a hundred did just as Jehoiada the priest ordered. Each one took his men—those who were going on duty on the Sabbath and those who were going off duty—and came to Jehoiada the priest. 10Then he gave the commanders the spears and shields that had belonged to King David and that were in the temple of the LORD. 11The guards, each with his weapon in his hand, stationed themselves around the king—near the altar and the temple, from the south side to the north side of the temple.

12Jehoiada brought out the king’s son and put the crown on him; he presented him with a copy of the covenant and proclaimed him king. They anointed him, and the people clapped their hands and shouted, “Long live the king!”

13When Athaliah heard the noise made by the guards and the people, she went to the people at the temple of the LORD. 14She looked and there was the king, standing by the pillar, as the custom was. The officers and the trumpeters were beside the king, and all the people of the land were rejoicing and blowing trumpets. Then Athaliah tore her robes and called out, “Treason! Treason!”

15Jehoiada the priest ordered the commanders of units of a hundred, who were in charge of the troops: “Bring her out between the ranks and put to the sword anyone who follows her.” For the priest had said, “She must not be put to death in the temple of the LORD.” 16So they seized her as she reached the place where the horses enter the palace grounds, and there she was put to death.

17Jehoiada then made a covenant between the LORD and the king and people that they would be the LORD’s people. He also made a covenant between the king and the people. 18All the people of the land went to the temple of Baal and tore it down. They smashed the altars and idols to pieces and killed Mattan the priest of Baal in front of the altars.

Then Jehoiada the priest posted guards at the temple of the LORD. 19He took with him the commanders of hundreds, the Carites, the guards and all the people of the land, and together they brought the king down from the temple of the LORD and went into the palace, entering by way of the gate of the guards. The king then took his place on the royal throne, 20and all the people of the land rejoiced. And the city was quiet, because Athaliah had been slain with the sword at the palace.

COMMENTARY

1–3 As in other desperate times, a righteous woman would be used by God to stem the tide of apostasy. This ninth-century “Jochebed” (the mother of Moses) was named Jehosheba. A princess in her own right—being the daughter of Jehoram and sister of Ahaziah—she was also the wife of the high priest Jehoiada (2Ch 22:11). Conspiring with her nurse (and doubtless the high priest as well), Jehosheba hid the baby, at first in one of the palace chambers, then subsequently smuggled him into her temple quarters, where she managed to conceal him for six full years.

4 The Chronicler (2Ch 23:1–2) lists the names of the officers whom Jehoiada took into his confidence concerning the existence of the rightful king and with whom he entered into covenant to unseat Athaliah. The Chronicler also adds that these men gathered the Levites and family heads and brought them to Jerusalem.

Several differences in detail are observable between 2 Chronicles 23 and 2 Kings 11 in accordance with the goals of the authors. More than likely, both accounts are merely summary statements of the essential details, the account in Kings emphasizing the part played by the military in defense of the king and palace, and that in Chronicles, the role of the Levites in making the temple secure. The two, then, are supplementary, not contradictory.

The “Carites” are mentioned only here and in 2 Samuel 20:23, where they are associated with the Pelethites, who appear as bodyguards of the king. In that passage the LXX reads “Kerethites,” the more usual term associated with the Pelethites (cf. 1Ki 1:38). Both terms are connected with the Aegean world, the former with Crete, the latter more specifically with the Philistines. While some scholars see a distinction in origin between the Carites (Silicia) and Kerethites (Crete), the alternations between the two in 2 Samuel 20:23 may argue that they are the same.

5–11 Though details of Jehoiada’s plan of action are somewhat difficult to trace, the following steps appear to have been taken. (1) The royal bodyguard that was relieved from duty at the beginning of the Sabbath went to the temple, where the high priest provided them with the weapons stored in the sanctuary. (2) The men then formed two groups so as to surround the rightful king. (3) The bodyguard that came on duty subdivided into three groups, who stood guard at (a) the palace, (b) the Sur Gate (or “Foundation Gate”; 2Ch 23:5), and (c) the “gate behind the guard” (cf. the “gate of the guards”; 2Ki 11:19).

According to 2 Chronicles 23:7, the Levites formed a further circle around the king that was especially charged with the security of the temple. As Edersheim, 7:18, remarks:

This division of Levites was to form an outer circle not only around the king, but also around his military guard. This also explains the difference in the directions given in 2 Kings 11:8 to the military guards to kill those who penetrated their “ranks,” and in 2 Chronicles 23:7 to the Levites, to kill those who penetrated into the Temple. In other words, the Levites were to stand beyond the guards, and to prevent a hostile entrance into the Temple buildings; and if any gained their way through them to the ranks of the military, they were to be cut down by the guards. Thus the king was really surrounded by a double cordon—the military occupying the inner court around his person, while the Levites held the outer court and the gates.

12 With everyone in place, Jehoiada led the king to the appointed spot, perhaps in the innermost court between the temple and the altar, and anointed him as king, to the shouts of acclamation of the gathered throng. The “copy of the covenant” refers not only to the Ten Commandments (Ex 31:18), but also the whole law of God (Ps 119:88). Although the situation is not without difficulty, according to Deuteronomy 17:18 a copy of the law was to be made by the king himself from one given to him by the priests and was to be kept with the king always so that it became the rule for all his life. Thus by putting the crown on the young king’s head and a copy of the law in his hand, Jehoiada was acting in accordance with the ancient scriptural precedent—a move calculated to strengthen the hand of the supporters of the rightful king of the people.

13–16 The narrator now shifts scenes to the palace where Athaliah has heard the clamor. Rushing to the source of the jubilation, she beholds the newly crowned king standing on the royal dais at the eastern gate of the inner court to the temple. He is surrounded by high officials from the religious order and the military. She shrieks out her condemnation: “Treason!” But her cry will have as little effect as that of Israel’s Joram to Athaliah’s son Ahaziah (9:23). At Jehoiada’s command she is seized, escorted to the gate used for the palace horses, and put to death by the sword. Thus Athaliah, the most infamous queen of Judah, dies at the hands of executioners much as did her mother, Jezebel, queen of Israel (9:27–37).

17–20 The people needed to return to true worship and a life of service to God. This was particularly necessary after the ungodly reign of Athaliah. The covenantal renewal testified of the king’s relation to the Lord as heir to the Davidic covenant. Purging the land of Baalism and reinstituting proper Levitical leadership accompanied the people’s pledge to serve the king and the Lord (cf. 2Ch 23:17–19).

The fire of spiritual reform had been ignited and was to burn brightly for a time. Yet in the dependence of the king on others could be seen a flicker that would one day cause the fiery zeal for the Lord to flicker in the chilling winds of apostasy. This same Joash and many of the same officials would, on another day, pull Judah down to the dregs of the degraded Canaanite religion they had just rendered dormant. Merely programmed religion is perilous; genuine faith must be personal.

NOTES

2 According to Josephus (Ant. 9.141 [7.1]), Jehosheba (Jehoshabeath; 2Ch 22:11) was Ahaziah’s half sister, born to Jehoram by another woman. The same may also have been true of the royal infant Joash, whose mother was one Zibiah of Beersheba (2Ch 24:1). If so, his parentage could explain the reason the infant was missed in Athaliah’s massacre; perhaps even his birth was unnoticed by the queen mother. Interestingly Jehoiada had his young ward, Joash, take two wives (2Ch 24:3), to whom were born sons and daughters.

6 The Talmud identifies the Sur Gate as the temple court’s eastern gate. Here unclean animals would be turned away.

7 Although scholars disagree as to the precise reconstruction of the details, it is generally conceded that the Sabbath changeover provided an ideal time for Jehoiada to utilize all the guards in effecting his plan. See further Jones, 478–80, and G. Robinson, “Is II Kings XI:6 a Gloss?” VT 27 (1977): 56–61.

10 These weapons were originally dedicated by David from his campaign against the Aramean Hadadezer (2Sa 8:7). According to the LXX on 1 Kings 14:26, these weapons were carried away in Shishak’s campaign, though the MT does not specifically say so. This passage may indicate that David’s weapons were not surrendered at that time together with “all the treasures,” or simply that the replaced weaponry continued to be known as “King David’s.”

12 The Hebrew noun (ʿēdût, “precept, statute”) is also a treaty term (cf. the related Akkad. adu, “formal agreement”), being used in contexts dealing with covenants, especially with the Davidic covenant (see M. Weinfeld, “,” TDOT, 2:257, 259). Not only because of ancient scriptural warrant, then, but also in affirmation of obedience to God’s covenant with David, Jehoiada proclaimed this renewal of the promise given to the house of David, thus giving further support for the deposing of Athaliah. The NIV’s “copy of the covenant” is, therefore, doubly meaningful. The copy of the law in his hand would be a visible symbol of the pledge to live so as to make the promise of God’s covenant granted to David and his house fully applicable to Joash’s reign. T. N. D. Mettinger (King and Messiah [Lund: Gleerup, 1977], 287) puts forward the unlikely suggestion that here the noun refers to a dedicatory plaque.

14 The NIV follows the usual understanding of (hāʿammûd) as “the pillar,” as do the LXX, Syriac, and most modern versions and commentaries. The word can also signify a raised platform. The Vulgate translates the noun as “tribunal” (cf. 2Ch 23:13, gradum, “step”), a reading followed by the French La Sainte Bible (“l’estrade”), the Italian La Sacra Biblia (“palco”), and the NJB (“dais”).

In the parallel account in 2 Chronicles 23:13, the LXX reads “in his place,” a translation certainly allowable for the MT there and in the similar circumstances regarding Josiah (2Ch 34:31). Keil, 362, suggests that the king’s platform was placed “at the eastern gate of the inner court . . . and it was most probably identical with the brazen scaffold . . . mentioned in 2 Chronicles vi.13.”

17 For further instances of the instituting of covenantal renewal, see Deuteronomy 31:9–13; Joshua 24; 2 Samuel 7:8–16; 2 Kings 23:1–3. The Scriptures do not record the existence of a temple to Baal. Josephus (Ant. 11.154 [7.4]) maintains that Athaliah and her husband, Joram, had seen to its erection.

The name Mattan, the priest of Baal, is reminiscent of the original name of Judah’s last king, Zedekiah (2Ki 24:17). The name is also attested elsewhere in the OT (cf. 1Ch 25:4, 16; Ne 11:17, 22) and on a seal found at Lachish.

20 No need exists for viewing the statement as a variant priestly account of the earlier popular one (e.g., Gray, 381–82). The NIV correctly translates the Hebrew verb here as “had been slain” (i.e., at the time mentioned in v.16).

3. The Reign of Joash in the Southern Kingdom (11:21–12:21 [12:1–22])

OVERVIEW

Between the accession statement, with its spiritual evaluation (11:21–12:3), and the closing notice of Joash’s reign (12:19–21), the narrator largely deals with the king’s desire to repair the temple.

That subject is dealt with in three phases. (1) Joash instructs the priests concerning the collection of funds needed to make the necessary repairs (vv.4–5). (2) When the whole program lags for over two decades, the king orders that a new program be put into operation. Accordingly, the restoration work on the temple is able to proceed (vv.6–16). (3) The happy account of temple repairs, however, has an unhappy ending. When Aramean expansion under Hazael reaches Jerusalem, Joash buys him off by stripping the temple of its treasures (vv.17–18). Nor does Joash come to a happy end, for conspirators rise up and assassinate him (vv.19–21).

21Joash was seven years old when he began to reign.

