2 Chronicles · Chapter 21

V. 2. Azariah-Two sons called by the same name, though doubtless distinguished by some additional title: which is not mentioned here, because it did not concern succeeding ages to know it. Of Israel-So he is called either,

1. Because he was so by right: or

2. Because he was king not only of Judah and Benjamin, but of a great number of Israelites, who had come and settled in his kingdom.

Verse 2. And he had brethren-the sons of Jehoshaphat, king of Israel.] Jehoshaphat certainly was not king of Israel, but king of Judah. larvy Yisrael must be a corruption in the text, for hdwhy Yehudah; which is the reading of the Syriac, Arabic, Septuagint, and Vulgate: the Chaldee, only agrees with the Hebrew text. And the reading of the versions is supported by thirty-eight of Kennicott’s and Deuteronomy Rossi’s MSS. The word Judah should therefore be restored to the text.

Verse 2. And Azariah — Hebrew, whyrz[, Azaria-hu, distinguished by the last syllable, hu, from the Azariah mentioned in the former clause. Of Jehoshaphat king of Israel — So he is called, either, 1st, Because he was so by right: or, 2d, Because he was king not only of Judah and Benjamin, but of a great number of Israelites, who had come and settled in his kingdom.

Verse 2. Jehoshaphat king of Israel. Many think that Israel is here put for Judah; but many of the ten tribes now placed themselves under Jehoshaphat; the text may therefore be correct, God having made the house of David the real kings of Israel. Ezra also repeats the word kings of Israel, 2 Chronicles 28:19, 27.

Verse 3. The kingdom gave he to Jehoram] He made him co-partner with himself in the kingdom about three years before his death; so that he reigned only five years after the death of his father Jehoshaphat. See the notes on 2 Kings 8:16, &c.; and on the same, 2 Kings 1:17, where an attempt is made to settle this disturbed chronology.

Verse 3. With fenced cities of Judah — Over which he made them governors. This he seems to have done prudently; thus providing well for them, that they might not be tempted to envy their brother the kingdom, nor to quarrel among themselves: but “things excellently designed,” says Strigelius, from Cicero, “have often a very ill event.” This wealth and authority of theirs, made their brother first fear them, and then, through his wicked covetousness, contrive to cut them off, that he might get possession of their riches and power. Because he was the firstborn — Whom Jehoshaphat supposed he ought to prefer on account of the law, recorded Deuteronomy 21:15, though otherwise, it is probable, he would not have done it, having doubtless, before this time, observed his perverse and wicked inclinations, and how much he was swayed by his idolatrous wife.

Ver. 3. Their father gave them great gifts—with fenced cities of Judah. He made them lieutenants, and military princes of districts.

V. 4. Strengthened himself-He hardened his heart, as that word sometimes signifies. Princes-The chief of those Israelites, who out of love to God and the true religion, had forsaken their estates in the kingdom of Israel, and were now incorporated with the kingdom of Judah: because he thought these would be most zealous for that religion which he was resolved to oppose.

Verse 4. Slew all his brethren] What a truly diabolic thing is the lust of power! it destroys all the charities of life, and renders those who are under its influence the truest resemblants of the arch fiend. That he might sit the more secure upon his throne, this execrable man imbrues his hands in the blood of his own brothers! There are more instances of this species of cruelty among bad Asiatic kings than among any other class of men. The history of every country abounds in proofs; even that of our own is not the least barren.

Verse 4. He strengthened himself — Hardened his heart, as the word qzj, chazak, often signifies; and slew all his brethren with the sword — Either by false accusation, under colour of law, or rather by assassination, pretending, it is likely, that he could not think himself safe in the government till they were taken out of the way. Those that mean ill themselves, are commonly, without cause, jealous of those about them. And divers also of the princes of Israel — Either, 1st, Of Judah, here called Israel, as in verse 2. Or rather, 2d, Of Israel properly so called; not the princes of all Israel, or of the several tribes thereof, but the chief of those Israelites who, out of love to God and the true religion, had forsaken their estates in the kingdom of Israel, and were now incorporated with the kingdom of Judah: these he slew, because he thought they would be most zealous for that religion which he was resolved to oppose.

Verse 5. Jehoram was, &c. — Of this and several of the following verses, see notes on 2 Kings 8:17, &c.

Verse 6. He had the daughter of Ahab to wife] This was Athaliah, daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, who was famous for her impieties and cruelty, as was her most profligate mother. It is likely that she was the principal cause of Jehoram’s cruelty and profaneness.

Verse 7. To give a light to him] To give him a descendant.

