In the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel, Jehoshaphat being king of Judah then, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign. He was thirty-two years old when he began to reign. He reigned eight years in Jerusalem. He walked in the way of the kings of Israel, as did Ahab’s house; for he married Ahab’s daughter. He did that which was evil in Yahweh’s sight. However Yahweh would not destroy Judah, for David his servant’s sake, as he promised him to give to him a lamp for his children always.
In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, and made a king over themselves. Then Joram passed over to Zair, and all his chariots with him: and he rose up by night, and struck the Edomites who surrounded him, and the captains of the chariots; and the people fled to their tents. So Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah to this day. Then Libnah revolted at the same time. The rest of the acts of Joram, and all that he did, aren’t they written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? Joram slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in David’s city; and Ahaziah his son reigned in his place.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv16, 18, 20, 22 Read 2 Kings 1:17.
Read 2 Kings 1:17.
He was confirmed in his kingdom after his father’s death.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv16–24 2Ki 8:16 And in the fifth year of Joram…
2Ki 8:16 And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel, Jehoshaphat [being] then king of Judah, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign.
Ver. 16. Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign.] Whilst his father was yet living, for preventing of mischief after his death, which yet could not be.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv16–23 Jehoram was first made king or viceroy by his…
Jehoram was first made king or viceroy by his father divers years before this time, to wit, at his expedition to Ramoth-gilead, as was noted before; which dominion of his ended at his father’s return. But now Jehoshaphat, being not far from his death, and having divers sons, and fearing some competition and dissension among them, makes Jehoram king the second time, as David did Solomon upon the like occasion, 1Ch 29:22, which is the thing here related. But of this See Poole "2Ki 1:17"; See Poole "2Ki 3:1".
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On v16 We have here a brief account of the life…
We have here a brief account of the life and reign of Jehoram (or Joram), one of the worst of the kings of Judah, but the son and successor of Jehoshaphat, one of the best. Note, 1. Parents cannot give grace to their children. Many that have themselves been godly have had the grief and shame of seeing those that came forth out of their bowels wicked and vile. Let not the families that are thus afflicted think it strange. 2. If the children of good parents prove wicked, commonly they are worse than others. The unclean spirit brings in seven others more wicked than himself, Luk 11:26. 3. A nation is sometimes justly punished with the miseries of a bad reign for not improving the blessings and advantages of a good one.
Concerning this Jehoram observe,
Read full note →
I. The general idea here given of his wickedness (Kg2 8:18): He did as the house of Ahab, and worse he could not do. His character is taken from the bad example he followed, for men are according to the company they converse with and the copies they write after. No mistake is more fatal to young people than a mistake in the choice of those whom they would recommend themselves to and take their measures from, and whose good opinion they value themselves by. Jehoram chose the house of Ahab for his pattern rather than his father's house, and this choice was his ruin. We have a particular account of his wickedness (2 Chr. 21), murder, idolatry, persecution, everything that was bad.
II. The occasions of his wickedness. His father was a very good man, and no doubt took care to have him taught the good knowledge of the Lord, but, 1. It is certain he did ill to marry him to the daughter of Ahab; no good could come of an alliance with an idolatrous family, but all mischief with such a daughter of such a mother as Athaliah the daughter of Jezebel. The degeneracy of the old world took rise from the unequal yoking of professors with profane. Those that are ill-matched are already half-ruined. 2. I doubt he did not do well to make him king in his own life-time. It is said here (Kg2 8:16) that he began to reign, Jehoshaphat being then king; hereby he gratified his pride (than which nothing is more pernicious to young people), indulged him in his ambition, in hopes to reform him by humouring him, and so brought a curse upon his family, as Eli did, whose sons made themselves vile and he restrained them not. Jehoshaphat had made this wicked son of his viceroy once when he went with Ahab to Ramoth-Gilead, from which Jehoshaphat's seventeenth year (Kg1 22:51) is made Jehoram's second (Kg2 1:17), but afterwards, in his twenty-second year, he made him partner in his government, and thence Joram's eight years are to be dated, three years before his father's death. It has been hurtful to many young men to come too soon to their estates. Samuel got nothing by making his sons judges.
III. The rebukes of Providence which he was under for his wickedness. 1. The Edomites revolted, who had been under the government of the kings of Judah ever since David's time, about 150 years, Kg2 8:20. He attempted to reduce them, and gave them a defeat (Kg2 8:21), but he could not improve the advantage he had got, so as to recover his dominion over them: Yet Edom revolted (Kg2 8:22), and the Edomites were, after this, bitter enemies to the Jews, as appears by the prophecy of Obadiah and Psa 137:7. Now Isaac's prophecy was fulfilled, that this Esau the elder should serve Jacob the younger; yet, in process of time, he should break that yoke from off his neck, Gen 27:40. 2. Libnah revolted. This was a city in Judah, in the heart of his country, a priests' city; the inhabitants of this city shook off his government because he had forsaken God, and would have compelled them to do so too, Ch2 21:10, Ch2 21:11. In order that they might preserve their religion they set up for a free state. Perhaps other cities did the same. 3. His reign was short. God cut him off in the midst of his days, when he was but forty years old, and had reigned but eight years. Bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days.
IV. The gracious care of Providence for the keeping up of the kingdom of Judah, and the house of David, notwithstanding the apostasies and calamities of Jehoram's reign (Kg2 8:19): Yet the Lord would not destroy Judah. He could easily have done it; he might justly have done it; it would have been no loss to him to have done it; yet he would not do it, for David's sake, not for the sake of any merit of his which could challenge this favour to his family as a debt, but for the sake of a promise made to him that he should always have a lamp (that is, a succession of kings from one generation to another, by which his name should be kept bright and illustrious, as a lamp is kept burning by a constant fresh supply of oil), that his family should never be extinct till it terminated in the Messiah, that Son of David on whom was to be hung all the glory of his Father's house and in whose everlasting kingdom that promise to David is fulfilled (Psa 132:17), I have ordained a lamp for my anointed.
V. The conclusion of this impious and inglorious reign, Kg2 8:23, Kg2 8:24. Nothing peculiar is here said of him; but we are told (Ch2 21:19, Ch2 21:20) that he died of sore diseases and died without being desired.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv16–24 And in the fifth year of Joram the son…
And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel,.... Who began his reign in the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat, Kg2 3:1.
Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah; as he continued to be two years more; for this must be in the twenty third year of his reign, and he reigned twenty five years, Kg1 22:42.
Read full note →
Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign; according to Dr. Lightfoot (h), there were three beginnings of his reign; "first", when his father went with Ahab to Ramothgilead, when be was left viceroy, and afterwards his father reassumed the kingdom; the "second" time was, when Jehoshaphat went with the kings of Israel and Edom against Moab; and this is the time here respected, which was in the fifth of Joram king of Israel; and the "third" time was, at the death of his father; but knew his father was living.
(h) Works, vol. 1. p. 84.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv16, 18, 19 Jehoram - Jehoram was first made king or vice-roy,…
Jehoram - Jehoram was first made king or vice-roy, by his father divers years before this time, at his expedition to Ramoth- Gilead, which dominion of his, ended at his father's return. But now Jehoshaphat, being not far from his death, and having divers sons and fearing some competition among them, makes Jehoram king the second time, as David did Solomon upon the like occasion.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23 Verse 16. In the fifth year of Joram] This…
Verse 16. In the fifth year of Joram] This verse, as it stands in the present Hebrew text, may be thus read: "And in the fifth year of Joram son of Ahab king of Israel, [and of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah,] reigned Jehoram son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah." The three Hebrew words, ויהושפט מלך יהודה, and of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, greatly disturb the chronology in this place. It is certain that Jehoshaphat reigned twenty-five years, and that Jehoram his son reigned but eight; 1Kg 22:42; 2Kg 8:17; 2Ch 20:31; 2Ch 21:5. So that he could not have reigned during his father's life without being king twenty years, and eight years! These words are wanting in three of Kennicott's and De Rossi's MSS. in the Complutensian and Aldine editions of the Septuagint, in the Peshito Syriac, in the Parisian Heptapler Syriac, the Arabic, and in many copies of the Vulgate, collated by Dr. Kennicott and De Rossi, both printed and manuscript; to which may be added two MSS. in my own library, one of the fourteenth, the other of the eleventh century, and in what I judge to be the Editio Princeps of the Vulgate. And it is worthy of remark that in this latter work, after the fifteenth verse, ending with Quo mortuo regnavit Azahel pro eo, the following words are in a smaller character, Anno quinto Joram filii Achab regis Israhel, regnavit Joram filius Josaphat rex Juda. Triginta, c. We have already seen that it is supposed that Jehoshaphat associated his son with him in the kingdom and that the fifth year in this place only regards Joram king of Israel, and not Jehoshaphat king of Judah. 2Kg 1:17.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv16, 18, 19, 20, 21 2Ki 8:16. Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat began to…
2Ki 8:16. Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat began to reign — Jehoram was first made king or viceroy by his father, divers years before this time, at his expedition to Ramoth-gilead, which dominion of his ended at his father’s return. But now Jehoshaphat, being not far from his death, and having divers sons, and fearing some competition among them, makes Jehoram king the second time, as David did Solomon upon the like occasion. See note on chap. 2Ki 1:17.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv16, 20, 21, 22, 24 The passage is parenthetic, resuming the history of the…
The passage is parenthetic, resuming the history of the kingdom of Judah from 1Ki 22:50.
2Ki 8:16
Read full note →
The opening words are - “In the fifth year of Joram, son of Ahab, king of Israel, and of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah;” but they contradict all the other chronological notices of Jehoshaphat 1Ki 22:42, 1Ki 22:51; 2Ki 3:1; 2Ch 20:31, which give him a reign of at least twenty-three years. Hence, some have supposed that the words “Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah,” are accidentally repeated. Those, however, who regard them and 2Ki 1:17 as sound, suppose that Jehoshaphat gave his son the royal title in his 16th year, while he advanced him to a real association in the empire seven years later, in his 23rd year. Two years afterward, Jehoshatphat died, and Jehoram became sole king.
2Ki 8:17
The “eight years” are counted from his association in the kingdom. They terminate in the twelfth year of Johoram of Israel.
2Ki 8:18
Jehoshaphat’s alliance, political and social, with Ahab and Ahab’s family had not been allowed to affect the purity of his faith. Jehoram his son, influenced by his wife, Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab, “walked in the way of the kings of Israel;” he allowed, i. e., the introduction of the Baal-worship into Judaea.
Among the worst of Jehoram’s evil doings must be reckoned the cruel murder of his six brothers 2Ch 21:4, whom he killed to obtain their wealth.