12:1In the seventh year of Jehu, Joash became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem forty years. His mother’s name was Zibiah; she was from Beersheba. 2Joash did what was right in the eyes of the LORD all the years Jehoiada the priest instructed him. 3The high places, however, were not removed; the people continued to offer sacrifices and burn incense there.

4Joash said to the priests, “Collect all the money that is brought as sacred offerings to the temple of the LORD—the money collected in the census, the money received from personal vows and the money brought voluntarily to the temple. 5Let every priest receive the money from one of the treasurers, and let it be used to repair whatever damage is found in the temple.”

6But by the twenty-third year of King Joash the priests still had not repaired the temple. 7Therefore King Joash summoned Jehoiada the priest and the other priests and asked them, “Why aren’t you repairing the damage done to the temple? Take no more money from your treasurers, but hand it over for repairing the temple.” 8The priests agreed that they would not collect any more money from the people and that they would not repair the temple themselves.

9Jehoiada the priest took a chest and bored a hole in its lid. He placed it beside the altar, on the right side as one enters the temple of the LORD. The priests who guarded the entrance put into the chest all the money that was brought to the temple of the LORD. 10Whenever they saw that there was a large amount of money in the chest, the royal secretary and the high priest came, counted the money that had been brought into the temple of the LORD and put it into bags. 11When the amount had been determined, they gave the money to the men appointed to supervise the work on the temple. With it they paid those who worked on the temple of the LORD—the carpenters and builders, 12the masons and stonecutters. They purchased timber and dressed stone for the repair of the temple of the LORD, and met all the other expenses of restoring the temple.

13The money brought into the temple was not spent for making silver basins, wick trimmers, sprinkling bowls, trumpets or any other articles of gold or silver for the temple of the LORD; 14it was paid to the workmen, who used it to repair the temple. 15They did not require an accounting from those to whom they gave the money to pay the workers, because they acted with complete honesty. 16The money from the guilt offerings and sin offerings was not brought into the temple of the LORD; it belonged to the priests.

17About this time Hazael king of Aram went up and attacked Gath and captured it. Then he turned to attack Jerusalem. 18But Joash king of Judah took all the sacred objects dedicated by his fathers—Jehoshaphat, Jehoram and Ahaziah, the kings of Judah—and the gifts he himself had dedicated and all the gold found in the treasuries of the temple of the LORD and of the royal palace, and he sent them to Hazael king of Aram, who then withdrew from Jerusalem.

19As for the other events of the reign of Joash, and all he did, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Judah? 20His officials conspired against him and assassinated him at Beth Millo, on the road down to Silla. 21The officials who murdered him were Jozabad son of Shimeath and Jehozabad son of Shomer. He died and was buried with his fathers in the City of David. And Amaziah his son succeeded him as king.

COMMENTARY

11:21–12:3 [12:1–4] The spiritual evaluation of Joash is qualifiedly favorable. The notice that Joash conducted himself circumspectly while Jehoiada was still alive is ominous in tone (cf. 2Ch 24:17–22) and a reminder of the need for personal faith.

4–5 [5–6] Joash’s first edict concerning preparations for the repairing of the temple (doubtless made early in his reign; cf. 2Ch 24:5) called for the setting aside of money collected as payment of special religious taxes and voluntary offerings. The Chronicler adds that the Levites were to gather such funds personally from the cities of Judah.

6–8 [7–9] Though all haste was bidden in the matter, yet by the twenty-third year the work had not yet begun (2Ch 24:5). No formal reasons are cited for this seeming lack of effort by the Levites. But whatever the problem was, the system was not working. So the king took away the priests’ supervision of the task, and the prestige of the royal office was lent to the project.

9–16 [10–17] Joash decreed that a chest be set outside the wall to the inner court at the southern gate on the righthand side of the entrance to the temple, so that everyone who passed through might cast a contribution in for the temple’s repair (v.9; cf. 2Ch 24:8). Joash also had a proclamation read throughout Judah concerning the need and the intent of the box; in the proclamation he urged all citizens to participate willingly, in accordance with Moses’ ancient institution (cf. Ex 25:2–3; 30:12–16; Lev 27:2–8 with 2Ch 24:9). The response was tremendous (v.10; cf. 2Ch 24:10).

When there was ample money to begin the repairs, the workmen were commissioned (vv.11–12; cf. 2Ch 24:11–13). A comparison of v.13 with 2 Chronicles 24:14 indicates that no monies were used for making the sacred vessels so long as the repairs of the temple proceeded. So successful was the king’s program and so responsibly did all concerned carry out their duties that there was even money left over for the provision of sacred vessels for the sanctuary service (2Ch 24:14).

17–21 [18–22] The date of the Aramean invasion mentioned here probably occurred soon after the death of Samsi-Adad V of Assyria in 811 BC, for the death of a king in the ancient Near East customarily signaled an occasion for military activity; moreover, for the first few years after Samsi-Adad’s death, Queen Semiramis ruled Assyria as regent for the young Adad-Nirari III (811–783 BC). Accordingly, Hazael seized the opportunity to march inland against the recently crowned Joash; Hazael followed up this march with a full strike into Philistia and Judea. His victorious moves brought him much booty and left many dead; even Joash was wounded in the campaign.

This fact need not imply, however, that Joash was assassinated as he lay recovering from his wounds, as some scholars have suggested. Actually the details of the Aramean campaign and Joash’s death may be separated by nearly a decade, with Joash’s death not coming until 796 BC. In the OT details are often telescoped, with events of cause and effect brought together though chronologically separated by many years and other events.

The Chronicler (2Ch 24:15–18) reports that after the death of Jehoiada, Joash fell under the influence of godless advisors, who turned his heart to Canaanite practices. It was to no avail that God sent his prophets to warn against this apostatizing. Even Jehoiada’s son Zechariah was stoned to death for delivering God’s message (2Ch 24:20–22).

Apparently the citizens could no longer tolerate this situation, so they put Joash to death. As the bed had become the scene of Ben-Hadad’s death at the hands of Hazael (2Ki 8:15), so it was for Joash (2Ch 24:25); conspirators assassinated him “in Beth Millo” (2Ki 12:20).

NOTES

11:21 [12:1] Joash became king at age seven (11:21), coincidently, in the seventh year of Jehu’s reign. Likewise, Athaliah was overthrown in her seventh year (11:4).

5 [6] The noun (makkār, “treasurers” [NIV]; lit., “his assessor”) comes from the Semitic root that means “do business” (so, e.g., Akkad.; cf. Heb. [mākar “sell”]; hence, e.g., Akkad. makkāru, “trader”; Ugar. mkr, “merchant”; cf. Egyp. mkr, “merchant”). Here the term must refer to a type of temple personnel who, perhaps, as Gray, 586, suggests, assisted the priests with the evaluation of sacrifices and offerings brought to the temple. The term is also used of the temple personnel and of tax assessors at Ugarit. Both earlier and recent translators have struggled with the noun. The KJV translated it “acquaintance” (cf. NJB), while the NKJV renders it “constituency.” The NRSV and GWT give it as “donors,” while the REB has “treasurer.”

6 [7] By the “twenty-third year” of King Joash is meant the twenty-third year of his reign. The king is now thirty.

9 [10] At first sight a discrepancy seems to exist between the details in Kings and those in Chronicles. Whereas this verse locates Joash’s chest “beside the altar, on the right side” (cf. Josephus, Ant. 9.163 [8.2]), 2 Chronicles 24:8 places it without, “at the gate of the temple.” Actually the chest could not have been placed beside the altar per se, for this would contravene Levitical stipulation. The intent of the text of Kings is simply that the chest was set against the wall of the altar at the entrance that lay to the righthand side of the altar, or the southern entrance to the middle court. So understood, the texts of Kings and Chronicles are in natural agreement.

10–16 [11–17] The accounts in Kings and 2 Chronicles 24:9–14 are supplementary. The officers who collected the money from the full chest were two: (1) the royal secretary and (2) the high priest’s designated official. Having been brought to the royal office, the money would be weighed and then distributed to the supervisors of the building operations. The men involved were so trustworthy that no accounting was demanded of them.

Because coinage is first mentioned in postexilic times (Ezr 2:69), Wiseman, 1 & 2 Kings, 237, is perhaps correct in suggesting that what was collected was silver, which “when melted down into ingots was readily available for payments.”

20 [21] For “Millo,” see Note on 1 Kings 9:15. The identification of the descent of Silla is uncertain. As Edersheim, 7:33, observes, it “probably marks a locality, but it is difficult of explanation.” The royal bed often became a deathbed in the ancient Near East (cf., e.g., the account of the assassination of the Egyptian king Amenemhet [ANET, 418–19]).

21 [22] The variation of “Zabad” in 2 Chronicles 24:26 and “Jozabad” here may simply be one of a shortened form, much like that between Joash and Jehoash.

The variation between Jehozabad’s apparent mother Shomer (Kings) and Shimrith (Chronicles) may be accounted for in terms of the difference between feminine names ending in ah (here shortened further in MT) and t. It is also possible that the Shomer of Kings was the father of Shimrith (Chronicles), mother of Jehozabad. It is singularly strange that both men may have had the same name and both mothers were from Transjordan.

4. The Reign of Jehoahaz in the Northern Kingdom (13:1–9)

1In the twenty-third year of Joash son of Ahaziah king of Judah, Jehoahaz son of Jehu became king of Israel in Samaria, and he reigned seventeen years. 2He did evil in the eyes of the LORD by following the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, which he had caused Israel to commit, and he did not turn away from them. 3So the LORD’s anger burned against Israel, and for a long time he kept them under the power of Hazael king of Aram and Ben-Hadad his son.

4Then Jehoahaz sought the LORD’s favor, and the LORD listened to him, for he saw how severely the king of Aram was oppressing Israel. 5The LORD provided a deliverer for Israel, and they escaped from the power of Aram. So the Israelites lived in their own homes as they had before. 6But they did not turn away from the sins of the house of Jeroboam, which he had caused Israel to commit; they continued in them. Also, the Asherah pole remained standing in Samaria.

7Nothing had been left of the army of Jehoahaz except fifty horsemen, ten chariots and ten thousand foot soldiers, for the king of Aram had destroyed the rest and made them like the dust at threshing time.

8As for the other events of the reign of Jehoahaz, all he did and his achievements, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel? 9Jehoahaz rested with his fathers and was buried in Samaria. And Jehoash his son succeeded him as king.

COMMENTARY

1–3 Jehoahaz’s reign began in the same year that Joash launched his campaign to repair the temple (12:6). The negative spiritual evaluation of his reign is accompanied by the statement that God allowed the Aramean king Hazael to afflict the northern kingdom repeatedly.

4–9 The chronological understanding of the details of vv.4–7 (cf. vv.22–24) turns on two items: (1) a comparison of the details of the scriptural account with the recorded history of the ancient Near East, and (2) a recognition that Ben-Hadad is not here called king but merely the son of Hazael. With regard to the latter point, Keil, 375–76, is probably correct in suggesting that Ben-Hadad’s activity lay in his service as a commanding officer in his father’s army. As to the former point, it seems clear that Hazael’s chief military activity fell in the early periods surrounding the death of Samsi-Adad V in 811 BC, specifically, during the five years that followed while Semiramis was regent for the young Adad-Nirari III (811–783 BC; see Note on 12:17).