Verse 8. In his days the Edomites revolted] See on 2 Kings 8:21.

V. 10. Libnah-Libnah seems to have set up for a free state. And the reason is here given, both why God permitted it, and why they did it, because Jehoram was become an idolater. While he adhered to God, they adhered to him; but when he cast God off, they cast him off. Whether this would justify them in their revolt or no, it justified God’s providence which suffered it.

Verse 10. The same time did Libnah revolt — Libnah seems to have set up for a free state. And the reason is here given, both why God permitted it, and why they did it, because Jehoram was become an idolater. While he adhered to God, they adhered to him; but when he cast God off, they cast him off. Whether this would justify them in their revolt or not, it justified God’s providence which suffered it.

Ver. 10. Libnah was a strong city in the time of David. It fell by lot to the priests; and being a frontier town, was strongly fortified. The cause of the revolt is supposed to be Jehoram’s attempts to enforce idolatry, and to oppress his people.

V. 11. High places-Not to the Lord, but to Baals or false gods. And caused-Not only by his counsel and example, but by force, by threats, and penalties.

Verse 11. To commit fornication] That is, to serve idols. The Israelites were considered as joined to Jehovah as a woman is joined to her husband: when she associates with other men, this is adultery; when they served other gods, this was called by the same name, it was adultery against Jehovah. This is frequently the only meaning of the terms adultery and fornication in the Scriptures.

Verse 11. He made high places — Not to the Lord, whose sworn enemy he was, but to Baals, or false gods. Caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit fornication — Spiritual whoredom, or idolatry, seducing them to eat things sacrificed to idols, (Revelation 2:20,) not only by his counsel and example, but, as it follows, by force, by threats, and penalties.

11. He made high places in the mountains — Thus undoing, or setting at naught, the labours of his pious father, who had exerted himself with marked though not complete success, (compare 2 Chronicles 17:6, 20:33,) to take away this stone of stumbling from Israel. Caused… Jerusalem to commit fornication — A common scriptural metaphor for idolatry. Compelled Judah — In thus using violence to seduce the people to idolatry, Jehoram was probably influenced by his wife, Athaliah, who would fain have introduced a foreign idolatry into the kingdom of Judah as her mother Jezebel had done into the kingdom of Israel.

V. 12. From Elijah-By this it appears, that Jehoram came to the throne before Elijah’s translation. It is true, we find Elisha attending Jehoshaphat; but that might be, while Elijah was yet on earth: for we read of Jehoram’s coming to the crown, before we read of Elijah’s translation, 1 Kings 22:50. We may suppose, the time of his departure was at hand, so that he could not go in person to Jehoram. But he left this writing, probably with Elisha, to be sent the first opportunity. The message is sent in the name of the Lord God of David his father, upbraiding him with his relation to David, as that which was no more his honour, but an aggravation of his degeneracy.

Verse 12. There came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet] From 2 Kings 2:11, it is evident that Elijah had been translated in the reign of Jehoshaphat, the father of Jehoram. How then could he send a letter to the son? Some say he sent it from heaven by an angel; others, that by the spirit of prophecy he foresaw this defection of Jehoram, and left the letter with Elisha, to be sent to him when this defection should take place; others say that Elijah is put here for Elisha; and others, that this Elijah was not the same that was translated, but another prophet of the same name. There are others who think that, as Elijah was still in the body, for he did not die, but was translated, he sent this letter from that secret place in which he was hidden by the Almighty. All the versions have Elijah, and all the MSS. the same reading. Dr. Kennicott contends that Elisha was the writer; for Elijah had been taken up to heaven thirteen years before the time of this writing. Our margin says, the letter was written before his assumption, and refers to 2 Kings 2:1.

These are all conjectures; and I could add another to their number, but still we should be where we were. I should adopt the conjecture relative to Elisha, were not every Hebrew MS., and all the Oriental versions, against it; to which may be added, that the author of this book does not once mention Elisha in any part of his work. It is certainly a possible case that this writing might have been a prediction of Jehoram’s impiety and miserable death, delivered in the time of the prophet, and which was now laid before this wicked king for the first time: and by it the prophet, though not among mortals, still continued to speak. I can see no solid reason against this opinion.