2Ki 8:19
The natural consequence of Jehoram’s apostasy would have been the destruction of his house, and the transfer of the throne of Judah to another family. Compare the punishments of Jeroboam 1Ki 14:10, Baasha 1Ki 16:2-4, and Ahab 1Ki 21:20-22. But the promises to David (marginal references) prevented this removal of the dynasty; and so Jehoram was punished in other ways 2Ki 8:22; 2Ch 21:12-19.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24 Fifth. Houbigant would read "third," p. 100. See chap.…
Fifth. Houbigant would read "third," p. 100. See chap. i. 17. (Haydock) --- Josaphat. That is, Josaphat being yet alive, who some time before his death made his son Joram king; as David had done before by his son Solomon. (Challoner) --- The words are omitted in some copies of the Septuagint (Du Hamel) and are perhaps inserted from the end of the verse. (Haydock) --- Protestants, "Jehosaphat being then king," in his 22d year. (Haydock) --- Joram had been appointed viceroy in the sixteenth year of his father’s reign, and was now raised to sit on the throne with him. Thus the Scripture may be reconciled. (Calmet)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v16 the monarchy under jehoram and ahaziah in judah, and…
FIFTH SECTION
the monarchy under jehoram and ahaziah in judah, and the elevation of jehu to the throne in israel.
Read full note →
2Ki_8:16 to 2Ki_9:37
A.—The reigns of Jehoram and Ahaziah in Judah.
Chap 2Ki_8:16-29 (2Ch_21:2-20).
16And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel [(]4 Jehoshaphat being then [had been] king of Judah [)], [or expunge the sentence in parenthesis] Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign. 17Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned eight years5 in Jerusalem. 18And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, as did the house of Ahab; for the daughter of Ahab6 was his wife: and he did evil in the sight of the Lord. 19Yet the Lord would not destroy Judah7 for David his servant’s sake, as he [had] promised him to give him always [omit always] a light [forever], and to [referring to] his children.
20In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, and made a king over themselves. 21So Joram went over to Zair, and all the chariots with him: and he rose by night, and smote the Edomites which compassed him about,8 and [smote]9 the captains of the chariots [i.e., of the Edomites]: and the people [of 22Israel] fled into their tents. Yet [So] Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah unto this day. Then Libnah revolted at the same time. 23And the rest of the acts of Joram, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah? 24And Joram slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David: and Ahaziah his son reigned in his stead.
25In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign. 26Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign: and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel. 27And he walked in the way of the house of Ahab, and did evil in the sight of the Lord, as did the house of Ahab: for he was the son-in-law of [connected by marriage with]10 the house of Ahab.
28And he went with Joram the son of Ahab [And Joram himself11 went] to the war against Hazael king of Syria in Ramothgilead; and the Syrians12 wounded Joram. 29And king Joram went back to be healed in Jezreel of the wounds which the Syrians had given him13 at Ramah, when he fought against Hazael king of Syria. And Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah went down to see Joram the son of Ahab in Jezreel, because he was sick.
the chronology of the period from ahab to jehu.
Polus says of the chronological statement with which this passage commences: Occurrit hic nodus impeditus, because it does not accord with previous data, especially with 2Ki_1:17, and has, therefore, caused the expositors great trouble. The question whether any reconciliation at all is possible, and, if so, how it is to be brought about, can only be answered after comparing all the data with reference to the reigns of the several kings of both realms between Ahab and Jehu. For, not only does a new period in the history of the monarchy begin with Jehu’s reign, but also it gives a fixed point from which to calculate the chronology of the preceding period, seeing that Jehoram of Israel and Ahaziah of Judah were both slain by him, perhaps upon, the same day (2Ki_9:21-27), and so there was a change of occupant on both thrones at the same time. This year, which almost all modern expositors agree in fixing, with a unanimity which is not usual with them, is the year 884 B.C. [This unanimity is not apparent. Rösch (Art. “Zeitrechnung,” in Herz. Encyc.) gives a table of twelve authorities. They fix this date as follows: Petavius, 884; Ussher, 2Kings 884: Des Vignoles, 876; Bengel, 886; Thiele, 888; Winer, 884; Ewald, 883; Thenius, 884; Keil, 883; Seyffarth, 855; Bunsen, 873. We may add, Rawlinson, 884; Lenormant, 886; Lepsius (on the ground of the Egyptian chronology) 861. No one of them makes this the starting point for introducing the dates of the Christian era into the Jewish chronology, and it is clear that there is no more certain means of establishing the date of Jehu’s accession in terms of the Christian era, than that of any other event. This date being thus arbitrarily fixed by the consensus of chronologers who have reached it by starting from some other date which they were able to fix by some independent means, all the other dates in Bähr’s chronology must suffer from the uncertainty which attaches to this. It is not an independent and scientific method of procedure. For the true point of connection between the Jewish chronology and the Christian era, see the appendix to this volume. The dates adopted by Bähr are also there collected into a table for convenience of reference.—W. G. S.] From this date backwards, the dates of the other reigns must therefore be fixed according to the data given in the text. As there are two kings who have the same name, יוֹרָם or יְהוֹרָם (in 2Ki_1:17 and 2Ch_22:6, both are called יְהוֹרָם, in 2Ki_9:15; 2Ki_9:17; 2Ki_9:21, יוֹרָם is the name of the king of Israel; in 2Ki_8:16; 2Ki_8:29, the king of Israel is called יוֹרָם, and the king of Judah יְהוֹרָם, while in 2Ki_8:21; 2Ki_8:23-24, the king of Judah is called יוֹרָם), we will call the king of Israel, in what follows, Joram, and the king of Judah, Jehoram, simply in order to avoid ambiguity.
We have to bear in mind, first of all, in counting the years of the reigns, the peculiar method of reckoning of the Hebrews. According to a rule which is given several times in the Talmud, and which was adopted also by Josephus in his writings, a year in the reign of a king is reckoned from Nisan to Nisan, in such a way that a single day before or after [the first of] this month is counted as a year (see Keil on 1 Kings 12. s. 139 sq., where the passages from the Talmud are quoted). [The note is as follows: “ ‘The only method of reckoning the year of the kings is from Nisan.’ Further on, after quoting certain passages in proof, it is added: ‘Rabbi Chasda said: “They give this rule only in regard to the kings of Israel.” ’ Nisan was the beginning of the year for the kings, and a single day in the year (i.e., after the first day of Nisan) is counted as a year. ‘One day on the end of the year is counted as a year.’ ” The citations are from the tract on the “Beginning of the Year” (ראשׁ השׁנה) in the Guemara of Babylon, 100:1 fol. iii., p. 1, ed. Amstel.] It cannot be doubted that this method of reckoning is the one employed in the books before us, for we saw above (1Ki_15:9; 1Ki_15:25) that the reign could not have comprised full years to the number stated. The same is also clear from a comparison of 1Ki_22:51, and 2Ki_3:1, and other examples will follow. Such a method of reckoning, which counted portions of a year as whole years in estimating the duration of a reign, necessarily produced inaccuracies and uncertainties, so that the difference of a year in different chronological data cannot present any difficulty, much less throw doubt upon the entire chronology of the period or overthrow it. If now we reckon back from the established date, 884 B.C., the reigns of the separate kings, the following results are obtained:
(a) For the kings of Judah:—Ahaziah, who died in 884, reigned only one year (2Ki_8:26), and, in fact, as is generally admitted, not a full twelvemonth. He therefore came to the throne in 884 or 885. His predecessor, Jehoram, reigned eight years (2Ki_8:17), down to 885, so that his accession fell in 891 or 892. Jehoshaphat, his father, reigned twenty-five years (1Ki_22:42), that is, from 916 or 917 on. As he came to the throne in the fourth year of Ahab, the accession of the latter falls in 919 or 920.
(b) For the kings of Israel.—Joram, who died in 884, had reigned for twelve years (2Ki_3:1). He came to the throne, therefore, in 895 or 896. His predecessor, Ahaziah, reigned for two years (1Ki_22:51 and 2Ki_3:1), but, as is admitted, not two full years. Hence he became king in 897 or 898. Ahab, his father, reigned for twentytwo years (1Ki_16:29); came to the throne, therefore, between 919 and 920, which agrees with the reckoning above.
Again, if we reckon the corresponding years of the reigns in the two kingdoms, we arrive at the following calculation: (a) Ahaziah of Judah became king in the twelfth year of Joram of Israel (2Ki_8:26), and, as the latter was slain in the same year as the former (884), the one year of the former (2Ki_8:26), cannot have been a full year, (b) Jehoram of Judah became king in the fifth year of Joram of Israel (2Ki_8:16), and, as the latter’s accession falls in 895 or 896 (see above), his fifth year coincides with 891 or 892, the date above established for the accession of Jehoram. (c) Ahaziah of Israel became king in the seventeenth (1Ki_22:51), and his successor, Joram, in the eighteenth (2Ki_3:1) year of Jehoshaphat, whence it is clear that Ahaziah, as was above remarked, did not reign for two whole years (1Ki_22:51). The seventeenth of Jehoshaphat falls, reckoning from his accession in 916, in 899, and his eighteenth in 898, whereas, according to the above calculation, Ahaziah came to the throne between 897 and 898, and Joram between 897 and 896. This insignificant discrepancy is evidently due to the Hebrew method of reckoning, for under that system it might well be that the two years of Ahaziah, although not complete, might embrace parts of 898, 897, and 896, and still Ahaziah might follow in the seventeenth and Joram in the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat. At any rate, the historical details, which are of far greater importance, are not touched by these slight chronological differences, far less are they in contradiction with them. Finally, if we add the reigns of the three kings of Judah, viz., Jehoshaphat twenty-five, Jehoram eight, and Ahaziah one, the sum is thirty-four years. As these years, however, were not all full, there cannot be more than thirty-two in all. The reigns of the three kings of Israel, Ahab twenty-two, Ahaziah two, Joram twelve, amount to thirty-six years, which were not all complete, so that they cannot give in all over thirty-five years. The entire period from Ahab to Jehu contains between thirty-five and thirty-six years, and, as Jehoshaphat came to the throne in the fourth year of Ahab, the sums agree.