Aramean fortunes were always linked to the Assyrians, who traditionally sought an access route to the Mediterranean. Accordingly, Hazael’s ability to move effectively against Israel-Judah was contingent on Assyria’s intervention. Thus when Adad-Nirari III was at last able to rule in his own right, he turned his attention immediately to the Aramean problem in a series of western thrusts (805–802 BC), the last of which saw the capture of Damascus and the submission of the western states.

The strong position of Assyria after 805 would seem to call for the attack described here to have occurred between the period 814–806, before the revived Assyrian presence in great power in the west. Afterward Israel had respite from the Aramean menace; therefore, it is likely that Adad-Nirari III was Israel’s deliverer sent in answer to Jehoahaz’s seeking of the Lord’s favor. Unfortunately, while Jehoahaz’s repentance appeared to be genuine, he allowed the state religion of the golden calves and the cult associated with the Asherah pole in Samaria to continue. A gracious and compassionate God displayed his concern for these latter-day recipients of the benefits of the covenant made with the patriarchs by preserving the northern kingdom, though in a severely weakened state (cf. vv.22–23).

NOTES

3 The Hebrew expression “all the days” appears to be a general term for “a long time” (NIV). Hazael is known to have been on the throne as late as 805 BC. Adad-Nirari III mentions his siege of Damascus and the carrying off of booty at that time (Luckenbill, 1:261, 263). In the inscription Hazael is simply designated “Lord,” perhaps a shortened form from Arslan Tash (ancient Ḥadatu, the Assyrian provincial capital of the west) reading “Belonging to our Lord, Hazael.”

Since nothing is heard of Hazael beyond the fall of Damascus and since shortly after that Ben-Hadad III is known to be occupying the throne (though in a much reduced capacity), we may provisionally assign the date of these two Aramean kings as follows: Hazael, ca. 841–802; Ben-Hadad III, 802–780.

4–5 The “deliverer” has been variously identified as Zakir of Hamath (E. Yamauchi, “Documents from Old Testament Times: A Survey of Recent Discoveries,” WTJ 41 [1978]: 26–27; S. Cook, CAH, 3:363), Jehoash and Jeroboam II of the northern kingdom (Keil, 375), Elisha (Gray, 595), and Adad-Nirari III of Assyria (J. B. Payne, The Theology of the Older Testament [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1962], 132). In the light of the historical records noted above, this last suggestion is perhaps the simplest, with Adad-Nirari III being Israel’s “savior-deliverer” much as Cyrus would later be God’s “shepherd” (Isa 44:28–45:1).

5. The Reign of Jehoash in the Northern Kingdom (13:10–25)

OVERVIEW

The juxtaposition of the accession statement plus spiritual evaluation (vv.10–11) with the closing notices (vv.12–13) is unique. The usual attention to historical details is thus allowed to form the climax of the narrative (vv.14–25). Here we learn that even on his deathbed Elisha is able to give the king a prediction of a series of victories over the hated Arameans (vv.14–19). But before telling of the fulfillment of that prophecy (vv.22–25), the narrator inserts an interesting note concerning a later miracle in association with the remains of Elisha’s dead body (vv.20–21).

10In the thirty-seventh year of Joash king of Judah, Jehoash son of Jehoahaz became king of Israel in Samaria, and he reigned sixteen years. 11He did evil in the eyes of the LORD and did not turn away from any of the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, which he had caused Israel to commit; he continued in them.

12As for the other events of the reign of Jehoash, all he did and his achievements, including his war against Amaziah king of Judah, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel? 13Jehoash rested with his fathers, and Jeroboam succeeded him on the throne. Jehoash was buried in Samaria with the kings of Israel.

14Now Elisha was suffering from the illness from which he died. Jehoash king of Israel went down to see him and wept over him. “My father! My father!” he cried. “The chariots and horsemen of Israel!”

15Elisha said, “Get a bow and some arrows,” and he did so. 16“Take the bow in your hands,” he said to the king of Israel. When he had taken it, Elisha put his hands on the king’s hands.

17“Open the east window,” he said, and he opened it. “Shoot!” Elisha said, and he shot. “The LORD’s arrow of victory, the arrow of victory over Aram!” Elisha declared. “You will completely destroy the Arameans at Aphek.”

18Then he said, “Take the arrows,” and the king took them. Elisha told him, “Strike the ground.” He struck it three times and stopped. 19The man of God was angry with him and said, “You should have struck the ground five or six times; then you would have defeated Aram and completely destroyed it. But now you will defeat it only three times.”

20Elisha died and was buried.

Now Moabite raiders used to enter the country every spring. 21Once while some Israelites were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of raiders; so they threw the man’s body into Elisha’s tomb. When the body touched Elisha’s bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet.

22Hazael king of Aram oppressed Israel throughout the reign of Jehoahaz. 23But the LORD was gracious to them and had compassion and showed concern for them because of his covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. To this day he has been unwilling to destroy them or banish them from his presence.

24Hazael king of Aram died, and Ben-Hadad his son succeeded him as king. 25Then Jehoash son of Jehoahaz recaptured from Ben-Hadad son of Hazael the towns he had taken in battle from his father Jehoahaz. Three times Jehoash defeated him, and so he recovered the Israelite towns.

COMMENTARY

10–13 The notice that Jehoash succeeded to Israel’s throne in the thirty-seventh year of Joash of Judah’s reign appears to be at variance with the data in 13:1, which indicates that Jehoahaz became king in Joash’s twenty-third year. Because Jehoahaz reigned seventeen years, one would expect something like the thirty-ninth year of Joash’s reign to be the point of correlation. Indeed some manuscripts of the LXX (cf. NEB) contain such a reading.

Alternatively, one may suggest either that Jehoash had a two-year coregency with his father Jehoahaz (Wiseman, 1 & 2 Kings, 241) or that beginning here the narrator switches from the nonaccession year system to the accession year system for the kings of the northern kingdom (Thiele, 72). In either case the reading of the MT can be allowed to stand.

14 Jehoash addressed Elisha with words reminiscent of the venerable prophet’s own testimony at Elijah’s translation (cf. 2:12 and Note). Because Jehoash came to Elisha and addressed him courteously, the Lord used the occasion to increase Jehoash’s slim faith.

15–19 Elisha’s placing of his hands on those of the king is reminisicent of his earlier act in raising the Shunammite’s son. The act was full of symbolism, with God himself assuring the king of Israel’s victory. The fact that Jehoash failed to shoot all the arrows at his disposal would limit the number of battles that he would win. Final victory would elude Jehoash; the deed would be accomplished only later by Jeroboam II (14:25–28).

20–21 Because Elisha’s bones are mentioned, it is assumed that this miracle must have occurred much later. If “bones” is a synecdoche for the whole body, however, such an assumption need not be made. As a figure of speech, “bones” may have been selected because of its use as representing the seat of one’s health (Pr 15:30; Isa 58:11) and that which is said to live again (Isa 66:14). National revival could also be symbolized by the coming to life of dead bones (Eze 37:1–14).

At any rate, more than the resuscitation of the dead man is surely intended here. Indeed, the juxtaposition of this event with the preceding account makes it clear that herein was another divinely intended sign. God was the God of the living, not the dead (cf. Lk 20:38), not only for the man who had been restored to life but for Israel as well. The nation could yet “live” if it would but appropriate the eternally living God as its own. The entire episode was a further corroborative sign that what Elisha had prophesied would certainly come to pass.

22–25 The chapter closes with some historical notices concerning the strained Aramean-Israelite relations during the reign of Jehoahaz and Jehoash. Conditions improved during Jehoash’s reign as the Israelite king; in accordance with Elisha’s prophecy, he defeated the Aramean king Ben-Hadad III, son of Hazael, three times. This record is a further indication of the inviolability of God’s Word and God’s continued faithfulness to the basic covenant made with the patriarchs.

NOTES

16 The prophet offered Jehoash the opportunity to assume a position of spiritual leadership. But the king failed to do so; his faith was scant, and the divine evaluation of his character (v.11) is not favorable.

20 The planned war campaigns in the ancient Near East could take place any time between April and the late fall (see de Vaux, 251). The type of razzia, or plundering foray, envisioned here, however, need not be structured quite so closely, though the text indicates that the Moabite raids were regularly carried out about the same time each year.

22–25 For the historical reconstruction of the period of Israelite-Aramean relations, see the Note on 13:3. An early eighth-century BC inscription of Adad-Nirari III at tell Er Rimah mentions the tribute of “Iuʾasu (Jehoash) the Samaritan.” The growing preoccupation of Adad-Nirari III with the affairs in the east and Jehoash’s treaty link with him, along with the growing weakness of Aram in the days of Ben-Hadad III (who was being pressed by Zakir of Hamath and Luash), provided the historical framework for the outworking of Elisha’s prophecy. See further A. Malmat, “The Arameans,” in D. J. Wiseman, ed., Peoples of Old Testament Times (Oxford: Clarendon, 1973), 145–46, 152–53; D. W. Thomas, Documents from Old Testament Times (New York: Harper & Row, 1961), 242–50.

6. The Reign of Amaziah in the Southern Kingdom (14:1–22)

OVERVIEW

The usual accession statement gives Amaziah a positive evaluation qualified only by his allowing the high places and the sacrifices performed there to continue (vv.1–4). The historical notices concerning his reign focus on three areas of activity: (1) his execution of his father’s assassins (vv.5–6); (2) his defeat of Edom (v.7); and (3) his foolish confrontation with Jehoash of the northern kingdom (vv.8–14).

The section comprising the closing notice is unusual. It begins by repeating the closing notice with regard to Jehoash’s life (vv.15–16; cf. 13:12–13). The effect is twofold. It not only reminds the reader of how greatly Amaziah’s reign is tied to that of Jehoash, but it also provides a transition to the reign of Jeroboam II that follows. The concluding rehearsal of Amaziah’s passing gives details both of his rebuilding of Elath and his death due to a broad-based conspiracy against him (vv.17–21).

1In the second year of Jehoash son of Jehoahaz king of Israel, Amaziah son of Joash king of Judah began to reign. 2He was twenty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem twenty-nine years. His mother’s name was Jehoaddin; she was from Jerusalem. 3He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, but not as his father David had done. In everything he followed the example of his father Joash. 4The high places, however, were not removed; the people continued to offer sacrifices and burn incense there.

5After the kingdom was firmly in his grasp, he executed the officials who had murdered his father the king. 6Yet he did not put the sons of the assassins to death, in accordance with what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses where the LORD commanded: “Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sins.”

7He was the one who defeated ten thousand Edomites in the Valley of Salt and captured Sela in battle, calling it Joktheel, the name it has to this day.

8Then Amaziah sent messengers to Jehoash son of Jehoahaz, the son of Jehu, king of Israel, with the challenge: “Come, meet me face to face.”

9But Jehoash king of Israel replied to Amaziah king of Judah: “A thistle in Lebanon sent a message to a cedar in Lebanon, ‘Give your daughter to my son in marriage.’ Then a wild beast in Lebanon came along and trampled the thistle underfoot. 10You have indeed defeated Edom and now you are arrogant. Glory in your victory, but stay at home! Why ask for trouble and cause your own downfall and that of Judah also?”

11Amaziah, however, would not listen, so Jehoash king of Israel attacked. He and Amaziah king of Judah faced each other at Beth Shemesh in Judah. 12Judah was routed by Israel, and every man fled to his home. 13Jehoash king of Israel captured Amaziah king of Judah, the son of Joash, the son of Ahaziah, at Beth Shemesh. Then Jehoash went to Jerusalem and broke down the wall of Jerusalem from the Ephraim Gate to the Corner Gate—a section about six hundred feet long. 14He took all the gold and silver and all the articles found in the temple of the LORD and in the treasuries of the royal palace. He also took hostages and returned to Samaria.