Verse 12. And there came a writing to him from Elijah — It is certain, Elijah was taken up into heaven in the time of Jehoshaphat. Therefore Josephus and the LXX. imagine (as Grotius observes) that from thence he sent a letter. Dr. Lightfoot is of opinion, that it is not meant of that Elijah who was carried up to heaven, but of another of his name, who sent this letter. Kimchi is of opinion that Elijah, foreseeing, by the spirit of prophecy, before he went to heaven, the wickedness of Jehoram, spake these words to one of the prophets, and charged him to put them down in writing, and send them in a letter to Jehoram, when he grew so impious, as is here related; and let him know that Elijah commanded this writing to be delivered to him: that so Jehoram, being affected with it, as if it had been sent from heaven, might be moved to repent of the evil he had done. And indeed the passage will bear this sense. He did not send a writing, but it was sent as his writing. For there is nothing in the words to intimate that this was written after his death, but only delivered after his death. So that it might have been written (for any thing that appears to the contrary) by Elijah himself before he was taken up into heaven. But, upon the whole, as we find the prophets were sent to those of their own time, and not to those who should come after, (there being a succession of prophets raised up for every age,) and as we have no mention of any other Elijah, in any other place of Scripture; and as (agreeable to what our Saviour makes Abraham say to the rich man, when he desired Lazarus to be sent from the dead to his brethren, They have Moses and the prophets,) we have no rational ground for thinking that God should employ a prophet, whom he had taken into heaven on this occasion, when there was, at that time, a prophet on the earth no ways inferior to him, namely, Elisha his successor: therefore there is ground to conclude, that the difficulty has arisen by the inaccuracy of transcribers of the Scriptures, and that it should be, and was at first written Elisha, and not Elijah.

Ver. 12. There came a writing to him from Elijah. The chronology of those times seems to suggest that Elijah had now ascended to heaven; but as the time of his ascension is not exactly noted, he might yet be on earth. The supposition of Josephus, that Elijah wrote this letter by an angel from heaven, is a rabbinical legend, utterly dissimilar to the way of providence in its intercourse with man.

12. There came a writing to him from Elijah — Here it appears that Elijah was still on earth in the days of Jehoram, and after the death of Jehoshaphat. Though we might naturally infer the contrary from the order of the narrative in 2 Kings, where Elijah’s ascension is recorded before the reign of Jehoram, yet such an inference is by no means necessary. The writer of Kings wished to group together the miracles of Elisha, and it was natural for him first to record the ascension of that master, Elijah, whose spirit rested so mightily upon his successor. So in his account of Elijah’s departure and of Elisha’s miracles he did not aim for chronological order, but for the grouping of certain assimilated facts. Some expositors, however, think that as Elijah committed the anointing of Hazael and Jehu (compare 1 Kings 19:15, 16, with 2 Kings 8:13, and 9:1-3, notes) to his servant Elisha, he may also have commissioned Elisha, or some other prophet, to announce, after his ascension, this threatening prophecy to Jehoram; and so, coming from that departed prophet, whose name had been a terror to Ahab, it would be like a voice from the other world calling to the wicked king of Judah. But this hypothesis seems to be entirely unnecessary, for there is no valid evidence that Elijah had yet ascended. His ministry was chiefly in the northern kingdom, and hence this is the only notice we have of him in Chronicles; but it shows that he did not overlook the religious interests of Judah.

The prophet’s epistle charges upon Jehoram two great crimes — 1) his compelling Judah into idolatry, and 2) the slaughter of his brethren. And for these crimes he announces a twofold punishment — 1) a stroke of Divine judgment upon his people, children, wives, and goods, (verse 14,) and 2) a dreadful, incurable disease. Verse 15.

Verse 13. Which were better than thyself — More innocent, righteous, and godly. This seems to intimate that they were pious persons, who abhorred idolatry. And, if so, his sin was the more heinous in cutting them off, as proceeding from enmity to God, as well as to them.

Verse 14. Will the Lord smite] “The WORD of the Lord will send a great mortality.”-Targum.

Verse 14. Behold, with a great plague, &c. — There was no calamity that could be thought of which did not befall this wicked prince: whose kingdom was destroyed and depopulated by the fiercest nations; his treasures ransacked; his wives carried into captivity; his children slain; and he himself laboured under a sore disease for two years; and when he was dead, had not the honour of royal sepulchre, such as his ancestors had. All which calamities were threatened in the writing sent him, that he might not think they came by chance, but by the special direction of Almighty God, as a punishment for his wickedness. But why should his people suffer, who are here threatened to be plagued? 1st, Because their base fear made them comply with him in his idolatry: and, 2d, Because he suffered in his people’s destruction: for as the honour, and safety, and strength of a king lie in the multitude and prosperity of his people; so when they are diminished, and destroyed, the king is very much weakened and endangered by it. And thy children, and thy wives — Whose lives shall go for the lives of thy brethren.