While the eleven data given in six passages thus agree essentially, one statement, 2Ki_1:17, according to which Joram of Israel became king in the second year of Jehoram of Judah, differs decidedly. If it is authentic, Jehoshaphat cannot have reigned twenty-five years, but only seventeen, and there was no eighteenth year of his, in which the accession of Joram of Israel is declared to have fallen (2Ki_3:1). Moreover, Jehoshaphat’s successor, Jehoram of Judah, did not then reign eight (2Ki_8:17), but fourteen years, and he came to the throne, not in the fifth (2Ki_8:16) year of Joram of Israel, but a year before him. This brings great disturbance, not only into the chronology, but also into the history of the entire period. In order to do away with this glaring discrepancy, the founder of biblical chronology, Ussher, following the rabbinical book called Seder Olam, adopted the explanation, in his Annal. Vet. et Nov. Testam., 1650, that Jehoram reigned for six or seven years with his father Jehoshaphat. This theory of a joint reign is the most generally accepted explanation. Keil defends it very vigorously, and asserts that “Jehoshaphat, when he marched out with Ahab to war against Syria in Ramoth Gilead (1Ki_22:3 sq.), appointed his son regent, and committed to him the government of the kingdom. The statement in 2Ki_1:17, that Joram of Israel became king in the second year of Jehoram of Judah, dates from this joint government.… But, in the fifth year of this joint administration, Jehoshaphat gave up the government entirely to him (Jehoram). From this time, i.e., from the twenty-third year of Jehoshaphat, we have to reckon the eight years of the reign of Jehoram of Judah, so that he reigned alone, after his father’s death, only six years.” This reconciliation is artificial and forced; but the following considerations tell especially against it:
(a) The biblical text says nothing anywhere about the assumed fact that Jehoshaphat raised his son to share his throne six or seven years before he died, and that he then, in the fifth year of this divided government, retired entirely, although, if any king had done such a thing, it must have had deep influence on the history of the monarchy. Keil himself is forced to admit that “we do not know the reasons which impelled Jehoshaphat to abdicate in favor of his son two years before his death.” It never can be proper to supplement the history on the basis of an isolated chronological statement. In 2Ch_21:5; 2Ch_21:20, the reign of Jehoram dates from the death of his predecessor, just as in the case of all the other kings, and its duration is stated as eight years, no account being taken of any two years during which he is thought to have reigned while his father was yet alive, or of five years that he reigned jointly with him. It is said there, in 2Ki_8:3, that Jehoshaphat “gave” to his sons gold and fortified cities, but to his eldest son, Jehoram, the kingdom; yet that clearly refers to the disposition he made for the time after his death, and not to any distribution which he accomplished two, or, in fact, seven, years before his death.
(b) Appeal is made, in support of this assumed joint government, to the obscure words in 2Ki_8:16 : וִיהוֹשׁפָטָ מֶלֶךְ יְהוּדָה, which Clericus supplements by עוּד חי, adhuc erat in vivis, aut simile quidpiam. Keil, with many of the old commentators, translates: “While Jehoshaphat was (still) king of Judah,” i.e., during the lifetime of Jehoshaphat. But those words are wanting in the Syrian and Arabic versions, in some MSS., and in the Complutensian Septuagint. Luther and De Wette leave them untranslated. Houbigant, Kennicott, Dathe, Schulz, Maurer, and Thenius want to remove them from the text. Thenius says that they are “evidently due to an error of the copyist, who has repeated them here from the end of the verse,” and that “they were then provided with the conjunction, in order to give them a connection.” We cannot, therefore, call their omission from the text “a piece of critical violence,” as Keil does. If, however, it is desired to retain them, because they are in the massoretic text, the Chaldee version, the Vulgate, and the Vatican Sept., still they cannot be translated in the manner proposed. The word “still,” which is here so important, is wanting in the text, and cannot be inserted without further deliberation. Kimchi and Ewald, with the rabbinical Sedar Olam, supply מֵת after יְהוּדָה, i.e., “and Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, was dead.” This, however, would be constructing a sentence which states what is true to be sure, but “the super-fluousness of which, and the unprecedentedness also, in the midst of the current formula in which it occurs, it is not necessary to point out” (Thenius). If the words are to stand, the only possible recourse is to supply היה, which so often is wanting, in the sense of the pluperfect. The sentence would then have to be understood as a parenthesis, intended to refer back again to the last king of Judah, because, in this verse, the history of the kingdom, which has been interrupted by the narrative of other incidents from 1Ki_22:50 up to this point, is now to be resumed. “Jehoshaphat had been king of Judah.” But in what manner soever the words may be translated, they can in no case obscure the clear and definite declaration that Jehoram became king in the fifth year of Joram of Israel, and that he reigned eight years. What is obscure can never explain what is clear, but only, vice versa, that which is clear can explain what is obscure.
(c) When Joram of Israel undertook the war against Moab (2Ki_3:4 sq.), (at the earliest in the first year of his reign), he called upon “Jehoshaphat king of Judah” to go with him, and when the three kings of Judah, Israel, and Edom, turned, in their distress, to Elisha, he would have nothing to do with Joram, but referred him to the prophets of Ahab and Jezebel, and finally gave ear to him only for the sake of “Jehoshaphat king of Judah,” who was faithful to Jehovah (2Ki_8:14). But if Jehoram had then been king of Judah according to 2Ki_1:17, or even joint ruler, Jehoshaphat could not have been spoken of simply as ruling king of Judah.
(d) Jehoshaphat held firmly to the worship of Jehovah, and was a decided opponent of all worship of Baal or Astarte. He was, in fact, one of the most pious of the kings of Judah (1Ki_22:43; 2Ch_17:3-6; 2Ch_19:3; 2Ch_20:32); his son Jehoram, on the contrary, did what was evil in the sight of God, and was devoted to the worship of Baal, which Ahab’s family had introduced (2Ki_8:18; 2Ch_21:6; 2Ch_21:11 sq.). It is impossible, therefore, that they should have ruled together. If Jehoshaphat had allowed his fellow-ruler to introduce and foster the worship of Baal, he would have made himself a participant in the same guilt, and would not have received the praise of changeless fidelity to Jehovah.
(e) Joint governments are foreign to Oriental, and, above all, to Israelitish antiquity. It is true that it is stated in the history of king Azariah (Uzziah) that he was a leper, and, therefore, lived in a separate house, and that his son Jotham “was over the house, judging the people of the land” (2Ki_15:5). The “house” here meant is the royal palace (cf. 1Ki_4:6; 1Ki_18:3), and it is not intended to assert that he became king during the lifetime of the rightful king, as is assumed with regard to Jehoram. Jotham did not become king until Uzziah’s death, and then he ruled for sixteen years (2Ki_15:7; 2Ki_15:33). The years in which he acted as regent for his sick father are not reckoned in these, as they should be, if it is to be a precedent for including in the eight years of Jehoram certain years during which he was joint-ruler with his father. There is no statement anywhere with regard to Jehoshaphat that he was sick or otherwise incapacitated for governing. This energetic ruler was far from needing an assistant, certainly not such a weak one as Jehoram. The latter was sick for two years before his death; but even he had no joint regent. His son Ahaziah did not come to the throne until after his death.
From all this we see plainly that all attempts to bring 2Ki_1:17 into agreement with the other chronological data, which are essentially in accord among themselves, are vain. We are therefore forced to the conclusion that the text of this verse, as it lies before us, is not in its original form. Thenius considers it corrupt, and desires to read for: “In the second year of Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat,” “in the twenty-second year of Jehoshaphat.” But this does not agree with 2Ki_3:1, where it is said that Joram of Israel came to the throne in the eighteenth, not twenty-second, of Jehoshaphat, nor with 1Ki_22:51, where “in the seventeenth year” must be changed, as Thenius proposes, to “in the twenty-first year,” a change which is inadmissible. On the other hand, it must be admitted that the form of statement varies considerably from the standing formula. In each case where the death of a king is recorded, there follows immediately the formula: such a one became king in his stead, without any further details in regard to the successor than simply his name. Then when the history of the following reign commences, often after the insertion of other incidents and reflections of greater or less length, it is stated in what year of the reign of the king of the other nation he began to reign, of what age he was, and how many years he ruled (cf. 1Ki_14:20-31; 1Ki_15:8-24; 1Ki_16:28; 1Ki_22:40-51; 2Ki_8:24; 2Ki_10:35; 2Ki_12:21; 2Ki_13:9; 2Ki_14:16-29; 2Ki_15:7; 2Ki_15:22; 2Ki_15:25; 2Ki_15:30; 2Ki_15:38; 2Ki_16:20; 2Ki_20:21; 2Ki_21:18; 2Ki_21:26; 2Ki_23:30; 2Ki_24:6). Now, in 2Ki_1:17, after the words “and he died according to the word of the prophet Elijah,” follows the ordinary formula, “and Joram became king in his stead;” but then there is added, what is not added in a single other passage: “In the second year of Jehoram, son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah,” but without the further details, which are usually given in that connection, in regard to the length of the reign, &c. These details are not added until we come to the commencement of the history of his reign, 2Ki_3:1; there, however, they vary very much from this short statement, as does also 2Ki_8:16. Now since, of course, the two complete and precise statements are to be preferred to the incomplete one, the unusual chronological datum in 2Ki_1:17 must be regarded as a later and incorrect addition, all the more as it stands in contradiction with all the other chronological data of the period in question. It appears distinctly as an addition in the Sept., where it stands at the end of the verse, and is not incorporated into it. It is remarkable that scholars have preferred to change the other complete and consistent data, in order to force them into agreement with this, rather than to give up this one statement which is totally unsupported, and which introduces confusion not only into the chronology, but also into the history.
Finally, we have to notice another calculation of the chronology of this period which Wolff has attempted (Studien und Kritiken, 1858, 2 Kings 4 : s. 625–688). He rejects in general very decidedly any assumption of joint sovereignty, and especially the joint rule of Jehoram and Jehoshaphat; but he inconsistently sets up such an assumption when he says (s. 643): “As his (Ahaziah of Israel’s) health was so far lost that he could no longer administer the government, he took his brother Joram on the throne with himself, as co-regent, at about the end of the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat. He remained king until the twenty-second year of Jehoshaphat, and then gave up the government entirely in favor of his brother, but did not die until the second year of Jehoram.” Ignoring the above-mentioned Jewish mode of reckoning, and starting from the purely arbitrary and unfounded assumption that only the dates given for the reigns of the kings of Judah are correct and reliable, Wolff changes the twenty-two years of Ahab to twenty, the two years of Ahaziah of Israel to four and a half, makes Joram succeed to the throne in the twenty-second instead of the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat, Jehoram in the third and not in the fifth year of Joram, and, finally, Ahaziah of Judah in the eleventh and not in the twelfth year of Joram. No one else has hitherto conceived the idea of undertaking so many changes in the text; they are all as violent as they are unnecessary, and, therefore, need no refutation, although their necessity is confidently asserted. The joint rule of Ahaziah and Joram is, if possible, still more contrary to the text than that of Jehoshaphat and Jehoram.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
2Ki_8:19. Yet the Lord would not destroy Judah, &c. The connection between 2Ki_8:19-20 is this: Although for David’s sake Judah did not, as a consequence of its apostasy, lose its dynasty and its existence as a nation, yet it had to pay dearly for its sin; for the Edomites, who had been subject to Judah for one hundred and fifty years, endeavored, during Jehoram’s reign, to regain their independence. Josephus says that they had killed the governor, whom Jehoshaphat had appointed (1Ki_22:47), and had chosen a king for themselves. In order to re-subjugate them Jehoram marched out with an army צָעִירָה, unquestionably the name of a place, but not equivalent to Zoar (Hitzig and Ewald), for this lay in Moab (Jer_48:34), not in Edom. The place cannot be more definitely located. The chronicler has instead עִס־שָׂרָיו, i.e., “with his captains,” and does not mention any place, probably because he did not know any place by the name here given. Thenius proposes to read שְׂעִירָה, which is favored by the Vulg., Seira, so that we should have to understand it as referring to the well-known mountainous region of Edom.