15As for the other events of the reign of Jehoash, what he did and his achievements, including his war against Amaziah king of Judah, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel? 16Jehoash rested with his fathers and was buried in Samaria with the kings of Israel. And Jeroboam his son succeeded him as king.

17Amaziah son of Joash king of Judah lived for fifteen years after the death of Jehoash son of Jehoahaz king of Israel. 18As for the other events of Amaziah’s reign, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Judah?

19They conspired against him in Jerusalem, and he fled to Lachish, but they sent men after him to Lachish and killed him there. 20He was brought back by horse and was buried in Jerusalem with his fathers, in the City of David.

21Then all the people of Judah took Azariah, who was sixteen years old, and made him king in place of his father Amaziah. 22He was the one who rebuilt Elath and restored it to Judah after Amaziah rested with his fathers.

COMMENTARY

1–4 Like David, the founder of the dynasty, Amaziah did that which was right except in one particular matter (cf. 1Ki 15:5). His failure to do away with worship at the high places is illuminated by the Chronicler’s report that Amaziah did not serve God “wholeheartedly” (2Ch 25:2).

5–7 In accordance with prevailing ancient Near Eastern practice, when Amaziah felt secure on the throne, he executed his father’s murderers. He did not follow the usual custom of killing their children, however. Both the narrator here and the Chronicler (2Ch 25:4) point out that this behavior harmonized with the stipulations of Deuteronomy 24:16.

Although the narrator dismisses Amaziah’s victory over Edom with a single verse, the affair receives expanded treatment in 2 Chronicles 25:5–15. According to the Chronicler, Amaziah laid careful plans for the reconquest of Edom (lost in the days of Jehoram; 8:20–22). He began with a general census and conscription of able-bodied men twenty years of age and older (2Ch 25:5). He added to the three-thousand-man army by raising another one hundred thousand mercenaries from Israel (2Ch 25:6), which he subsequently dismissed when rebuked by one of the Lord’s prophets (2Ch 25:7–10, 13). Thus encouraged that his cause was just and that God would give him the victory, Amaziah invaded Edom and inflicted a crushing defeat. The narrator of Kings reports an overwhelming victory in the Valley of Salt and the capture of Sela (see Notes). Success in Edom did not result in permanent occupation of the area, however (see Note on 8:22).

Life’s successes are not always the victories they seem to be. A notable defeat for Amaziah occurred here (2Ch 25:14–16). Having vanquished Edom and carried off booty and captives, he foolishly worshiped their captive gods. For this the man of God again rebuked Amaziah. This time Amaziah rejected the Lord’s warning. He threatened the prophet and sent him away. Yet before he left, that prophet announced Amaziah’s doom for his spiritual callousness and self-will.

8–11 The motive behind Amaziah’s proud challenge to Jehoash is not difficult to suggest. Amaziah was doubtless buoyed by his recent success in Edom and perhaps seeking vengeance for the pillaging rampage against the cities of Judah by the dismissed Israelite mercenaries (2Ch 25:13). Jehoash’s attempt to dissuade Amaziah fell on deaf ears. Neither the fable nor Jehoash’s stern warning was sufficient to prevent Amaziah’s ill-advised attack. True to the prophetic warning (2Ch 25:16), Amaziah was set on a course of self-destruction.

12–16 Jehoash not only routed Amaziah’s army (2Ch 25:22) but also took Judah’s king captive. Jehoash followed up his triumph with a thrust against Jerusalem that resulted in the loss of some six hundred feet of city wall, the confiscation of the temple furnishings and palace treasures, and the taking of many prisoners of war. Amaziah’s lesson in self-will had cost his nation dearly. The Chronicler (2Ch 25:20) reports that behind it all lay the wise hand of divine providence arranging the details of the lives of all concerned to teach Amaziah and Judah the folly of trusting in foreign gods.

As for the two gates mentioned here, the Ephraim Gate apparently was situated in the northern wall close to the modern Damascus Gate, while the Corner Gate was farther west (cf. 2Ch 26:9). The northwestern section of the wall was Jerusalem’s most vulnerable spot.

17–18 Some uncertainty exists concerning the details of Amaziah’s later life. Many build on the Chronicler’s report (2Ch 25:23–24) that Jehoash took Amaziah captive to suggest that Jehoash kept him in captivity for ten years. At Jehoash’s death he was released and returned to Judah, where he ruled jointly with his son Azariah for fifteen years. The uprising that led to Amaziah’s death appears to have been widespread. His apostasy and defeat may have brought him many adversaries.

19–20 The return of Amaziah’s body by horsedrawn chariot may point to a stately funeral cortege. Or it could mean that the very royal chariot by which Amaziah thought to make his escape was used to carry his dead body back to Jerusalem, or perhaps that his own chariot formed the hearse for the procession. The scriptural presentation (cf. 15:3; 2Ch 25:27) does not always cast Amaziah in a particularly good light. Indeed, the narrator presents his entire reign as an aspect of the era of Jehoash of Israel (13:10–14:16). Even his final fifteen years are discussed in relation to Jehoash’s death (14:17–22).

21–22 The mention of Azariah’s (Uzziah’s) restoration of Edomite Elath marks the first significant act of his independent rule and largely sets a historical peg for the entrance of the king into his period of greatness (cf. 2Ch 26:3–15).

NOTES

7 Although Wiseman, 1 & 2 Kings, 244, and A. F. Rainey (“Sela [of Edom],” IDBSup, 800) disallow it, Sela has usually been identified with the site near modern Petra. If this identification is correct, the seizure of Sela was a remarkable feat, for it lay amid the seemingly impregnable rocks and cliffs of the Wadi Musa. There the Nabataean stronghold of Petra would one day be erected. See further J. Lawlor, The Nabataeans in Historical Perspective (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1974), 127–39, and A. Negey, “Petra,” Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, ed. M. Avi Yonah (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1975), 4:943–58.

According to 2 Chronicles 25:11–12, the capture of Sela was preceded by an overwhelming victory in the Valley of Salt below, in which ten thousand Edomites lost their lives and an equal number were subsequently cast from one of Sela’s heights to the jagged valley below. Such a valley was located south of the Dead Sea (see Aharoni and Avi-Yonah, 89).

9 With this fable compare that of Jotham in Judges 9:7–15. For the Hebrew fable itself, see R. J. Williams, “The Fable in the Ancient Near East,” in A Stubborn Faith, ed. E. C. Hobbs (Dallas: Southern Methodist Univ. Press, 1956), 3–26.

11 The Beth Shemesh mentioned here as the location of battle was situated west of Jerusalem (cf. 1Sa 6:9), as opposed to other sites with the same name in Lower Galilee (Jos 19:22, 38).

13 The rehearsal of Amaziah’s patrilineage here is unusual. It may be a reminder of the legitimacy of his claim to the Judean crown, even in exile.

17 For a suggested chronological reconstruction of Amaziah’s later years, see Thiele (83–87). For a discussion of the chronological problems of chs. 13–15, see the helpful excursus of Hobbs, 184–85.

19 Lachish would again play a vital role in the latter days of Hezekiah and in Judah’s final demise (Jer 34:7), as attested by the famous Lachish Letters (see Note on 25:22).

21 If Azariah’s age at the time of his coregency with his father is in view, the preposition (taḥat) is to be translated “beside” or “under the authority of” (i.e., his father; cf. 15:1–2; 2Ch 26:1–3). For this use of the preposition, see Genesis 41:35; Numbers 5:19. For the use of the waw-consecutive construction as a pluperfect, see IBHS, 552–53.

22 For a more radical reconstruction of the chronological problems in ch. 14, see M. Naor, “Who Built Eilat and Restored It to Judah (2 Kgs 14:22)?” Beth Mikra 23 (1978): 285–91.

7. The Reign of Jeroboam II in the Northern Kingdom (14:23–29)

23In the fifteenth year of Amaziah son of Joash king of Judah, Jeroboam son of Jehoash king of Israel became king in Samaria, and he reigned forty-one years. 24He did evil in the eyes of the LORD and did not turn away from any of the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, which he had caused Israel to commit. 25He was the one who restored the boundaries of Israel from Lebo Hamath to the Sea of the Arabah, in accordance with the word of the LORD, the God of Israel, spoken through his servant Jonah son of Amittai, the prophet from Gath Hepher.

26The LORD had seen how bitterly everyone in Israel, whether slave or free, was suffering; there was no one to help them. 27And since the LORD had not said he would blot out the name of Israel from under heaven, he saved them by the hand of Jeroboam son of Jehoash.

28As for the other events of Jeroboam’s reign, all he did, and his military achievements, including how he recovered for Israel both Damascus and Hamath, which had belonged to Yaudi, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel? 29Jeroboam rested with his fathers, the kings of Israel. And Zechariah his son succeeded him as king.

COMMENTARY

23–29 The chapter closes with a brief notice of the forty-one year reign of Jeroboam II (793–752 BC). The era of Jeroboam (northern kingdom) and Azariah (southern kingdom) would mark a significant change in the fortunes of God’s people. These days would be marked by unparalleled prosperity for the twin kingdoms, both economically and politically. Indeed together they would acquire nearly the same territorial dimensions as in the days of the united monarchy (v.25).

But God’s blessings are too often taken for granted, and so it proved to be in Israel and Judah in the eighth century BC (cf. Hos 13:6; Am 6:1–6). Spiritually, the lives of God’s people degenerated into open sin in the northern kingdom (cf. Hosea, Amos) and into empty formalism in the south (cf. Joel). In such an era God therefore raised up the great writing prophets, one of whom, Jonah, is mentioned here (v.25).

Great responsibility for Israel’s spiritual problem lay with her leadership. Jeroboam II, while a capable administrator and military leader, had no concern for vital religion (v.24; cf. Hos 5:1–7; 6:1–7). He simply carried out the ritual of the standard state religion begun by Jeroboam I.

Nonetheless, Jeroboam’s external accomplishments were many. In accordance with an unrecorded prophecy of Jonah, Jeroboam restored fully the borders of Israel so that they extended from the entrance of Hamath (or Lebo Hamath; see Note on v.25), in the great Beqaʾ Valley amid the Lebanese Mountains, to the Sea of Arabah (or Dead Sea). Apparently even Hamath and Damascus came under Israelite superiority (v.28). Amos (Am 6:13–14) indicates that the Transjordanian territories were probably also recovered at this time.

In all these developments the faithfulness of God, despite Israel’s unfaithfulness (cf. Hos 2:2–3:5; 11:1–11; 14:4–8; Am 3:1–15), is evident. Because Israel had fallen into such desperate spiritual conditions (vv.26–27), a merciful God had acted in behalf of his people. As he had granted them deliverance from external pressures by sending Adad-Nirari III of Assyria against the Arameans (cf. 13:5), thus initiating a period of recovery under Jehoash (13:25), so now in a grander way he culminated that deliverance with full victory over the Arameans—one that included Israel’s recovery of its former boundaries (vv.27–28).

When Jeroboam II died in 752 BC, he left behind a strong kingdom but, unfortunately, one whose core foundation was so spiritually rotten that the edifice of state would not long withstand the rising tides of international intrigue and pressure.