14. A great plague — Margin, a great stroke. It was the judgment of disastrous war, as shown in verses 16, 17.

V. 15. People-Because the generality of them sinned, in complying with his wicked and idolatrous commands. Wives-Whose lives shall go for the lives of thy brethren, ver. 4.

Verse 15. Until thy bowels fall out] This must have been occasioned by a violent inflammation: by the same death perished Antiochus Epiphanes, and Herod Agrippa.

Verse 15. By reason of the sickness day by day — That is, from day to day continually, Hebrew, days upon days: or, (as days are often put for a year,) year upon year: that is, one year after another for two years, as the event shows, verse 19.

15. Great sickness by disease of thy bowels — Appropriate punishment for him who had no “bowels of compassion” for his own brethren, who were better than himself. Jehoram’s “incurable disease,” as described in this verse and in verses 18, 19, must have been of the most loathsome and excruciating character. “Trusen holds this disease to have been a violent dysentery, being an inflammation of the nervous tissue of the whole great intestine, which causes the overlying mucous membrane to decay and peel off, which then falls out often in tube-shape, so that the intestines appear to fall from the body.” — Keil.

V. 16. Philistines-A people fully subdued and dispirited: but God now raises their spirits and courage to do his work. Ethiopians-A people in Arabia, so called, either for their likeness in complexion to the Ethiopians, or because the one of these people were a colony of the other.

Verse 16. The Philistines, and-the Arabians] We have no other account of this war. Though it was a predatory war, yet it appears to have been completely ruinous and destructive. What a general curse fell upon this bad king; in his body, soul, substance, family, and government!

Verse 16. The Lord stirred up against Jehoram the spirit of the Philistines — A people who had been fully subdued and dispirited; but whose spirits and courage God now raised, that they might do his work. And of the Arabians, that were near the Ethiopians — Hebrew, near the Cushites, that is, the Ethiopians properly so called, for they were parted only by the Red sea; or rather a people in Arabia, frequently mentioned in Scripture, and so called either for their likeness in colour and complexion to the Ethiopians, or because one of these tribes was a colony from the other.

Ver. 16. The Lord stirred up against Jehoram the Arabians that were near the Ethiopians. µyvwk Cushim, the Cushites, who had possessions on both sides of the Red sea. This seems to be the only reason why the wife of Moses should be reproachfully called an Ethiopian woman.

16. The Philistines, and… Arabians — These nations had been tributary to Jehoshaphat, (2 Chronicles 17:11,) but under his wicked son they revolted, and Jehovah used them as his rod of anger to punish Jehoram, as he had foretold. Verse 14. “Southern Arabia was originally occupied by Cushites, or Ethiopians, (Genesis 10:7,) whose descendants still exist in the modern Mahra, a remnant of the Himyaritic Arabs. ‘The Arabians that were near the Ethiopians’ were probably Joktanean Arabs from the neighbourhood of these Cushites.” — Rawlinson.

V. 17. His wives-Whom also they slew, 2 Chronicles 22:1, except Ahaziah and Athaliah; who possibly were hidden in some secret place. Left him-Blood for blood. He had slain all his brethren; they slay all his sons, but one. And he had not escaped, had be not been of the house of David; which must not be extirpated, like that of Ahab: because a blessing was in it; no less a blessing than that of the Messiah.

Verse 17. Save Jehoahaz the youngest] This person had at least three names, Jehoahaz, Ahaziah, (2 Chronicles 22:1,) and Azariah, (2 Chronicles 22:6.)

Verse 17. And his sons also, and his wives — Whom they slew, all except Ahaziah and Athaliah, who possibly were hid in some secret place. So that there was never a son left him, save Jehoahaz — Who is also called Ahaziah, a name of the same signification with Jehoahaz, and, by a small alteration of the letters, Azariah, (2 Chronicles 22:6,) the meaning of which word is akin to the other, all signifying the possession, strength, or help of the Lord. Thus blood was required for blood. Jehoram had slain all his brethren; they slay all his sons but one. And he had not escaped, had he not been of the house of David, which must not be extirpated, like that of Ahab, because a blessing was in it, no less a blessing than that of the Messiah.