2Ki_8:21. And he rose by night, &c. “It is clear that we have in this verse the record of an unsuccessful attempt of Jehoram to re-subjugate Edom. We must, therefore, form our conceptions of the details according to this character of the whole” (Thenius). It is an utter mistake to understand the occurrence as the Calwer Bibel, on 2Ch_21:7 sq., explains it: “The cowardly, faithless king plotted and executed a massacre by night of the Edomites who surrounded him, in which his own captains also fell; and since, according to 2Ki_8:21, his own people upon this deserted him, he could not accomplish anything further against the Edomites, and they remained independent.” The passage rather states simply that the army of Judah, as it approached Edom, was surrounded by the Edomites, but broke through them by night, and fled homewards (1Ki_8:66), so that it barely escaped an utter defeat. From this time on the dominion of Judah over Edom was at an end (Psa_137:7).
2Ki_8:22. Unto this day, i.e., until the time of composition of the original document from which this is taken (see above, on 1Ki_8:8). The Edomites were, indeed, re-subjugated for a short time (2Ki_14:7; 2Ki_14:22), but never again permanently.—Then Libnah revolted at the same time. This city lay in the plain of Judah, not far from the frontier of Philistia. It was at one time an ancient royal residence of the Canaanites, and afterwards one of the priests’ cities [cities of refuge] of the Israelites (Jos_15:42; Jos_12:15; Jos_21:13), though it can hardly have retained the latter character until the time of Jehoram. We may suppose that it was instigated to revolt by the Philistines, and that it was assisted by them. Among the further details mentioned by the chronicler, it is stated that the Philistines attacked Jehoram, and inflicted upon him a severe defeat (2Ch_21:16 sq.). [It is also stated there that the allied Philistines and Arabians took Jerusalem and plundered. the temple, an event to which Hitzig refers the passage Joel 4:4–6. Thenius approves this, but thinks that 2Ch_21:17 is inconsistent with 2Ki_10:3, which assigns a different fate to Ahaziah’s kindred.—W. G. S.]
2Ki_8:25. Did Ahaziah begin to reign. The chronicler states Ahaziah’s age at his accession as forty-two (II., 2Ki_22:2). This is the result of a mistake of מ for כ, in the numerals (Keil, Winer, Thenius), as we must conclude from the age assigned to Jehoram in 2Ki_8:17. Jehoram was, thirty-two when he ascended the throne; he reigned eight years; died, therefore, at forty. Ahaziah was twenty-two at his accession; he was, therefore, born when his father was eighteen. There is nothing astonishing in this, for, according to the Talmud, young men might marry after their thirteenth year, and eighteen was the usual age of marriage (Winer, R.-W.-B., i. s. 297). [It should be noticed that this bears upon 2Ch_21:17, where it is said that Ahaziah was the youngest of the sons of Jehoram.—W. G. S.]—Athaliah is here (2Ki_8:26) called the daughter of Omri, although she was in fact his granddaughter, because he was the founder and father of the royal house to which she belonged, and which brought so much misfortune upon Israel and Judah. The chronicler adds (II., 2Ki_22:3), that she was “his [Ahaziah’s] counsellor to do wickedly.”
2Ki_8:28. And he went with Joram, &c. [Joram himself went; see the amended translation and Textual and Grammatical, note 7. If אֶת is taken as the prep., then we have to assume that, after Joram was wounded, Ahaziah also left the seat of war and went to Jerusalem, and then that he went down from there again to Jezreel to visit Joram; for that is the simple and natural meaning of the last clause of 2Ki_8:29. The awkwardness of this acceptation is evident. It is better to take אֶת as the so-called “accusative sign,” as explained in the note referred to.—W. G. S.] On Ramoth-Gilead, see note on 1Ki_4:13. This strongly fortified city was, in the time of Ahab, in the hands of the Syrians, and he did not succeed in taking it away from them. He was wounded in the attempt so that he died (1 Kings 22). From 2Ki_9:2; 2Ki_14:15, we see that, at the time when Joram was at war with Hazael, it was again in the possession of the Israelites. It is not stated when or how, since the death of Ahab, it came into their hands. According to 2Ki_9:14, Joram was שֹׁמֵר בְּרָמֹת, i.e., he was defending the city against the attacks of Hazael, who was thirsting for conquest, and who undoubtedly commenced the war. It was, therefore, in defending, and not in attacking the city, that Jehoram was smitten, that is, severely wounded. [See note on 2Ki_9:1.] He ordered that he should be taken to Jezreel (see note on 1Ki_18:45), and not to Samaria, although the latter was much nearer, probably because the court was at Jezreel. [Thenius’ suggestion that he could make this journey over a smooth road, while the way to Samaria lay over mountains, is also good.—W. G. S.] But the army remained under command of the generals in and before Ramoth. The king’s wound does not seem to have healed for some time. Ewald maintains that Ahaziah did not go to the war with Joram, but went to visit him from Jerusalem at a later time, when he was being healed of his wound. He says, therefore, that the particle אֶת in 2Ki_8:28 is to be struck out. There is, however, no ground for this (see Thenius on the verse), for יָרַד, in 2Ki_8:29, does not prove that he went from Jerusalem to Jezreel, since the latter lay to the north of Ramoth as well as of Jerusalem. It may well be that he visited Joram from Ramoth, whither he had gone with him to the war, especially as it was not so far from there as from Jerusalem. [אֶת is not the prep. but the case-sign with the nominative; יוֹרָם is therefore the subject of וילךְ, and not Ahaziah, as it is commonly understood (see Text. and Gramm.). Ahaziah did not go to Ramoth, but went down from Jerusalem to Jezreel.—W. G. S.]
HISTORICAL AND ETHICAL
1. The history of the reign of the two kings of Judah, which forms a consistent whole, does not interrupt the flow of the narrative, as might at first appear, but is inserted here for good and imperative reasons. The kingdom of Judah had kept itself free from the worship of the calf and of Baal, which prevailed in the kingdom of Israel, until the death of Jehoshaphat. That worship was, however, transplanted to Judah by the marriage of Jehoram, the son and successor of Jehoshaphat, with Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, for Athaliah controlled her husband Jehoram, and his son, Ahaziah, as we see from 2Ki_8:18; 2Ki_8:27, and from 2Ch_21:6; 2Ch_22:3, just as Jezebel, the fanatical idolatress, controlled Ahab. Though the guilt of the house of Ahab, which persisted in its evil courses in spite of all the testimonies of the divine grace, and in spite of all the exhortations and threats of the prophets Elijah and Elisha, was already great enough, it became still greater and heavier by the extension of the apostasy to Judah. Thus the measure became full, and the judgment which the prophet Elijah had predicted, the utter destruction of the dynasty, was brought about. It was inaugurated by Hazael, and consummated by Jehu. Joram of Israel was defending Ramoth against the former when he was wounded; he was brought to Jezreel where Jezebel was. Ahaziah of Judah came thither to visit him (by an especial dispensation of Providence, as 2Ch_22:7 expressly states), and so it came to pass that the three chief representatives of the house of Ahab were present at one and the same place. At this time now, Jehu was elevated to the throne; he hastened to Jezreel and killed all three of them, Joram, Ahaziah, and Jezebel. It was necessary, therefore, that the history of Jehoram and Ahaziah of Judah should precede chap. 9, which tells about the elevation of Jehu. This also explains the brevity of this record compared with the more detailed one in Chronicles. The author restricts himself to those details which give the causes and the explanation of the judgment which fell upon Joram and Ahaziah by the hand of Jehu.14
2. Jehoram and Ahaziah were the first kings of Judah under whom idolatry was not only tolerated, but formally introduced (2Ch_21:11). The book of Chronicles contains no further information than is here given in regard to Ahaziah, who did not reign for even one full year. What is there stated in regard to Jehoram shows him to us as one of the wickedest and most depraved kings that ever reigned in Judah, under whom the nation not only sank religiously, but also politically came near to ruin. He drove it by force to idolatry (וַיַּדַּח); he murdered his six brothers, and other princes besides; the Edomites established their independence of his authority; the Philistines and Arabians defeated him, and carried off all his treasures, his wives, and his children; finally, a horrible disease attacked him, which lasted two years, when he at length died. Schlier (Die Könige in Israel, s. 121 sq.) asserts in regard to him: “It was oppressive to him to be only a joint ruler; he determined to cast off the restraints of a correcting and warning father. So he sought to accomplish this by his marriage. He murdered his six brothers, who were better than himself, and also several chiefs who stood by them, and he held his royal father in captivity. It is true that he scrupled to stain his hand with the blood of his father, and that he left him still the title of king; but he held the government, from this time on, entirely in his own hands.” Of all these facts, with the exception of the murder of his brothers and the other prominent men, there is not a word in the biblical text. They are all pure fictions, to the invention of which the author is led by assuming as an historical certainty that Jehoshaphat and Jehoram ruled together for seven years. After making this assumption he feels justified in going on to explain the circumstances which produced this state of things, and especially why, after five years of this arrangement, Jehoshaphat should have retired entirely from the government for the last two years of his life. [It is a very good, instance of the method of commenting on the Scriptures which consists in inventing possible combinations in order to reconcile apparently inconsistent statements, and it shows what comes of it. It is often undertaken in a false idea of reverence for the Scriptures, and in a mistaken desire to save their authority. It is clear that a high and pure conception of, and loyalty to, historical truth, must be abandoned before any one can adopt this method of interpretation. The statements of the text are one thing, and the inventions of the commentator are another. Any one who undertakes this work must determine beforehand to keep the distinction between the two clearly and firmly before himself in his work, and the only sound method of interpretation is to cling to the text and leave inventions aside. The notion of a joint government is a pure fiction, and there is no reason why any one who adopts it should not go farther, and invent fictitious causes, occasions, and other details to account for it.—W. G. S.] The asserted facts fall to the ground with the false assumption on which they are built. The facts which are given in the documents are more than sufficient in themselves to establish the depravity of Jehoram. His wickedness is explained, since his father was one of the best and most pious kings of Israel, by the influence of his wife, and by his connection with the house of Ahab. In his history and that of Ahaziah we have a terrible example of the way in which one bad woman (Jezebel) can radically corrupt entire dynasties and entire states, and of the curse which rests upon matrimonial connections which are only formed in order to attain political objects (see above, 1 Kings 22. Hist. § 1).