NOTES

23 Jeroboam II’s assumption of power in the fifteenth year of Amaziah (782–781 BC) indicates the time of his independent rule. His forty-one year reign reckons from 793, the time of his appointment as coregent with his father, Jehoash.

25 The Hebrew phrase translated “Lebo Hamath” (NIV) refers to a location known from the Assyrian records of Tiglath-Pileser III (see Luckenbill, 1:294). Alternatively, it may be translated “entrance to Hamath.”

The Sea of the Arabah may well be equated with “the valley of the Arabah” of Amos 6:14, which, in turn, may be the same as Isaiah’s (Isa 15:7) “Ravine of the Poplars” at the southern end of the Dead Sea across the Jordan. If so, Jeroboam’s Transjordanian conquest was total. It would appear that Uzziah and Jeroboam and the twin kingdoms lived in essential harmony and cooperation.

For the relation of the mention of Jonah here to the occasion of Jonah’s prophecy, see Richard D. Patterson and Andrew E. Hill, Minor Prophets (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary; Carol Stream, Ill.: Tyndale, 2008), 285.

26 For the phrase “slave or free,” see Notes on 1 Kings 14:10.

28 Among the “other events” of Jeroboam II was his attention to the economy and the agricultural needs of the country. Verification of Israel’s prosperity comes from the recovery of the famous Samaria Ostraca, dating from this general period. These ostraca are bills of lading for delivery of fine oil and barley sent to Samaria from the royal estates. For the texts themselves, see J. Gibson, Syrian Semitic Inscriptions (Oxford: Clarendon, 1973), 5–15. On the great inner corruption of Israelite society in the eighth century BC, see Bright, 241–48.

The NIV (cf. Montgomery, 446), sensing the difficulty of retaining the MT’s (lîhûdâ, “for Judah”) in the light of the known history of the era, repoints the MT to read “to Yaudi.” So construed it reflects the name of an ancient city in northern Syria (cf. ANET, 654), better known in the Assyrian inscriptions as Samal (see W. Beyerlin, Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975], 260).

The pointing of the MT can be maintained, however, if one understands it to indicate that Jeroboam restored Damascus and Hamath to Judah (together) with Israel. This understanding would imply that Uzziah had allied himself with Jeroboam in the enterprise. A similar approach is taken by Manahem Haran (“The Rise and Decline of the Empire of Jeroboam ben Joash,” VT 17 [1967]: 296). Note, however, that Haran emends the Hebrew text by reading w^e (“and”) instead of b^e (“in”) before Israel. For uses of the Hebrew preposition b^e meaning “in, with,” see IBHS, 196–97.

The preposition b^e is known to interchange with other prepositions in parallel structure in northwest Semitic languages (see UT, 92–93), including Hebrew. Examples include b^e with taḥat (“under”; Isa 57:5), with min (“from”; Ps 18:8[9], and with l^e (“at, in”; Ge 49:27; Ecc 11:6). The fluctuation in the meaning of b^e may suggest that in parallel with l^e here the phrase may be translated “to Judah (and) to Israel.”

The distinction between “the entrance to Hamath” (or Lebo Hamath; v.25) and Hamath and Damascus here is an accurate one. “Damascus” and “Hamath” must refer to the kingdoms represented by the capital cities. Hamath lay outside the boundaries of ideal Israel (cf. Nu 34:8; cf. 2Sa 8:9–12) and never was captured by David as such.

The Assyrian Adad-Nirari III captured Damascus shortly before (802 BC). Though Adad-Nirari’s weak successors campaigned in the area five times from 773–754 BC, they were largely occupied with matters to the east and south; therefore, the Assyrians were not really in a position to oppose Jeroboam’s expansion northward. For light on these events and campaigns during this period in Syria from the Assyrian annals of the eighth century BC, see Luckenbill, 2:260–68; Hallo, 44; E. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987), 374–75.

8. The Reign of Uzziah in the Southern Kingdom (15:1–7)

1In the twenty-seventh year of Jeroboam king of Israel, Azariah son of Amaziah king of Judah began to reign. 2He was sixteen years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem fifty-two years. His mother’s name was Jecoliah; she was from Jerusalem. 3He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, just as his father Amaziah had done. 4The high places, however, were not removed; the people continued to offer sacrifices and burn incense there.

5The LORD afflicted the king with leprosy until the day he died, and he lived in a separate house. Jotham the king’s son had charge of the palace and governed the people of the land.

6As for the other events of Azariah’s reign, and all he did, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Judah? 7Azariah rested with his fathers and was buried near them in the City of David. And Jotham his son succeeded him as king.

COMMENTARY

1–4 Judah’s tenth king was Azariah (“Yahweh has helped”), known also as Uzziah (vv.13, 30, 32, 34, “Yahweh is my strength”), the latter name possibly being assumed on the occasion of his independent reign (v.1). Uzziah was made coregent at the time of Amaziah’s ill-conceived campaign against Jehoash (14:8–14; 2Ch 25:17–24). After Amaziah’s assassination in 767, Uzziah took the throne in his own right and ruled until 740. Thus, counting his coregencies, Uzziah ruled some fifty-two years.

Several reasons may be found for such a lengthy reign besides the longevity of the king. First, Israel’s perennial enemy, Assyria, was in a state of severe decline. After the death of the vigorous king Adad-Nirari III (810–783), Assyria was ruled by three weak kings—Shalmaneser IV (782–774), Assur-Dan III (773–756), and Assur-Nirari V (755–746)—who strove desperately to maintain themselves against the advance of their hostile northern neighbor, Urartu. Other campaigns took them mainly to the south and east. Moreover, Assyria was rocked internally by plagues in 765 and 759 and by internal revolts from 763 to 759.

Second, relations between Jeroboam II of Israel and Uzziah remained cordial, so that together the two nations were able eventually to acquire nearly the same territorial dimensions as in the days of the united monarchy. Indeed the Chronicler makes it clear that the era of the early eighth century BC was one of great expansion militarily, administratively, commercially, and economically—a period whose prosperity was second only to that of Solomon (2Ch 26:1–15).

Third, and more basically, Uzziah was noted as a man who began well because of the spiritual heritage he had received from his father (v.3; cf. 2Ch 26:4–5). Accordingly, God’s abundant blessing was shed on him (2Ch 26:6–15) so that his fame spread throughout the Near Eastern world (2Ch 26:8, 15).

The mention of the continued worship at the “high places” indicates a state policy of noninterference with competing religious forms that had been in force since at least the time of Joash (cf. 12:3; 14:3–4). The apparent compromise is indicative of a basic spiritual shallowness that was to surface in the prophecies of the great writing prophets of the eighth century BC.

5 Great earthly success is often difficult to manage to spiritual benefit. As with Solomon before him, Uzziah’s successes proved to be his undoing. His great power fostered such pride and haughtiness that about 750 BC he sought to add to his vast power by usurping the prerogatives of the sacred priesthood. Challenged to his face by the priests as he attempted to make an offering at the altar of incense, he was also instantaneously judged by God, who smote him with leprosy (or a serious skin disease). Driven from the temple forever, Uzziah thereafter remained a leper, dwelling in isolation until his death (2Ch 26:16–21). During Uzziah’s last decade, due to his condition, his son Jotham was made coregent and public officiator, though probably Uzziah remained the real power behind the throne.

6–7 Although Uzziah was buried in the city of David and in the royal burial field, his body was excluded from the royal tombs (cf. 2Ch 26:22–23). An ossuary was discovered by E. L. Sukenik (“Funerary Tablet of Uzziah, King of Judah,” PEQ 63 [1931]: 217–21) with the Aramaic inscription, “Hitherto were brought the bones of Uzziah, king of Judah. Do not open.”

NOTES

5 Uzziah’s “separate house” (, bêt-haḥāpšît) involves the king’s occupying a place where he was free from the routine responsibilities of royalty (cf. the Heb. of 1Sa 17:25). The term is a difficult one and receives varying treatment in the ancient versions; the Peshitta renders it, “in a house hidden away,” and the Vulgate, “in a free house, separately.” The LXX simply transliterates the term (αφφουσωθ). A. Guillaume (“Hebrew and Arabic Lexicography, A Comparative Study,” AbrN 4 [1965]: 6) suggests a relation with the Arabic ḥaffaša (“he stayed in his tent,” i.e., “he dwelt in his house without leaving it”). W. Rudolph (“Ussias ‘Haus der Freiheit,’” ZAW 89 [1977]: 418–20) suggests that the Hebrew term is a euphemism for formal isolation.

That Uzziah remained the dominant figure behind the throne would be certain if he could be identified with that “Azriau” mentioned as the leader of a coalition that opposed Tiglath-Pileser III in his first western campaign. For details, see Thiele, 93–94; D. Luckenbill, “Azariah of Judah,” AJSL 41 (1925): 217–32; contrariwise, see Montgomery, 446–47. Many scholars, however, maintain that the reference must be to the king of Iauda in northern Syria (see Montgomery, 446–47; Hobbs, 194).

Jotham’s title (ʿal-habbayit, “over the palace”; lit., “over the house”) doubtless deals with the management of the myriad of complex details relative to the smooth functioning of palace life. The title was previously ascribed to Solomon’s chamberlain Ahishar (1Ki 4:6) and later was to be held by Eliakim, Hezekiah’s official (2Ki 18:18; Isa 36:3). The title is known from a clay seal impression from Lachish bearing the name “Gedaliah,” probably the one whom the Babylonians appointed governor after the fall of Jerusalem (25:22).

Josephus (Ant. 9.225 [10.4]) connects the events of Uzziah’s condition with the earthquake recorded in Amos 1:1. For a discussion of “leprosy” in the Bible, see Note on 5:1.

6 For Uzziah’s “other events” and general conditions in the eighth century BC, see my remarks concerning the background to Joel (see EBC, vol. 7).

9. The Reign of Zechariah in the Northern Kingdom (15:8–12)

8In the thirty-eighth year of Azariah king of Judah, Zechariah son of Jeroboam became king of Israel in Samaria, and he reigned six months. 9He did evil in the eyes of the LORD, as his fathers had done. He did not turn away from the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, which he had caused Israel to commit.

10Shallum son of Jabesh conspired against Zechariah. He attacked him in front of the people, assassinated him and succeeded him as king. 11The other events of Zechariah’s reign are written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel. 12So the word of the LORD spoken to Jehu was fulfilled: “Your descendants will sit on the throne of Israel to the fourth generation.”

COMMENTARY

8–12 Little is recorded of Zechariah, the fourth descendant of Jehu to assume the throne of Israel, except the familiar evaluation that he did evil in perpetuating the idolatrous sins of Jeroboam I and that he died in an assassination plot. With the passing of Zechariah, the Lord’s prophetic promise to Jehu (10:30) stood fulfilled (cf: Am 7:9).

The shortness of Zechariah’s reign and that of Shallum, his murderous successor, points up the great contrast in their abilities with those of Jeroboam II and underscores the weakness of the northern kingdom. The openness of Shallum’s deed is expressive of Israel’s social degradation. If “son of Jabesh” points to Shallum’s place of origin, it would indicate that he was a Transjordanian Gileadite. A later Gileadite plot would take the life of King Pekahiah (v.25).

NOTES

10 The MT’s difficult reading (qābāl-ʿām, “in front of the people” [NIV], i.e., in public view) is emended in the Lucianic recension of the LXX to read “In Ibleʿam” (cf. NIV note), thus making Zechariah’s death near where Jehu had massacred Judah’s royal house (9:27; 10:12–14)—perhaps a touch of poetic justice.