17. Brake into it — Made a forcible irruption into the kingdom, and captured many of the chief cities, if not Jerusalem itself. Carried away all the substance that was found in the king’s house, and his sons also, and his wives — This most naturally implies the capture of Jerusalem and the plunder of the royal palace. And yet, it must be confessed, that such a plunder of the capital city is usually described in a more direct and unmistakable way. Compare 2 Chronicles 12:9; 25:24: 2 Kings 14:13. Keil therefore argues that the capital was not captured, and that “the substance that was found in the king’s house” was the treasures belonging to the king’s family, which were stored in various cities, villages, and castles of the kingdom. 1 Chronicles 27:25. He supposes also that the king’s sons and wives were captured, not in Jerusalem, but in the camp of the men of Judah, (2 Chronicles 22:1,) where they were surprised and taken by the enemy. Owing to the brevity of the narrative, the exact sense is somewhat obscure; but we cannot resist the conviction that the king of Judah’s wives would scarcely have been found in the camp, and the whole passage is most easily and naturally explained by supposing that, on this occasion as on a number of others, Jerusalem was broken into, and largely plundered by the invading forces.

Verse 18. The Lord smote him] “And after all these things the WORD Of the Lord smote his bowels,” &c.-Targum.

Verse 18. The Lord smote him in his bowels with an incurable disease — Dr. Mede observes, two impious kings are recorded to have had the same end that this Jehoram had: Antiochus Epiphanes and Agrippa, of whom it was said, eiv ti splagcna toiv ou splagcnizomenoiv, “Of what avail are bowels to those who have no bowels, who show no pity or compassion?” It is true, even good men, and those who are dear to God, may be afflicted with diseases of this kind: but to such they are fatherly chastisements, and, by the support of divine consolation, the soul may have ease and peace, even then when the body is afflicted with pain; which certainly was not the case with Jehoram.

Ver. 18. The Lord smote him—with an incurable disease. Not a dysentery, for that would have killed him in less than two years: but from the eruption of the bowels, scrophulous abscesses seem more likely to have been his complaint.

Verse 19. After the end of two years, his bowels fell out] The Targum seems to intimate that he had a constipation and inflammation in his bowels; and that at last his bowels gushed out.

No burning] “His people made no burning of aromatic woods for him, as they had done for his forefathers.”-Targum. See on 2 Chronicles 16:14.

Verse 19. So he died of sore diseases — These words seem to import that he was afflicted with a complication of diseases, together with his dysentery; all which were very grievous, and a suitable punishment of his horrid wickedness. And his people made no burning for him — Paid him no extraordinary funeral honours.

19. His people made no burning for him — As they did for Asa his grandfather. 2 Chronicles 16:14, note.

V. 20. Desired-This is an emphatical expression, because it is usual with men to desire the deaths of some persons, whom afterward they lament, and heartily wish they were alive again. But for this ungodly and unhappy prince, his people did not only in his life time wish his death, but afterwards did not repent of those desires.

Verse 20. Departed without being desired.] He was hated while he lived, and neglected when he died; visibly cursed of God, and necessarily execrated by the people whom he had lived only to corrupt and oppress. No annalist is mentioned as having taken the pains to write any account of his vile life. This summary mention of him consigns him to the execration of posterity, and holds in the view of every prudent governor, the rock on which he split and wrecked the state.

II CHRONICLES

Verse 20. And departed — Hebrew, went, namely, the way of all the earth, as it is more fully expressed Joshua 23:14. Or, to the land of darkness, Job 10:21, 22. Or, to his long home, Ecclesiastes 12:5. Or, went away, namely, out of this world, as the word Ëlh, halack, used here and Job 14:20; Ecclesiastes 5:15; 6:4, signifies. And there are many such phrases used concerning death, in the Old and New Testaments, which all signify that death is not an annihilation, but only a translation into another place and state. See Genesis 15:15; Philippians 1:23. Without being desired — Hebrew, without desire, which may be referred, 1st, To himself. He had no desire of living longer, nor any pleasure in life, but was heartily weary of it, through his excessive pains. Or rather, it belongs, 2d, To his people, who did not desire that he should live longer, but oft and heartily wished that he had died sooner: which contempt of him they showed both by making no burning for him, as they used to do for good kings, and by denying him burial among the kings. The expression is emphatical: for it is usual with men to desire the death of some persons, whom afterward they lament, and heartily wish they were alive again. But for this ungodly and unhappy prince, his people did not only in his life-time wish his death, but afterward did not repent of those desires.

Ver. 20. They buried him—not in the sepulchres of the kings. The elders had a little power between the demise of one monarch and the accession of another; and they laid this punishment on the deceased Jehoram. A monarchy seems to have been for Israel the best form of government, when the throne was filled with eminent men; and the worst, when the king was a bad man. Happy art thou, oh England, in a mixed monarchy!

20. Departed without being desired — That is, unregretted, unwept, unhonoured. His people were rather glad to be rid of such a king. Not in the sepulchres of the kings — Those tombs, it was thought, would have been dishonoured and defiled by the burial there of one so abandoned and accursed of Jehovah.