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
2Ki_8:16-29. Jehoram and his son Ahaziah: (a) The way in which both walked (18–27); (b) how they came to choose this way (18–27); (c) whither they were brought by it (2Ki_8:20-22; 2Ki_8:28-29; see also Histor. § 2).—The Spirit of the House of Ahab: (a) Perversion of all divine and human ordinances. Wicked and corrupt women set the tone, and ruled over their weak husbands; (b) immorality, licentiousness, murder, and tyranny (2Ch_21:4; 2Ch_21:6; 2Ch_21:11); (c) contempt, on the one hand, for the richness of God’s long-suffering and goodness, and, on the other, for the warnings of God’s judgments and chastisements. What a different spirit animated the household of a Cornelius (Act_10:2), of a Crispus (Act_18:8), of the jailer at Philippi (Act_16:34)! Cf. Pro_14:11; Pro_12:7; Psa_25:2-3.—The Importance of Family Relationships: (a) The great influence which they exert. (They necessarily bring about relationship in spirit and feeling; they work gradually, but mightily; one member of the connection draws another with him, either to good or to evil. In spite of their pious father and grandfather, Jehoram and Ahaziah were tainted by the apostasy of the house of Ahab (2Ki_8:18; 2Ki_8:27). How many are not able to resist the evil influences of these connections, and therefore make shipwreck of their faith, and are either drawn into open sin and godlessness, or are transformed into a superficial, thoughtless, and worldly character. (b) The duty which therefore devolves upon us. (The calamities which even the pious Jehoshaphat brought upon his house, nay, even upon his country, arose from the fact that he gave the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel to his son, as a wife, and did not bear in mind that relationships which do not rest upon the word and commandment of God bring discontent and ruin. Therefore beware of entering into relationships which lack the bond of faith and unity of spirit, however grand or advantageous externally they may seem to be. Do not, by such connections, transplant the Ahab and Jezebel spirit into your house, for it eats like a cancer, and corrupts and destroys to the very heart.)
2Ki_8:19. Behold the faithfulness of God, who, for the sake of the fidelity of the father, chastises indeed the son, but yet will not utterly destroy him.—Cramer: God will sustain his Church (kingdom) until the end of the world, in order that a holy leaven may remain, no matter how many may be found who scoff at His promise to sustain His Church.
2Ki_8:20. God punishes infidelity to himself by means of the infidelity of men to one another.—Cramer: If we do not keep faith with God, then people must not keep faith with us. By means of insurrection God punishes the sins of sovereigns, and dissolves the authority of kings (cf. Job_12:18).
2Ki_8:26. Calw. Bib.: It is a horrible thing when not merely relatives, but even a mother instigates to evil.
2Ki_8:28. Cramer: Have no dealings with a fool-hardy man, for he undertakes what his own mind dictates, and you will have to suffer the consequences with him (Sir_8:18).
2Ki_8:29. Calw. Bib.: As he so gladly joined himself to Ahab’s family, and was so fond of spending his time with them, there it was, by the ordering of Providence, that he met his end. Those who, by their hostility to the Lord, belong together, must come together, according to God’s just decree, that they may perish together. Jehoram was so anxious to be healed of the bodily wound which the Syrians had given him, that he left the army and returned to Jezreel; but the wounds of his soul, which he had inflicted upon himself, caused him no trouble, and did not lead him back, as they should have done, to Him who promised: “I will restore health unto thee, and I will heal thee of thy wounds” (Jer_30:17). The children of this world visit one another when they are ill; they do it, however, not in order to console the sick one with the Word of Life, and to advance God’s purpose in afflicting him, but from natural love, from relationship, or other external reasons. Their visits cannot, therefore, be regarded as Christian work.
Footnotes:
[4]2Ki_8:16.—[Keil and Bähr and the English translators take ויהושׁפט מלך יהודה as a parenthesis. In this view it must be understood that Jehoram of Judah assumed the government during the lifetime of his father. (See the Excursus on the Chronology.) In the Sept. (Alex.) Syr., Arab., and many MSS., the words are wanting. They arise from an error of the copyist, who repeated them from the end of the verse (Thenius, Bunsen). Ewald supplies מֵת before מָלַךְ; but, as Thenius well objects, there is no instance of any such statement inserted in the midst of this current formula.
[5]2Ki_8:17.—[The keri proposes the pl. שָׁנִים according to the rule for numbers between two and ten.
[6]2Ki_8:18.—[“Daughter of Ahab,” viz., Athaliah, 2Ki_8:26. According to 2Ch_21:4, he put to death all his brothers, perhaps, as Keil suggests, in order to get the treasures which Jehoshaphat had given to them (2Ch_21:3).
[7]2Ki_8:19.—[“The Lord would not destroy Judah,” &c., 2Ch_21:7. “The Lord would not destroy the house of David, because of the covenant that He had made with David,” cf. 2Sa_7:12. On נִיר, see on 1Ki_11:36. לְבָנָיו, i.e., “referring to, or, according to the sense, through, or by means of, his children” (Thenius, Bähr, Keil, Bunsen, and others). A man’s posterity is spoken of as his light. It burns until his descendants die out. God promised that David’s light should last forever, “referring to” his posterity, through whom, or by preserving whom, God would keep the promise. Cf. 1Ki_15:4, for another example of the usage. The “and” in the E.V., is imported from 2Ch_21:7, where it is adopted, as in the Vulg. and Sept., as an “easier reading” (Thenius).
[8]2Ki_8:21.—[הַסֹּבֵיב is an anomalous form. It is punctuated with tsere, which is thus written full, although it is long only by accent. Ewald only says of it that it “is very remarkable” (s. 52, note 1). There are a few forms like יוֹסִיף which have sometimes been explained as part. kal, and some desire to punctuate this סֹבִיב, still regarding it as part. kal, but explaining it by the last-mentioned analogy. Böttcher, however (§ 994, 3), disposes otherwise of every one of those forms, and thus destroys that analogy. He punctuates this הַסָּבִיב. The sense would not be different, but a concise and literal translation is difficult. “He attacked Edom, the investment against him,” i.e., he attacked the line which enclosed him.
[9]2Ki_8:21.—[“Smote” must be repeated in the English in order to show that “captain” is in the same construction with “Edomites.”
[10]2Ki_8:27.—חתן is used here generally for a relative by marriage. See the Chron. (II., 2Ki_22:3-4) for a development of this statement.
[11]2Ki_8:28.—[אֶת is not the prep., but the case-sign. Böttcher has vindicated for this the signification “self,” § 515, cf. 2Ki_6:5. “The iron itself;” the part which was iron; not the handle.
[12]2Ki_8:28.—[For the omission of the article in ארמים, cf. 1Sa_17:52-53, and Ew. § 277, c. The article is necessary according to the general usage, but exceptions occur.
[13]2Ki_8:29.—[“Which the Syrians had given.” The imperf. here, and in 2Ki_9:15 in the Hebrew text, is very remarkable. Elsewhere we find the perf. in relative or other subordinate clauses, which interrupt the flow of discourse in order to specify attendant circumstances or details. It is like the aorist used for the pluperf. In 2Ch_22:6 we find the perf.—In 2Ch_21:17 it is stated that the Philistines and Arabians carried away all the sons of Jehoram but Jehoahaz, the youngest. In 2Ki_22:1 it is stated that the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah, the youngest and only remaining son of Jehoram, king. The two names are equivalent in meaning, the syllable from the name of Jehovah being in the one case prefixed, and in the other, affixed. Probably the latter form was the one adopted when he ascended the throne. In 2Ki_22:6 we have the form Azariah, which is probably, as Ewald suggests, a slip of the pen.—W. G. S.]
[14] [The dynasty of Omrl and its connections:
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv16, 18, 24 JEHORAM'S WICKED REIGN. (Kg2 8:16-23)
JEHORAM'S WICKED REIGN. (Kg2 8:16-23)
Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat . . . began to reign--(See on Kg2 3:1). His father resigned the throne to him two years before his death.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 24 REIGN OF JEHORAM, SON OF JEHOSHAPHAT, 2Ki_8:16-24.
REIGN OF JEHORAM, SON OF JEHOSHAPHAT, 2Ki_8:16-24.
16. Joram… Jehoram — These names are used interchangeably, the one being merely a contraction of the other. Ahab and Jehoshaphat had each a son Jehoram, and these sons became brothers-in-law by the marriage of Jehoshaphat’s son with Ahab’s daughter. 2Ki_8:18. See the note on 1Ki_22:42; and on the chronology of this reign the note on 2Ki_1:17.
Read full note →
Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah — This confirms the supposition made in note on 2Ki_1:17, that Jehoram began to reign during his father’s lifetime. Some MSS. and versions omit these words; but the weight of evidence is in favour of retaining them. This Jehoram’s reign is more fully described in 2 Chronicles 21.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv16–23 16–24. Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah.…
16–24. Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah. His wars with Edom and Libnah (2Ch_21:1-20)
16. In the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab] On the difficulties connected with the chronology of this period, see above on 2Ki_1:17. On the strength of the words in this verse ‘Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah’ it is supposed that Jehoram king of Judah was co-regent with his father. But, as is noted on the margin of R.V., some ancient authorities omit the sentence which makes father and son to be reigning together. The chief difficulty is introduced by the words of 2Ki_1:17, which make Joram the son of Ahab commence his reign in the second year of Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat of Judah. That statement contradicts the present verse, and the explanation given on 2Ki_1:17 though generally accepted gives rise to many questions. Especially it is objected that in no other instance is a son found reigning along with his father. Then Jehoshaphat was a vigorous monarch and zealous for the service of Jehovah, and was not likely to take as his coadjutor a prince of so weak a character, and of such different religious feeling as Jehoram. Still no more satisfactory solution has been suggested.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv16–24 (16) In the fifth year of Joram the son…
(16) In the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab.—See Note on 2Ki_1:17.
The name Joram is an easy contraction of Jehoram. In this verse and in 2Ki_8:29 the king of Israel is called Joram, and the king of Judah Jehoram; in 2Ki_8:21; 2Ki_8:23-24 Joram is the name of the king of Judah. In 2Ki_1:17 and 2Ch_22:6, both kings are called Jehoram.
Read full note →
Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah.—Literally, and Jehoshaphat king of Judah; so that the meaning is, “In the fifth year of Joram . . . and of Jehoshaphat.” Were the reading correct, it would be implied that Jehoram was for some reason or other made king or co-regent in the lifetime of his father, just as Esarhaddon united his heir Assurbanipal with himself in the government of Assyria. But the clause should be omitted as a spurious anticipation of the same words in the next line. So some Hebrew MSS., the Complut., LXX., the Syriac, and Arabic, and many MSS. of the Vulg. The clause as it stands is an unparalleled insertion in a common formula of the compiler, and there is no trace elsewhere of a co-regency of Jehoram with his father. Ewald, after Kimchi, would turn the clause into a sentence, by adding the word mêth, “had died:” “Now Jehoshaphat the king of Judah had died,” an utterly superfluous remark.
(16-24) The reign of Jehoram, king of Judah. (Comp. 2 Chronicles 21)
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv16–24 Vers. 16-24. THE WICKED REIGN OF JEHORAM IN JUDAH.…
Vers. 16-24. THE WICKED REIGN OF JEHORAM IN JUDAH. At this point the writer, who has been concerned with the history of the kingdom of Israel hitherto in the present book, takes up the story of the kingdom of Judah from 1Ki_22:50, and proceeds to give a very brief account of the reign of Jehoshaphat"s eldest son, Jehoram, or (by contraction) Joram. His narrative has to be supplemented from 2Ch 21, which contains many facts not mentioned by the writer of Kings.