F. The Era of the Decline and Fall of the Northern Kingdom (15:13–17:41)

1. The Reign of Shallum in the Northern Kingdom (15:13–15)

13Shallum son of Jabesh became king in the thirty-ninth year of Uzziah king of Judah, and he reigned in Samaria one month. 14Then Menahem son of Gadi went from Tirzah up to Samaria. He attacked Shallum son of Jabesh in Samaria, assassinated him and succeeded him as king.

15The other events of Shallum’s reign, and the conspiracy he led, are written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel.

COMMENTARY

13–15 Shallum’s minimal reign of but one month was terminated by a retaliatory raid by Menahem, who, in turn, usurped the throne. Menahem, who may have been a military commander under Zechariah, brought his forces from Tirzah against Shallum in Samaria. Tirzah was an ancient Canaanite city important for its strategic commercial location and noted for its surpassing beauty (SS 6:4). The city had served as a royal retreat (1Ki 14:17) and a national capital (1Ki 16:8–10) and had remained important.

NOTES

14 The name “Menahem” (meaning “comforting”) may indicate that the new king’s parents were well advanced in years or that his parents found comfort in his birth as a result of the death of an earlier child. The name of his father, “Gadi,” is a shortened form of “Gaddiyahu,” found in an ostracon from Samaria (ANET, 321).

2. The Reign of Menahem in the Northern Kingdom (15:16–22)

16At that time Menahem, starting out from Tirzah, attacked Tiphsah and everyone in the city and its vicinity, because they refused to open their gates. He sacked Tiphsah and ripped open all the pregnant women.

17In the thirty-ninth year of Azariah king of Judah, Menahem son of Gadi became king of Israel, and he reigned in Samaria ten years. 18He did evil in the eyes of the LORD. During his entire reign he did not turn away from the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, which he had caused Israel to commit.

19Then Pul king of Assyria invaded the land, and Menahem gave him a thousand talents of silver to gain his support and strengthen his own hold on the kingdom. 20Menahem exacted this money from Israel. Every wealthy man had to contribute fifty shekels of silver to be given to the king of Assyria. So the king of Assyria withdrew and stayed in the land no longer.

21As for the other events of Menahem’s reign, and all he did, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel? 22Menahem rested with his fathers. And Pekahiah his son succeeded him as king.

COMMENTARY

16 Menahem’s raid against Tiphsah is set off in a separate paragraph in the MT. The narrator thus indicates that this military action took place before he became king (cf. Josephus, Ant. 9.230–31). Was Menahem on a “march of terror” (Cohn, 107) or, being an army commander, was he on a mission ordered by Zechariāh (Hobbs, 196–97)? If the latter scenario is the case, it would indicate that his absence with the armed forces may have provided Shallum with the opportunity for his coup.

Complicating the picture is the problem of the identity of Tiphsah. Tiphsah was situated on the Euphrates (1Ki 4:24). The supposed unlikelihood that this far northern location was intended has caused some commentators to suggest an emendation to Tappuah. Such a reading is found in the Lucianic recension of the LXX (cf. NJB, NLT, REB). Tappuah has the advantage of lying in nearby Ephraim (Jos 16:8). Nevertheless, the seven-day hold that Shallum had on Samaria may indicate that it took a week for news of the coup to reach Menahem at Tiphsah and for him to return. In any case, whether Menahem was still at Tiphsah or had already returned to Tirzah, he went to Samaria to deal with Shallum. Having done so, he seized the throne for himself (v.14).

17–22 Menahem’s decade of rule is characterized as one of total sinfulness. In addition to further prostituting Israel’s religious experience, he compromised its independence by becoming a vassal to Pul (or, more properly, Tiglath-Pileser III, 745–727 BC) of Assyria. His motive in doing so was not one of patriotic concern for Israel’s survival; rather, he hoped that the Assyrian alliance would solidify his hold on the throne of Israel, possibly against a potential rival such as Pekah (vv.27–31).

In order to gain the Assyrian king’s backing, he levied a tax of fifty shekels of silver on the wealthy men of the realm so that the assessed levy of one thousand talents of silver might be gathered. Since a talent then weighed about seventy-five pounds, this total was obviously a tremendous sum. Nevertheless the sum was fully met, and Tiglath-Pileser “withdrew and stayed in the land no longer” (v.20).

While Menahem thus bought the crown for himself and respite from Assyria, the stiff stipulations were to cause further internal friction that was to ignite the fires of insurrection soon after his son Pekahiah succeeded him. Although Menahem had thought to buy time—perhaps even Israel’s independence—his policy was to spell the beginning of the end. A totally apostate Israel was to reap the harvest of her spiritual wickedness at the hands of the very ones whom Menahem had trusted for deliverance.

To understand the complex events of the late eighth century BC, a word must be said concerning the Assyrians. After nearly a half century of decline, Assyria reawakened with the usurpation of the throne by Tiglath-Pileser III in 745 BC (Pul in v.19). Indeed he and his successors in the Neo-Assyrian Empire were to effect a drastic change in the balance of power in the ancient Near East. Having solidified the kingdom in the east, Tiglath-Pileser turned his attention to the west in 743. Although the exact course of his western campaign is difficult to follow, it seems clear that all Syro-Palestine submitted to the Assyrian yoke. Among those nations and kings whose tribute is recorded in his annals is the name “Menahem of Israel,” thus confirming the biblical account.

NOTES

16 Identified with Tell el Farʿah, Tirzah remains one of the most striking confirmations of biblical details turned up by the archaeologist’s spade. See G. E. Wright, “The Excavation of Tell el Farʿah,” BA 12 (1949): 66–68. For examples of the heinous foreign practice of “ripping open” expectant mothers, see 2 Kings 8:12; Hosea 13:16; Amos 1:13.

19–20 Pul and the Assyrian Tiglath-Pileser III are one and the same individual (cf. 1Ch 5:26). Assyrian kings frequently had two names, a throne name for Assyria and one for Babylonia. Thus the Tiglath-Pileser of Assyria was known as Pul(u) in Babylon much as Shalmaneser V was known as Ululaia. For information regarding Tiglath-pileser III’s western campaign, see CAH, 3:33–35; Hallo, 169–71.

Hobbs, 198–200, argues at length that Tiglath-Pileser III did not invade Israel but instead came to Menahem’s aid against a third party. The fifty shekels of silver were thus paid to Assyrian mercenaries. Hobbs’s unlikely suggestion founders on at least two points. (1) His objection to (gibbôrê haḥayil, lit., “the men of wealth”) as referring to the wealthy overlords overlooks the fact that the lady from Shunem was described by the feminine equivalent to this phrase. (2) Hobbs fails to account for the raising of such a sum by an army commander.

Possible reference to these events in Menahem’s dealings with Tiglath-Pileser III may be reflected in Hosea’s oracle (Hos 8:7–10), though J. B. Payne (Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy [New York: Harper & Row, 1973], 404) prefers to associate Hosea’s warning with the events of that Assyrian king’s second western campaign.

3. The Reign of Pekahiah in the Northern Kingdom (15:23–26)

23In the fiftieth year of Azariah king of Judah, Pekahiah son of Menahem became king of Israel in Samaria, and he reigned two years. 24Pekahiah did evil in the eyes of the LORD. He did not turn away from the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, which he had caused Israel to commit. 25One of his chief officers, Pekah son of Remaliah, conspired against him. Taking fifty men of Gilead with him, he assassinated Pekahiah, along with Argob and Arieh, in the citadel of the royal palace at Samaria. So Pekah killed Pekahiah and succeeded him as king.

26The other events of Pekahiah’s reign, and all he did, are written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel.

COMMENTARY

23–26 Few details are recorded of the two-year reign of Menahem’s son Pekahiah except the notice of his evil spiritual condition and the coup d’état that took his life. Pekah, his assassin and successor, was one of Pekahiah’s chief officers. The report that fifty men accompanied him indicates that Pekah was a military commander.

The notice of a twenty-year reign for Pekah (v.27) would seem to indicate that this Gileadite strong man had laid claim to the crown some twelve years earlier. Apparently he had been prevented from taking the throne only by Menahem’s swift action in the unsettled times during Shallum’s conspiracy. Pekahiah’s appointment of Pekah to be a chief officer may have been an attempt to placate a rival party. The usurpation and troubled times that followed may suggest that there was an anti-Assyrian party that remained submerged during the rule of the fiery Menahem.

NOTES

25 The NIV takes the enigmatic “Argob and Arieh” (lit., “eagle and lion”) to be personal names. Alternatively, they might refer to place names. M. J. Geller (“A New Translation for 2 Kings XV 25,” VT 26 [1976]: 374–77) takes the two names as a compound phrase referring to a sphinxlike statue that symbolically guarded the gate, much as the colossal aladlammu figures that protected the gates of the Neo-Assyrian kings.

4. The Reign of Pekah in the Northern Kingdom (15:27–31)

27In the fifty-second year of Azariah king of Judah, Pekah son of Remaliah became king of Israel in Samaria, and he reigned twenty years. 28He did evil in the eyes of the LORD. He did not turn away from the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, which he had caused Israel to commit.

29In the time of Pekah king of Israel, Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria came and took Ijon, Abel Beth Maacah, Janoah, Kedesh and Hazor. He took Gilead and Galilee, including all the land of Naphtali, and deported the people to Assyria. 30Then Hoshea son of Elah conspired against Pekah son of Remaliah. He attacked and assassinated him, and then succeeded him as king in the twentieth year of Jotham son of Uzziah.

31As for the other events of Pekah’s reign, and all he did, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel?

COMMENTARY

27–31 The chronology of Pekah’s time is beset with serious problems. To Pekah is attributed a twenty-year reign, beginning with the end of the fifty-two-year reign of Azariah of Judah. Further, v.30 indicates that his reign was terminated by Hoshea’s conspiracy in the twentieth year of Jotham’s rule. Verse 33, however, indicates that Jotham reigned but sixteen years. Moreover, v.32 notes that Jotham himself began to rule in Pekah’s second year. Further synchronisms occur in v.8, where the thirty-eighth year of Uzziah is marked as Zechariah’s accession year; in 16:1, where the seventeenth year of Pekah and the accession year of Ahaz are equated; and in 17:1, where the twelfth year of Ahaz is given as the first of Hoshea’s nine years.

Because, on the basis of both biblical and secular history, the fall of Samaria can be assigned confidently to 722 BC, and because Azariah’s fifty-second year can be shown to be 740 BC, it would appear that there is no room for a twenty-year reign by Pekah. Further, due allowance must be made for the reigns of Zechariah (six months), Shallum (one month), Menahem (ten years), Pekahiah (two years), and Hoshea (nine years) in the same interval of time.

The resolution of these data, while difficult, is not impossible. Probably because Pekah carried out a consistent anti-Assyrian policy, the chronicles of the southern kingdom gave full credit to Pekah’s regnal claims. It would seem that already at the death of Zechariah in 752 BC, Pekah had claimed the kingship and was recognized as king in Transjordanian Gilead; however, the swift action of the Israelite military forces through Menahem prevented Pekah from furthering his aspirations for the next decade. In 742, when the powerful Menahem died, the problem of Pekah again surfaced, with Pekahiah solving the problem by bringing Pekah into a position of prominence. After two years, Pekah was able to find an opportunity to dispose of Pekahiah and rule in his own right over all Israel until the troublesome international events associated with Tiglath-Pileser III’s second western campaign (734–732) forced his demise at the hands of a pro-Assyrian faction led by Hoshea (732).