And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab King of Israel, Jehoshaphat being then King of Judah; literally, and of Jehoshaphat King of Judah. The words are wanting in three Hebrew manuscripts, in some editions of the Septuagint, in the Peshito Syriac, in the Parisian Heptaplar Syriac, in the Arabic Version, and in many copies of the Vulgate. They cannot possibly have the sense assigned to them in our version, and are most probably a gloss which has crept into the text from the margin. Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat King of Judah began to reign. Jehoram"s reign was sometimes counted from the seventeenth year of his father, when he was given the royal title, sometimes from his father"s twenty-third year, when he was associated, and sometimes from his father"s death in his twenty-fifth year, when he became sole king. (see the comment on 2Ki_1:17 and 2Ki_3:1)
Read full note →
Vers. 16-29. Two kings of Judah.
(On the chronology, see Exposition.) The reigns of Jehoram and Ahaziah are black spots in the history of Judah.
I JEHORAM, SON OF JEHOSHAPHAT. We may notice concerning this ruler:
1. He had a pious father. We may quote Thomas Fuller"s quaint comments on this part of the Savior"s genealogy: "Lord, I find the genealogy of my Savior strangely checkered with four remarkable changes in four immediate generations.
(1) "Rehoboam begat Abiam;" that is, a bad father begat a bad son.
(2) "Abiam begat Asa;" that is, a bad father a good son.
(3) "Asa begat Jehoshaphat;" that is, a good father a good son.
(4) "Jehoshaphat begat Joram;" that is, a good father a bad son.
I see, Lord, from hence, that my father"s piety cannot be entailed; that is bad news for me. But I see also that actual impiety is not always hereditary; that is good news for my son.
1. He made an evil marriage. "The daughter of Ahab Athaliah his wife." In sanctioning this union of his son with the house of Ahab Jehoshaphat grievously erred. Jehoshaphat"s whole policy of keeping up friendly relations with Ahab was a mistake, destined to bear bitter fruit in his family and his kingdom. No considerations of political expediency should have tempted him to allow a marriage of the heir of his throne with a daughter of the infamous Jezebel. Rulers have even yet Pecuniary, social, or family considerations are allowed to determine a step which ought never to be taken except on grounds of real affection and moral and spiritual affinity. Athaliah"s entrance into the royal household of Judah had a disastrous effect on its future. She was a true child of the Israelitlsh Jezebel, and reproduced her character in all its essential features. Bold, bad, energetic, unscrupulous, ambitious, her influence over her husband was wholly for evil. And he seems to have yielded himself entirely up to it.
2. He walked in evil ways. "He walked in the way of the kings of Israel" etc. The connection of this with his marriage is indicated in the words, "For the daughter of Ahab was his wife." To that malign influence is probably to be attributed the great crime with which his reign began the slaughter of his six brethren, with many of the princes. (2Ch_21:2-4) The other evils of his reign are indicated by the Chronicles tempting and compelling the people to idolatry, etc.. (2Ch_21:11, 2Ch_21:13)
3. He was mercifully dealt with for the sake of David. Grieved though God was with his conduct, he would not destroy Judah, having pledged himself to David to perpetuate his line. The descendants of holy men and women do not know how much of God"s mercy and forbearance they often owe to, their ancestral connection. God spares them for their fathers" sakes. (Rom_11:28)
4. Yet his sins brought heavy disasters on the kingdom. God did not destroy Judah, but he punished it. As the wickedness of the Israelitish kings was punished by the revolt of Moab, (2Ki_1:1) so the sins of Jehoram were visited by a series of calamities which fell upon the nation. The revolt of Edom, of Libnah, invasions of the Philistines, Arabians, etc., broke in upon and desolated the land. (2Ch_21:16, 2Ch_21:17) Only when rulers and people were fearing the Lord could it be said, "Also in Judah things went well". (2Ch_12:12) Things cannot go well when men"s hearts are bent on wickedness. God is against us, and troubles rise thick on every side. The revolt of Edom is the only calamity referred to in detail in the text. Jehoram seems to have attempted to suppress the rebellion, but, being encompassed by the enemy, had great difficulty in cutting his way through, and escaping. The loss of Edom was a permanent one.
5. He came to a miserable end. He went down to his death visibly under a cloud of Divine wrath, and amidst the contempt, if not the execrations, of his people. God smote him, the Chronicler tells us, with a painful and incurable disease, and he died, despised and unlamented. (2Ch_21:18, 2Ch_21:19) He was buried in Jerusalem, but not in the tomb of the kings. Presumptuous transgressors are rightly visited with judgments of exceptional severity (cf. Act_12:23) It is the memory of the just that is blessed, but the name of the wicked shall rot. (Pro_10:7)
II AHAZIAH SON OF JEHOBAM.
1. A short but evil reign. Ahaziah, who reigned but one year, was the youngest son of Jehoram, the elder having been slain in the wars with the Arabians. (2Ch_22:1) His reign was evil, like his father"s. In this case it is said expressly that Athaliah and others of her kindred were his counselors to do evil. (2Ch_22:3, 2Ch_22:4) A mother"s influence is even more potent than a father"s. But when both parents go partners in open wickedness, it is no wonder if a son follows their example.
2. A fateful visit. Ahaziah and Jehoram of Israel were speedily to meet their end together. The Chronicler says "the destruction of Ahaziah was of God by coming to see Joram". (2Ch_22:7) Jehoram had been wounded in a campaign against Hazael at Ramoth-Gilead, and was now at Jezreel to be healed of his wounds. Thither Ahaziah repaired to visit him, and there both kings were slain by Jehu. The visible providence of God is again seen in this visit. His hook is in the nose of the sinner; he leads him wherever he will. J.O. (2Ki_19:28)
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On v17 Jehoram--began to reign.
2Ki_8:17-24
Jehoram--began to reign.
Read full note →
Lessons from the life of Jehoram
This is a short fragment of a kings history, the history of Jehoram. Brief as it is, it contains many practical truths.
I. That piety is not necessarily hereditary. Parents, as a rule, transmit their physical and intellectual qualities to their children, but not their moral characters. Jehoram was a bad man and a wicked king, but he was the son of Jehoshaphat, who was a man of distinguished piety, and reigned wisely and beneficently over Israel for twenty-five years. Of him it was said that the more his riches and honour increased the more his heart was lifted up in the ways of the Lord (2Ch_17:5-6). But how different was his son! One of the first acts of his government was to put to death his six brothers, and several of the leading men of the empire. But whilst piety is not necessarily hereditary, because children are moral agents: what then? Are parents to do nothing to impart all that is good in their character to their children? Undoubtedly no! They are commanded to train up a child in the way it should go when it is young. Where the children of godly parents turn out to be profligate and corrupt, as a rule some defect may be traced to parental conduct. Even in the life of Jehoshaphat, we detect at [east two parental defects.
1. In permitting his son to form unholy alliances.
2. In granting his son too great an indulgence. He raised him to the throne during his own lifetime. He took him into royal partnership too soon, and thus supplied him with abundant means to foster his vanity and ambition.
II. That immoral kings are national curses. What evils this man brought upon his country! Through him the kingdom of Judah lost Edom (which had been its tributary for one hundred and fifty years), which revolted and became the determined enemy of Judah ever afterwards (Psa_137:7). Libnah, too, revolted at the same time. This was a city in the south-western part of Judah assigned to the priests, and a city of refuge. It has always been so. Wicked kings, in all ages, have been the greatest curses that have afflicted the race. Another practical truth is--
III. That death is no respecter of persons.
1. Death does not respect a mans position, however high.
2. Death does not respect a mans character however vile. Jehoram was a bad man, and utterly unfit to die: but death waits not for moral preparation. (David Thomas, D. D.)
Baneful influence of a wicked wife
Jehoram, the son of good Jehoshaphat, walked in the evil ways of the kings of Israel, and he wrought that which was evil in the sight of the Lord. For--mark the reason given by the inspired historian-jehoram did that which was evil in the eyes of the Lord, for He had the daughter of Ahab to wife! What secrets were indicated by that one reason! What a whole volume of tragedy is wrapped up in that brief sentence! The responsibility seems to a large extent transferred from him and placed upon his wife, who was a subtler thinker, a more desperate character, with a larger brain and a firmer will, with more accent and force of personality. Be not unequally yoked together: do not look upon marriage lightly; do not suppose that it is a game for the passing day, a flash and gone, a hilarious excitement, a wine-bibbing, a passing round of kind salutations, then dying away like a trembling echo. Beware what connections you form, and do not suppose that the laws of God can be set aside with impunity. Our family life explains our public attitude and influence. What we are at home we are really abroad. Wives, do not destroy your husbands: when they would do good, help them; when they propose to give to the cause of charity, suggest that the donation be doubled, not divided; when they would help in any good and noble work, give them sympathy, and prayer, and blessing. We never knew a man yet of any enduring public power that was not made by his wife, and we never knew a public yet that fully appreciated the value of that ministry. It is secret; it is at home; it does not show, it is not chalked on a black-board, it is not gilded on a high ceiling, it is silent--but vital. We have seen a man go down in his church life, and we have wondered why, and it was his wife, the daughter of Ahab, who was degrading him, narrowing him and dwarfing him in his thinking and sympathy. We have seen a man go up in his public influence, and we have found that it was his wife who was encouraging him, helping him, telling him that he was on the right way, and wishing him good luck in the name of the Lord. See to it that your home is right: have a beautiful home--morally and religiously; a sacred house, a sanctuary where joy is the singing angel, and then, when you come abroad into the market-place, into the pulpit or into parliament, or into trading and commerce, or into any of the social relations of life, you will bring with you all the inspiration that comes from a home that blooms like a garden or glows like a summer sun. (J. Parker, D. D.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain On v16
(1) JEHORAM BEN-JEHOSHAPHAT OF JUDAH
B.C. 851-843
Read full note →
(2) AHAZIAH BEN-JEHORAM OF JUDAH
B.C. 843-842
2Ki_8:16-29
"Bear with the Turk, no brother near the throne."
-POPE.
THE narrative now reverts to the kingdom of Judah, of which the historian, mainly occupied with the great deeds of the prophet in Israel, takes at this period but little notice.
He tells us that in the fifth year of Jehoram of Israel, son of Ahab, his namesake and brother-in-law, Jehoram of Judah, began to reign in Judah, though his father, Jehoshaphat, was then king.
The statement is full of difficulties, especially as we have been already told {2Ki_1:17} that Jehoram ben-Ahab of Israel began to reign in the second year of Jehoram ben-Jehoshaphat of Judah, and {2Ki_13:1} in the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat. It is hardly worth while to pause here to disentangle these complexities in a writer who, like most Eastern historians, is content with loose chronological references. By the current mode of reckoning, the twenty-five years of Jehoshaphats reign may merely mean twenty-three and a month or two of two other years; and some suppose that, when Jehoram of Judah was about sixteen, his father went on the expedition against Moab, and associated his son with him in the throne. This is only conjecture. Jehoshaphat, of all kings, least needed a coadjutor, particularly so weak and worthless a one as his son; and though the association of colleagues with themselves has been common in some realms, there is not a single instance of it in the history of Israel and Judah-the case of Uzziah, who was a leper, not being to the point.