Allowing for the differing accession systems in Israel and Judah, the various dates and data can be harmonized as follows:

• 753/752 BC: Uzziah’s thirty-eighth year (including coregency), the year of Shallum’s usurpation and of Menahem’s seizing the throne of Israel, the year of Pekah’s “rule” in Gilead
• 742 BC: The death of Menahem, the accession of Pekahiah
• 740/739 BC: The assassination of Pekahiah and the accession of Pekah, the death of Uzziah in Judah and the accession of Jotham (already a coregent since 752/751) in the “second year” of Pekah’s independent rule
• 736 BC: The year Jotham gave the reigns of government over to Ahaz (= Pekah’s “seventeenth year”)
• 732/731 BC: Hoshea seizes power (= Pekah’s “twentieth year” and the twelfth year of Ahaz (who apparently had been appointed crown prince and heir designate by his father in the crisis during Tiglath-Pileser III’s first western campaign in 744)
• 732/731 BC: Jotham’s twentieth year (Jotham had apparently lived for four years beyond the relinquishment of his throne to Ahaz)

Pekah’s stormy beginning was to characterize his short independent rule. In 734 BC Tiglath-Pileser III swept out of Assyria on a second western campaign that was to break the anti-Assyrian coalition headed by the Aramean king Rezin and Pekah of Israel. By 732 the alliance was thoroughly broken and Damascus had fallen. All the western Fertile Crescent, from the Taurus Mountains on the north to the border of Egypt on the south, lay in Assyrian hands. The Syrian states were divided into five provinces, Israel into three.

The battle against Israel centered in Galilee: Ijon, Abel Beth Maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, and Hazor—all known Galilean cities. The text also adds significantly that Tiglath-Pileser III penetrated into Pekah’s center of power, Gilead. Because the cities lay in a general north-south direction, the biblical account may well preserve the Assyrian king’s line of march. The mention of Janoah may indicate that after the victory over Kadesh, Tiglath-Pileser divided his forces, half proceeding southward against Hazor and on to Gilead, and the other half moving southwest to Janoah and then on to Phoenicia.

With the loss of Galilee and Gilead and with the presence of Assyrian troops all along Israel’s western frontier, it seemed evident that Pekah’s anti-Assyrian policy had brought Israel to the point of extinction. Accordingly, while Tiglath-Pileser was concluding the siege of Damascus in 732 BC, Hoshea succeeded in defeating and displacing Pekah. That insurrection cost the controversial Gileadite his life. With the dispatching of Pekah and submission to Tiglath-Pileser, the ultimate demise of Israel was postponed for a decade. But its end was sure, for its corruption was total, having permeated all levels of society.

NOTES

27 For details relative to the intricate chronological problems of this period, see H. Stigers, “Pekah,” ZPEB, 4:669–71; H. Tadmor, “The Campaigns of Sargon II of Ashur: A Chronological-Historical Study,” JCS 12 (1958): 22–40, 77–100; Thiele, 77–140; Payne, ZPEB, 1:839–42; Hobbs, 204–5.

29 For information relative to Tiglath-Pileser III’s second western campaign, see Hallo, 171–74; Aharoni and Avi-Yonah, 94–95. It is, of course, possible that the biblical record simply summarizes the account of Tiglath-Pileser III’s campaign against Israel, with no conclusions drawn as to the order of his plan of attack. Bright, 217, suggests a coastal attack in 734 BC, the Syro-Israelite thrust in 733, and the taking of Damascus in 732. For the Assyrian text, see ANET, 283–84.

30 Tiglath-Pileser III claims that the Israelites “overthrew their king Pekah and I placed Hoshea as king over them” (ANET, 284). He goes on to record Israel’s tribute to him. Evidently by submitting to Tiglath-Pileser, the pro-Assyrian party in Israel sought immediate recognition of its government and confirmation of Hoshea as king (see also Note on 17:1).

Hobbs, 203, points out that “the name ‘Hoshea’ contains an ironic twist. It is derived from the root ‘to save’ and contrasts vividly with the activities of the promised ‘savior’ mentioned in 13:5.”

5. The Reign of Jotham in the Southern Kingdom (15:32–38)

32In the second year of Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel, Jotham son of Uzziah king of Judah began to reign. 33He was twenty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem sixteen years. His mother’s name was Jerusha daughter of Zadok. 34He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, just as his father Uzziah had done. 35The high places, however, were not removed; the people continued to offer sacrifices and burn incense there. Jotham rebuilt the Upper Gate of the temple of the LORD.

36As for the other events of Jotham’s reign, and what he did, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Judah? 37(In those days the LORD began to send Rezin king of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah against Judah.) 38Jotham rested with his fathers and was buried with them in the City of David, the city of his father. And Ahaz his son succeeded him as king.

COMMENTARY

32–33 Already coregent for at least a decade, during Jotham’s reign political and religious conditions remained largely as they were in Uzziah’s time. The country’s prosperity continued as well (2Ch 27:1–4). Regrettably that prosperity was to lead, as it so often does, to spiritual neglect (cf. Isa 1–5)—a condition that was to make Judah ripe for open apostasy in Ahaz’s day.

34–35 Jotham turned his attention to his country’s internal needs. He rebuilt the Upper Gate at the northern entrance of the temple. From the Chronicler (2Ch 27) we learn much more. Thus Jotham extended the wall of Ophel (2Ch 27:3; cf. 26:9). He also turned his attention to urban planning, constructing cities in the highlands of Judah that, together with a system of towers and fortifications in the wooded areas, could serve both economic and military purposes.

At the onset of his reign the Ammonites, from whom Uzziah had exacted tribute (2Ch 26:8), refused to acknowledge Jotham’s overlordship, thus occasioning successful campaigns against the Ammonites so that they once again paid their tribute (2Ch 27:5). The notice that this tribute continued into the second and third year may correlate with the probability that about the year 736 BC Jotham had turned over the reigns of government to his coregent son, Ahaz, possibly due to some failure in health or to rising international tensions.

36–38 Toward the end of Jotham’s reign, political storm clouds began to appear on the international horizon. The Chronicler speaks of “all his wars” (2Ch 27:7); and the narrator of Kings notes that Rezin, the Aramean king, and Pekah, Israel’s king, began their incursions into Judah. The issue was designed by the Lord to test the young Ahaz in spiritual things (cf. Isa 7:1–8:10), but there would be no repentance forthcoming.

NOTES

35 For archaeological light on Jotham’s building activities, see E. Oren, “Ziqlag—A Biblical City on the Edge of the Negev,” BA 45 (1982): 177–78.

6. The Reign of Ahaz in the Southern Kingdom (16:1–20)

OVERVIEW

Between the accession statement, with its unusually strong negative spiritual evaluation (vv.1–4), and the brief closing notice (vv.19–20), the narrator focuses on two areas of concern. (1) In the political realm he provides details of a Syro-Israelite incursion (vv.5–6), to which Ahaz reacted by bribing the Assyrian king to act as his rescuer (vv.7–9). (2) He also catalogs Ahaz’s temple innovations, which took the form of a new Damascene type of altar (vv.10–11) and the religious services there (vv.12–16). Further modifications included changes in the temple furnishings (vv.17–18). All these developments in Ahaz’s reign are presented as commentary illustrating the fact that Ahaz “did not do whata was right in the eyes of the LORD his God” (v.2).

1In the seventeenth year of Pekah son of Remaliah, Ahaz son of Jotham king of Judah began to reign. 2Ahaz was twenty years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem sixteen years. Unlike David his father, he did not do what was right in the eyes of the LORD his God. 3He walked in the ways of the kings of Israel and even sacrificed his son in the fire, following the detestable ways of the nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites. 4He offered sacrifices and burned incense at the high places, on the hilltops and under every spreading tree.

5Then Rezin king of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem and besieged Ahaz, but they could not overpower him. 6At that time, Rezin king of Aram recovered Elath for Aram by driving out the men of Judah. Edomites then moved into Elath and have lived there to this day.

7Ahaz sent messengers to say to Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria, “I am your servant and vassal. Come up and save me out of the hand of the king of Aram and of the king of Israel, who are attacking me.” 8And Ahaz took the silver and gold found in the temple of the LORD and in the treasuries of the royal palace and sent it as a gift to the king of Assyria. 9The king of Assyria complied by attacking Damascus and capturing it. He deported its inhabitants to Kir and put Rezin to death.

10Then King Ahaz went to Damascus to meet Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria. He saw an altar in Damascus and sent to Uriah the priest a sketch of the altar, with detailed plans for its construction. 11So Uriah the priest built an altar in accordance with all the plans that King Ahaz had sent from Damascus and finished it before King Ahaz returned. 12When the king came back from Damascus and saw the altar, he approached it and presented offerings on it. 13He offered up his burnt offering and grain offering, poured out his drink offering, and sprinkled the blood of his fellowship offerings on the altar. 14The bronze altar that stood before the LORD he brought from the front of the temple—from between the new altar and the temple of the LORD—and put it on the north side of the new altar.

15King Ahaz then gave these orders to Uriah the priest: “On the large new altar, offer the morning burnt offering and the evening grain offering, the king’s burnt offering and his grain offering, and the burnt offering of all the people of the land, and their grain offering and their drink offering. Sprinkle on the altar all the blood of the burnt offerings and sacrifices. But I will use the bronze altar for seeking guidance.” 16And Uriah the priest did just as King Ahaz had ordered.

17King Ahaz took away the side panels and removed the basins from the movable stands. He removed the Sea from the bronze bulls that supported it and set it on a stone base. 18He took away the Sabbath canopy that had been built at the temple and removed the royal entryway outside the temple of the LORD, in deference to the king of Assyria.

19As for the other events of the reign of Ahaz, and what he did, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Judah? 20Ahaz rested with his fathers and was buried with them in the City of David. And Hezekiah his son succeeded him as king.

COMMENTARY

1–2 The name “Ahaz” is a shortened form of “Jehoahaz” (cf. the similar name “Ahaziah”). Ahaz’s name appears in its fuller form in the tribute lists of Tiglath-Pileser III (Luckenbill, 1:287).

The notice that Ahaz was but twenty years old at his accession and that he ruled sixteen years has occasioned no little difficulty, particularly since, according to 2 Chronicles 29:1, his son Hezekiah was already twenty-five when he succeeded his father. Some manuscripts of the ancient Greek and Syriac versions at 2 Chronicles 28:1 record Ahaz’s age at his accession as twenty-five. While this reading would have the advantage of making Ahaz appreciably older at the time of his son’s birth, the MT’s lower figure is not impossible in the light of ancient Near Eastern marriage practices.

If a sixteen-year independent reign (732–716 BC) for Ahaz is not primarily in view here, the answer to this knotty problem is to be sought in the tangled chronology of the late eighth century BC. Ahaz may have lived four years after handing over the reigns of government to Hezekiah in 720 BC, an event that may be related to the Assyrian-Philistine wars of 720 and 716 BC. Accordingly, the Chronicler’s note as to Hezekiah’s accession is reckoned from the sole reign of Hezekiah in 716 BC. In that case, Ahaz would have been born in 756 and died in 716, while Hezekiah was born in 741–740, when Ahaz was fifteen or sixteen. Such a scenario may account for the reading of the Greek and Syriac texts for 2 Chronicles 28:1 that Ahaz was “twenty years old when he began to reign.”