The kings both of Israel and of Judah at this period, with the single exception of the brave and good Jehoshaphat, were unworthy and miserable. The blight of the Jezebel marriage and the curse of Baal worship lay upon both kingdoms. It is scarcely possible to find such wretched monarchs as the two sons of Jezebel-Ahaziah and Jehoram in Israel, and the son-in-law and grandson of Jezebel, Jehoram and Ahaziah, in Judah. Their respective reigns are annals of shameful apostasy, and almost unbroken disaster.
Jehoram ben-Jehoshaphat of Judah was thirty-two years old when he began his independent reign, and reigned for eight deplorable years. The fact that his mothers name is (exceptionally) omitted seems to imply that his father Jehoshaphat set the good example of monogamy. Jehoram was wholly under the influence of Athaliah, his wife, and of Jezebel, his mother-in-law, and he introduced into Judah their alien abominations. He "walked in their way, and did evil in the sight of the Lord." The Chronicler fills up the general remark by saying that he did his utmost to foster idolatry by erecting bamoth in the mountains of Judah, and compelled his people to worship there, in order to decentralize the religious services of the kingdom, and so to diminish the glory of the Temple. He introduced Baal-worship into Judah, and either he or his son was the guilty builder of a temple to Baalim, not only on the "opprobrious mount" on which stood the idolatrous chapels of Solomon, but on the Hill of the House itself. This temple had its own high priest, and was actually adorned with treasures torn from the Temple of Jehovah. So bad was Jehorams conduct that the historian can only attribute his non-destruction to the "covenant of salt" which God had made with David, "to give him a lamp for his children always."
But if actual destruction did not come upon him and his race, he came very near such a fate, and he certainly experienced that "the path of transgressors is hard." There is nothing to record about him but crime and catastrophe. First Edom revolted. Jehoshaphat had subdued the Edomites, and only allowed them to be governed by a vassal; now they threw off the yoke. The Jewish King advanced against them to "Zair"-by which must be meant apparently either Zoar, {2Ki_11:18; 2Ch_21:11; 2Ch_24:7} through which the road to Edom lay, or their capital, Mount Seir. There he was surrounded by the Edomite hosts; and though by a desperate act of valor he cut his way through them at night in spite of their reserve of chariots, yet his army left him in the lurch. Edom succeeded in establishing its final independence, to which we see an allusion in the one hope held out to Esau by Isaac in that "blessing" which was practically a curse.
The loss of so powerful a subject-territory, which now constituted a source of danger on the eastern frontier of Judah, was succeeded by another disaster on the southwest, in the Shephelah or lowland plain. Here Libnah revolted, {Jos_10:29-39} and by gaining its autonomy contracted yet farther the narrow limits of the southern kingdom.
The Book of Kings tells us no more about the Jewish Jehoram, only adding that he died and was buried with his fathers, and was succeeded by his son Ahaziah. But the Book of Chronicles, which adds far darker touches to his character, also heightens to an extraordinary degree the intensity of his punishment. It tells us that he began his reign by the atrocious murder of his six younger brothers, for whom, following the old precedent of Rehoboam, Jehoshaphat had provided by establishing them as governors of various cities. As his throne was secure, we cannot imagine any motive for this brutal massacre except the greed of gain, and we can only suppose that, as Jehoram ben-Jehoshaphat became little more than a friendly vassal of his kinsmen in Israel, so he fell under the deadly influence of his wife Athaliah, as completely as his father-in-law had done under the spell of her mother Jezebel. With his brothers he also swept away a number of the chief nobles, who perhaps embraced the cause of his murdered kinsmen. Such conduct breathes the known spirit of Jezebel and of Athaliah. To rebuke him for this wickedness, he received the menace of a tremendous judgment upon his home and people in a writing from Elijah, whom we should certainly have assumed to be dead long before that time. The judgment itself followed. The Philistines and Arabians invaded Judah, captured Jerusalem, and murdered all Jehorams own children, except Ahaziah, who was the youngest. Then Jehoram, at the age of thirty-eight, was smitten with an incurable disease of the bowels, of which he died two years later, and not only died unlamented, but was refused burial in the sepulchers of the kings. In any case his reign and that of his son and successor were the most miserable in the annals of Judah, as the reigns of their namesakes and kinsmen, Ahaziah ben-Ahab and Jehoram ben-Ahab, were also the most miserable in the annals of Israel.
Jehoram was succeeded on the throne of Judah by his son Ahaziah. If the chronology and the facts be correct, Ahaziah ben-Jehoram of Judah must have been born when his father was only eighteen, though he was the youngest of the kings sons, and so escaped from being massacred in the Philistine invasion. He succeeded at the age of twenty-two, and only reigned a single year. During this year his mother, the Gebirah Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, and granddaughter of the Tyrian Ethbaal, was all-supreme. She bent the weak nature of her son to still further apostasies. She was "his counselor to do wickedly," and her Baal-priest Mattan was more important than the Aaronic high priest of the despised and desecrated Temple. Never did Judah sink to so low a level, and it was well that the days of Ahaziah of Judah were cut short.
The only event in his reign was the share he took with his uncle Jehoram of Israel in his campaign to protect Ramoth-Gilead from Hazael. The expedition seems to have been successful in its main purpose. Ramoth-Gilead, the key to the districts of Argob and Bashan, was of immense importance for commanding the country beyond Jordan. It seems to be the same as Ramath-Mizpeh; {Jos_13:26} and if so, it was the spot where Jacob made his covenant with Laban. Ahab, or his successors, in spite of the disastrous end of the expedition to Ahab personally, had evidently recovered the frontier fortress from the Syrian king. Its position upon a hill made its possession vital to the interests of Gilead; for the master of Ramah was the master of that Trans-Jordanic district. But Hazael had succeeded his murdered master, and was already beginning to fulfill the ruthless mission which Elisha had foreseen with tears. Jehoram ben-Ahab seems to have held his own against Hazael for a time; but in the course of the campaign at Ramoth he was so severely wounded that he was compelled to leave his army under the command of Jehu, and to return to Jezreel, to be healed of his wounds. Thither his nephew Ahaziah of Judah went to visit him; and there, as we shall hear, he too met his doom. That fate, the Chronicler tells us, was the penalty of his iniquities. "The destruction of Ahaziah was of God by coming to Joram."
We have no ground for accusing either king of any want of courage; yet it was obviously impolitic of Jehoram to linger unnecessarily in his luxurious capital, while the army of Israel was engaged in service on a dangerous frontier. The wounds inflicted by the Syrian archers may have been originally severe. Their arrows at this time played as momentous a part in history as the cloth-yard shafts of our English bowmen which "sewed the French ranks together" at Poictiers, Crecy, and Azincour. But Jehoram had at any rate so far recovered that he could ride in his chariot; and if be had been wise and bravely vigorous, he would not have left his army under a subordinate at so perilous an epoch, and menaced by so resolute a foe. Or if he were indeed compelled to consult the better physicians at Jezreel, he should have persuaded his nephew Ahaziah of Judah-who seems to have been more or less of a vassal as well as a kinsman-to keep an eye on the beleaguered fort. Both kings, however, deserted their post, -Jehoram to recover perfect health; and Ahaziah, who had been his comrade-as their father and grandfather had gone together to the same war-to pay a state visit of condolence to the royal invalid. The army was left under a popular, resolute, and wholly unscrupulous commander, and the results powerfully affected the immediate and the ultimate destiny of both kingdoms.
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On v16 2Ki_8:16. Joram the son of Ahab—See Notes on chap.…
CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES.—
2Ki_8:16. Joram the son of Ahab—See Notes on chap. 2Ki_3:1.
Read full note →
2Ki_8:18. The daughter of Ahab—Attaliah. It was through her influence the king introduced the worship of Baal into Judah (2 Chronicles 21 :).
2Ki_8:19. To give him alway a light, and to his children—i.e., “even in his children,” that his kingdom should be kept from becoming extinct.
2Ki_8:21. Zair—Vulgate says Seir; other authorities suggest Zoar.The people fled to their tents—i.e., the men of Judah.
2Ki_8:22. Yet Edom revolted—So Edom revolted, thus fulfilling Gen_27:40, for though the Edomites were subjugated for a brief period (chap. 2Ki_14:7; 2Ki_14:22), they were never again vanquished.—W. H. J.
HOMILETICS OF 2Ki_8:16-29
THE WOEFUL DISASTERS OF AN UNHOLY ALLIANCE
In this paragraph we detect traces of the baneful influence of the iniquitous Jezebel. The brief histories of Jehoram and Ahaziah present a terrible example of the way in which one bad woman can radically corrupt entire dynasties and kingdoms, and of the curse that rests upon matrimonial connections which are only formed in order to attain political objects. The kingdom of Judah became tainted with the idolatry that had degraded and enfeebled Israel, and there was danger that the social morality of Jerusalem would sink to the low, black level of Samaria. The dynasty of Omri was the most disastrous in the annals of Israel, and is stained with the darkest crimes. Such a succession of weak and wicked rulers could not continue for ever. The doom of the dynasty is declared. The darkening clouds of vengeance are closing round. The victims and the avenger are being prepared. The hour to strike is at hand. We have here an indication of the woeful disasters that befell Judah because of its unhappy connections with Israel, and how the wrong-doers were ripening for punishment.
I. That an unholy alliance may be unwisely sanctioned by good and holy parents. Jehoshaphat, the father of Jehoram, was one of the noblest kings of Judah. Influenced by genuine piety, he effected important reforms in his kingdom. He abolished idolatry; he raised a formidable army, and strongly fortified the frontiers; he promoted a flourishing commerce; he administered justice with strict impartiality; he maintained and encouraged the worship of Jehovah; he was beloved by his people, and his fame spread in every direction. It was a serious mistake when he first entered into confederacy with the profane court of Israel. His connection with Ahab in war (chap. 3), and with Ahaziah in commerce (2Ch_20:35), both ended disastrously. But the greatest wrong, and what became a fruitful source of evil, was his sanctioning the marriage of his son with a daughter of the house of Ahab. If he was induced to it by the prospect of advantage, he was utterly disappointed. Not only did he suffer himself, but many calamities happened to his descendants in consequence of this affinity. Parents cannot be too careful in advising their children as to matrimonial alliances; and children should respect the counsel and riper judgment of parents on so delicate and important a subject. Mere sentiment and passion should not be allowed to blind the sense of what is just and wise and holy. The best of parents in other respects may be weak in this. And yet, if a mistake is made, it is made for life, and many other lives are involved in the suffering.
II. That an unholy alliance often leads to a career of unexampled wickedness (2Ki_8:18). Though Jehoram reigned during the life-time of Jehoshaphat, he did not follow the good example of his father, but chose Ahab for his pattern, if he did not exceed him in vileness and cruelty. He murdered his six brothers, as it would appear, for no other reason than to become possessed of the treasures which his father bequeathed to them (2 Chronicles 21), not from any jealousy that they would interfere with the succession to the throne. A king who did not shrink from fratricide may be easily conceived capable of any crime. Jehoram grew into a monster of impurity and wickedness, and, after a brief reign of eight years, he died of a horrible desease, unhonoured, and unregretted. It is some consolation to society that the career of its most debauched and brutalised members is brief. Outraged nature retaliates with suffering and premature death. A bad wife may drive her husband to the vilest excesses; there is no escape from her baleful influence but in the grave. How different would have been the history and career of some men if they had married differently!