3–4 Not content to continue the standing state policies of limited religious compromise, Ahaz transgressed the bounds of propriety by imitating the idolatrous heathen practices of Israel. Most nefarious of all was his participation in the debased Molech rites (see Notes). He went so far as to send his own son through the sacrificial fires (v.3; cf. Lev 18:21; 20:1–5; Dt 12:31; 2Ki 21:6). According to the scriptural data, these rites took place at the confluence of the Hinnom and Kidron valleys in a sacred enclosure known as Topheth (cf. 23:10; Isa 30:33; Jer 7:31).

The exact nature of the sacrifices and the divinities involved has been the subject of much discussion. The same type of sacred place with the same name has been found in the transplanted Phoenician colony of Carthage. That the sacrificial offering was called by a name made up of the same Semitic consonants (mlk) contained in the name “Molech” would seem to argue that the god involved was the old Canaanite deity Baal, with human sacrifice made to him called mlk (cf. Jer 19:5; 32:35). The rites were heinous and a total defilement of the God-ordained sacrificial service. The later spiritual reformation of Josiah was to bring an end to these sinister proceedings, a judgment Jeremiah utilized in picturing God’s coming judgment on his sinful people (Jer 2:23; 7:30–33; 19:5–6).

The valley’s reputation for extreme wickedness gave rise to the employment of its name as a term for the eschatological place of punishment of the wicked (1 En. 27:1ff.; 54:1ff.; 56:3–4; 90:26), a designation confirmed by Christ himself (Mt 5:22, 29–30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; 25:41).

5–6 The full details of the complex international situation must be gleaned not only from 2 Kings 16 but also from 15:37; 2 Chronicles 28; and Isaiah 7:1–16. These sources show that the Syro-Israelite alliance had been operative against Judah already in Jotham’s day (2Ki 15:37). The allied attack against Judah was two-pronged. Rezin came along the eastern portion of Judah, drove down to the key seaport of Elath, and took it (v.6; 2Ch 28:5). Pekah launched an effective general campaign against northern Judah that resulted in the death of thousands of its citizens and the capture of hundreds of others (though the captives were later granted their freedom and returned to Jericho through the intercession of the prophet Obed; cf. 2Ch 28:6–15).

Moreover, the newly liberated Edom took the opportunity to strike back and carried away some Judahites to captivity (2Ch 28:17). As well, the Philistines found the time ripe to make renewed incursions into the western Shephelah and take captive certain cities in southern Judah.

An attack aimed at taking Jerusalem and installing a new king on the throne is described in Isaiah 7:2–6. Surrounded by hostile enemies on all sides, Ahaz received God’s prophet Isaiah. He assured Ahaz that the enemy would fail; God himself would see to that. Ahaz could request any confirmatory sign that he wished, and it would be granted (Isa 7:7–11). Ahaz, with a flare of piety, refused Isaiah’s offer (Isa 7:12); he preferred to rely on his own resourcefulness. God nevertheless gave Ahaz a sign, the prophecy that Matthew associates with the virgin birth of the Messiah (Isa 7:13–16; cf. Mt 1:22–23).

God was superintending the whole complex undertaking. He would deal with apostate Israel (cf. 2Ki 17:5–18; 18:11–12), thwart the plans of Rezin and Pekah by bringing defeat to them (Isa 7:5–16), and chastise spiritually bankrupt Ahaz (2Ch 28:5, 19).

7–9 Ahaz’s request to Tiglath-Pileser III was couched in diplomatic language that displayed his respect and submission to him. The narrator thus shows that rather than trusting in the Lord (cf. Isa 7:10–16), Ahaz put forward a “persuasive effort to draw the Assyrian king into Ahaz’s war, to protect him as a father would a son” (Cohn, 113). Tiglath-Pileser complied all too readily, eventually thoroughly subduing the Arameans, taking Damascus and deporting its inhabitants, and executing Rezin (v.9). Israel was spared only through Hoshea’s coup d’état and swift submission to Assyria—a takeover that cost Pekah his life (15:29–30).

10–11 According to the records of Tiglath-Pileser III, the Assyrian king called for a meeting of his new vassals in Damascus. Ahaz was impressed with the type of altar in use there and sent back instructions to Uriah the priest for its construction. The text gives no hint that Uriah objected to Ahaz’s command; rather, the altar’s construction was completed and ready for use by the time the king arrived back in Jerusalem.

12–13 When Ahaz returned he had his daily offerings presented on this new altar, thereby dedicating the altar’s use to the Lord. The offerings that were made were all of the sweet-savor type, expressing the maintenance of the believer’s communion with God. The burnt and meal offerings symbolized dedication and service, the fellowship (peace) offering symbolized fellowship, and the drink offering emphasized the joy of life poured out to God in Spirit-led obedience (v.13). What a parody of piety! He who knew nothing of genuine godliness would feign his devotion to God—and that via an alien altar!

14–16 The following verses catalog Ahaz’s further religious innovations, all of which speak of his deepening apostasy. The prescribed brazen altar was transferred from facing the sanctuary entrance to the northern side. Accordingly, all future offerings would be made on the recently dedicated Damascene altar. Ahaz would henceforth use the brazen altar in connection with his divination practices, thus indicating Ahaz’s involvement in Assyrian pagan rites.

17 Ahaz went even further. He appropriated the high stands holding the altar for their brass. Likewise he lowered the molten Sea by taking away the bronze bulls that supported it and placed it on a low stone pedestal. The narrator assigns no reason for these actions. Perhaps Ahaz needed the brass for future payment of tribute, or it was simply a matter of streamlining the temple furnishings.

18 Not content with these “reforms” in the matter of ceremonial furnishings, Ahaz went still further. The covered structure that opened to the inner court, together with the king’s private entrance to that place, were removed “in deference to the king of Assyria.” The exact impact of these words is difficult to ascertain. Whether Tiglath-Pileser wanted less prestige to be held by his new vassal or felt that such a special royal place might indicate too close a tie to an established religion that might later foster a spirit of independence against Assyria is uncertain. At any rate, the wholesale changes were either made at the Assyrian king’s suggestion or were done to gain his pleasure.

19–20 Ahaz went yet further in his apostasy. According to the Chronicler (2Ch 28:24–25; cf. 29:7), he went so far as to desecrate the temple furniture and close the temple itself so that the services within the Holy Place were discontinued. “Worship services” would henceforth be held only in connection with the new altar or at one of the several altars erected throughout Jerusalem or at the high places dedicated to the various gods established throughout Judah by royal edict (28:24–25). All his innovations speak volumes as to Ahaz’s depraved spiritual condition. It is small wonder, then, that the Chronicler reports that Ahaz provoked the Lord’s anger (28:25). When Ahaz died, he was not accorded proper burial in the royal tombs. He who was “unlike David” in his relation to the Lord (2Ki 16:2; 2Ch 28:1) was not laid to rest beside him.

NOTES

3 The Molech problem is a complex one. That literal human sacrifice was involved (contra N. H. Snaith, “The Cult of Molech,” VT 16 [1966]: 123–24) is abundantly shown in the Canaanite literary texts and is elsewhere implied or stated in the OT.

In some cases “Molech” appears to refer to a personal god (e.g., possibly but not certainly Lev 20:1–5), though opinions vary as to the deity’s identity. Some scholars suggest Milcolm, the national god of Ammon (1Ki 11:7), whose name itself is a deliberate scribal misvocalization of the name based on the Semitic word mlk. (For discussion of the nature and function of Milcolm, see W. H. Shea, “Milkom as the Architect of Rabbath-Ammon’s Natural Defences in the Ammon Citadel Inscription,” PEQ 111 [1978]: 17–25.) But 2 Kings 23:10, 13 appears to differentiate between the worship of Milcolm and Molech. (Some scholars suggest that “Molech” likewise is a scribal corruption, with the vowels for the consonants mlk being supplied from the Hebrew bōšet, “shame.”) Others interpreters consider Molech to be Melek Athtar, a well-known astral deity in the ancient Near East of whom several deities (e.g., Milcolm and Chemosh) are local expressions (see J. Gray, “Molech, Moloch,” IDB 3:422–23; cf. Am 5:26–27; Ac 7:43).

The name Molech more than likely originates in the ancient Semitic term mālik, being the absolute state of a noun meaning “king.” Thus the word was at first an epithet of a deity. Significantly the first reference to God as “king” comes from the mouth of the pagan diviner Balaam (Nu 23:21), as R. B. Allen (“The Theology of the Balaam Oracles,” in Tradition and Testament, ed. John and Paul Feinberg [Chicago: Moody Press, 1981], 103, 118) aptly points out. J. J. M. Roberts (The Earliest Semitic Pantheon [Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1972], 42–43, 105–6) decides that Dagan was the original deity with whom the term was combined. In time the term split off and became used independently. As this independent unit, the name was utilized throughout the Semitic world. (See further J. Ebach, “ADRMLK, Moloch und BAʾALADR: Eine Notiz zum Problem der Moloch-Verehrung im alten Israel,” UF 11 [1979]: 211–26.)

Though the evidence renders certain that the term mālik enjoyed widespread use as a divine name, however, the issue is whether an independent deity by that name is intended in the OT and more specifically in eighth/seventh-century Judah. Although George C. Heider (The Cult of Molek [Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1985]) argues forcibly for a chthonic deity whose worship was especially observed in Jerusalem, the linguistic and archaeological data as harmonized with the biblical data (cf. 23:10 with Jer 7:31; 19:5–6; 32:35) would appear to favor the idea that mlk refers to a type of sacrifice made to Baal in a sacred enclosure known as a “tophet.” (Notice, however, that in Syrian “tophet” means “fire pit.”) For further details see B. H. Warmington, Carthage (Baltimore: Penguin, 1964), 158–60; L. E. Stager and S. R. Wolff, “Child Sacrifice at Carthage,” BAR 10 (1984): 30–47.

10 For Tiglath-Pileser III’s inscription listing Ahaz, see ANET, 282. The prototype of Ahaz’s new altar has been often disputed, with some deciding for an Assyrian-style altar (e.g., Cohn, Gray, Gressman, Kittel, Montgomery, T. H. Robinson) and others (e.g., de Vaux) favoring an Aramean one. The latter position appears to be in harmony with the Chronicler’s report that Ahaz was influenced by the “gods of the kings of Aram” (2Ch 28:23).

(d^emût, “likeness”) and (tabnît, “shape, pattern”) are well rendered by the NIV’s “sketch” and “detailed plans.” The former word gives the altar’s outward appearance and may indicate an artist’s sketch; the latter suggests an architect’s drawing.

12–13 Whether Ahaz personally offered sacrifices on the new altar or simply supervised Uriah’s actions is uncertain (cf. Solomon, 1Ki 8:62–64; Jeroboam, 12:33–13:1; Jehu, 2Ki 10:25).

15 The Hebrew verb translated “for seeking guidance” (NIV) bears many nuances. Whether Ahaz intended to use the altar as a place for seeking the Lord’s guidance through prayer (cf. Ps 27:4) or for some aspect of syncrestic divination is uncertain.

17 For the Solomonic basins and movable stands and the molten Sea, see 1 Kings 7:23, 27. They are mentioned among the several items that were carried away in the later Babylonian despoiling of Jerusalem (25:13–14; Jer 27:19–20; 52:17–23).

The Hebrew translated “stone base” (NIV; cf. LXX) refers not to the stone pavement of the court as the Vulgate suggests, but, as Keil, 407, decides, to a pedestal made of stones.