III. That an unholy alliance corrupts and demoralises the national life. (2Ki_8:20-22). Edom and Libnah revolted. They despise a king who was both weak and wicked. Jehoram made some attempt to put down the rebellion, and though he was successful in a night engagement against the Edomites, his soldiers gave up the battle and ran away to their homes. Edom, which had been tributary to Judah from the days of David, was thus lost to Jehoram. The national life was demoralised, and the people were heedless as to what became of the national power and prestige. Jehoram had the memorable distinction of being the first to introduce the abominations of Baal worship to Judah, and the result was soon evident in the lowering of the moral tone of the national character. In the rulership of Judah, it was a great drop from Jehoshaphat to Jehoram; but in the moral life of the people it was a greater drop from Jehovah to Baal!
IV. That an unholy alliance infects posterity with its evils (2Ki_8:25-29). The bad influence of Jehoram did not die with him. It survived in Ahaziah, who inherited and practised the worst features of his father’s example. The history, brief as it is, is careful to point out his relationship to the worst dynasty that darkens the history of the Jewish kings, and to show the predominating tendency of his life to be evil. “He did evil in the sight of the Lord, as did the house of Ahab.” Sin hardens the heart and produces obstinacy of disposition. The practice of sin becomes an infatuation, until the sinner becomes incorrigible. So that
“You may as well
Forbid the sea for to obey the moon,
As by oath remove, or counsel shake,
The fabric of his folly.”—Shakspeare.
But the network of retribution is being drawn tighter round its victims. It is not without design that Joram, Ahaziah, and Jezebel are brought together in Jezreel. The avenger is at hand, and the three chief representatives of the house of Ahab must be the first to fall.
V. That the worse sins of an unholy alliance cannot revoke the Divine promise. “Yet the Lord would not destroy Judah for David His servant’s sake, as He promised him to give him alway a light and to his children” (2Ki_8:19 comp. with 1Ki_11:36). By the formal adoption of idolatry Judah had revolted from Jehovah and became as bad as Israel, and, but for the Divine promise, the royal family of Judah would have been as thoroughly extirpated as that of Israel. O, the infinite patience of God! The basest ingratitude, the most outrageous sins, cannot invalidate the fidelity of God. David was assured that he should not lack a successor on the throne of Israel, so that his name should be as a light continually kept burning by a constant supply of oil, until the Messiah came, in whose glorious advent the greatest earthly luminary should be quenched. The pledge, though in abeyance for many long, weary years, was fully redeemed. And now, “while wicked men from generation to generation perish in their sins, the son of David, the light of His church, ever liveth to protect; bless, and comfort His people.”
LESSONS:—
1. Great care should be taken in forming the friendships and alliances of life.
2. Unutterable mischief has resulted from an ill-assorted marriage.
3. No union should be entered into that is not based on the mutual love of God.
GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES
2Ki_8:16-29. The spirit of the house of Ahab. I. Perversion of all divine and human ordinances. “Wicked and corrupt women set the tone and ruled over their weak husbands. II. Immorality, licentiousness, murder, and tyranny. III. Contempt, on the one hand, for the richness of God’s long-suffering and goodness; and, on the other, for the warnings of God’s judgments and chastisements. What a different spirit animated the household of a Cornelius (Act_10:2), of a Crispus (Act_18:8), cf a jailer at Philippi (Act_16:34).
—The importance of family relationships. I. The great influence which they exert. They necessarily bring about relationship in spirit and feeling. They work gradually, but mightily. One member of the connection draws another with him either to good or to evil. In spite of their pious father and grandfather, Jehoram and Ahaziah were tainted by the apostasy of the house of Ahab. How many are not able to resist the evil influences of these connections, and therefore make shipwreck of their faith, and are either drawn into open sin and godlessness, or are transformed into a superficial, thoughtless, and worldly character. II. The duty which therefore devolves upon us. The calamities which even the pious Jehoshaphat brought upon his house, nay, even upon his country, arose from the fact that he gave the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel to his son, as a wife, and did not bear in mind that relationships which do not rest upon the word and cammandment of God bring discontent and ruin. Therefore beware of entering into relationships which lack the bond of faith and unity of spirit, however grand or advantageous externally they may seem to be. Do not, by such connections, transplant the Ahab and Jezebel spirit into your house, for it eats like a cancer, and corrupts and destroys to the very heart.—Lange.
2Ki_8:18. An indiscreet marriage. I. May be mistakenly promoted by the best of parents. II. Makes the beginning of married life morally perilous. III. Leads on gradually to the commission of great sins. IV. Involves many in disgrace and suffering.
2Ki_8:19. Behold the faithfulness of God, who, for the sake of the fidelity of the father, chastises indeed the son, but yet will not utterly destroy him. God will sustain His kingdom to the end of the world, in order that a holy leaven may remain, no matter how many may be found who scoff at His promise to sustain His church.—Cramer.
—The Divine faithfulness.—
1. Is not rendered inefficacious by human sin.
2. Guarantees the fulfilment of every Divine promise.
3. May well inspire the unbeliever with alarm.
4. Provides the light of hope in the darkest period of human history.
2Ki_8:20-24. A demoralised monarch. 1. Weakens government.
2. Is powerless to suppress rebellion.
3. Loses the respect and attachment of his subjects.
4. Dies without being regretted, and is buried without sorrow.
2Ki_8:27. The influence of a bad example.
1. Is felt by succeeding generations.
2. Is difficult to counteract when emanating from a near relative.
3. When deliberately followed tends to shorten life, and leads to misery and ruin.
2Ki_8:28-29. Confederates in a false religion.
1. Are capable of strong personal attachments.
2. Share with one another the risks and fortunes of war.
3. Not devoid of sympathy in affliction.
2Ki_8:29. As he so gladly joined himself to Ahab’s family, and was so fond of spending his time with them, there it was, by the ordering of Divine providence, that he met his end. Those who, by their hostility to the Lord, belong together, must come together, that they may perish together. Jehoram was so anxious to be healed of the bodily wound which the Syrians had given him, that he left the army, and returned to Jezreel; but the wounds of his soul, which he had inflicted upon himself, caused him no trouble, and did not lead him back, as they should have done, to Him who promised, “I will restore health unto thee, and I will heal thee of thy wounds” (Jer_30:17). The children of this world visit one another when they are ill. They do it, however, not in order to console the sick one with the word of life, and to advance God’s purpose in afflicting him, but from natural love, from relationship, or other external reasons. Their visits cannot, therefore, be regarded as Christian work.—Calwer Bib.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On v16 Jehoram Called Joram, 2Ki 8:21; 2Ki 8:23; 2Ki 8:24.
Jehoram Called Joram, 2Ki 8:21; 2Ki 8:23; 2Ki 8:24.
began Heb. reigned, i.e. began to reign in consort with his father.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v16 The Reign of Jehoram and of Ahaziah
The Reign of Jehoram and of Ahaziah
v. 16. And in the fifth year of Joram, the son of Ahab, king of Israel, Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah, Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, began to reign, being coregent with his father for two years.
Read full note →
v. 17. Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem, six of these alone.
v. 18. And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, in all the idolatrous wickedness which they practiced, as did the house of Ahab; for the daughter of Ahab was his wife, the evil of mixed marriages being apparent here also; and he did evil in the sight of the Lord.
v. 19. Yet the Lord would not destroy Judah for David His servant’s sake, He did not want it to lose its existence as a nation, as He promised him to give him alway a light and to his children, namely, by keeping his descendants on the throne. Nevertheless, the country had to pay dearly for the sin of its king.
v. 20. In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, regaining its independence, and made a king over themselves.
v. 21. So Joram went over to Zair, a fortified city of Idumea, and all the chariots with him, the full strength of his army; and he rose by night and smote the Edomites which compassed him about, who were threatening to take him and his whole army captive, and the captains of the chariots. And the people, that is, the Judean soldiers, fled into their tents, to their homes, barely escaping an utter defeat.
v. 22. Yet, and so it happened that, Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah unto this day. Then Libnah, an ancient royal city of the Canaanites, in the Plain of Judah, near the frontier of Philistia, revolted at the same time. So Judah was losing in prestige and power right along.
v. 23. And the rest of the acts of Joram and all that he did, are they not written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah?
v. 24. And Joram slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers In the city of David, being given an honorable burial; and Ahaziah (or, Azariah), his son, reigned in his stead.
v. 25. In the twelfth year of Joram, the son of Ahab, king of Israel, did Ahaziah, the son of Jehoram, king of Judah, begin to reign.
v. 26. Two and twenty years old was Ahaziali when he began to reign, he being the youngest son of Jehoram, 2Ch 21:17; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Athaliah, the daughter, that is, the granddaughter, of Omri, king of Israel, who is here mentioned because he was the founder of the royal house to which the queen-mother belonged.
v. 27. And he walked in the way of the house of Ahab, in idolatrous wickedness, and did evil in the sight of the Lord, as did the house of Ahab; for he was the son-in-law of the house of Ahab, and therefore under the influence of the unspeakable Jezebel.
v. 28. And he went with Joram, the son of Ahab, to the war against Hazael, king of Syria, in Ramoth-gilead, the fortified city in the country east of Jordan, which Ahab had already tried to recover; and the Syrians wounded Joram, after, having taken possession of the city once more, 2Ki 9:14.
v. 29. And King Joram went back to be healed in Jezreel, his summer residence, of the wounds which the Syrians had given him at Ramah, that is, the Ramoth in the country of Gilead, when he fought against Hazael, king of Syria. And Ahaziah, the son of Jehoram, king of Judah, went down to see Joram, the son of Ahab, his brother-in-law, in Jezreel, because he was sick, suffering from the wounds which lie had received, the armies meanwhile remaining in the field. When men ignore and reject the blessings of God and despise His mercies, God shows them that He is very well able to punish them severely, to let justice take its course in their case.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv16, 18, 20, 22 General Information:
General Information:
Jehoram becomes king of Judah.
Read full note →
In the fifth year of Joram son of Ahab, king of Israel
This describes the time that Jehoram began to reign over Judah by stating how long Joram, the current king of Israel, had been reigning. AT: "In the fifth year that Jorman son of Ahab was king of Israel" or "In year five of the reign of Joram son of Ahab, king of Israel" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
fifth year
"year 5" (See: Ordinal Numbers)
Jehoram began to reign
Jehoram, son of Jehoshaphat, became the king of Judah.
thirty-two years old
"32 years old" (See: Numbers)
translationWords
Joram
Ahab
kingdom of Israel
reign
Jehoshaphat
kingdom of Judah
Jerusalem
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 24 8:16 Jehoram was co-regent with his father, Jehoshaphat, for…
8:16 Jehoram was co-regent with his father, Jehoshaphat, for five years before becoming king of Judah on his own in the fifth year of the reign of Joram (848 BC).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.