CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES.

2Ki. 8:16. Joram the son of AhabSee Notes on chap. 2Ki. 3:1.

2Ki. 8:18. The daughter of AhabAttaliah. 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 childreni.e., even in his children, that his kingdom should be kept from becoming extinct.

2Ki. 8:21. ZairVulgate says Seir; other authorities suggest Zoar.The people fled to their tentsi.e., the men of Judah.

2Ki. 8:22. Yet Edom revoltedSo 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 fathers 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 servants 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 Gods long-suffering and goodness; and, on the other, for the warnings of Gods 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 Ahabs 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 Gods 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.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

III. CONTEMPORARY EVENTS IN JUDAH 8:1629

At this point the author picks up the history of Judah from 1Ki. 22:50 and gives a brief resume of the reigns of (1) Jehoram (2Ki. 8:16-24), and (2) Ahaziah (2Ki. 8:25-29). These men are the fifth and sixth successors of Solomon on the throne of Judah.

A. THE REIGN OF JEHORAM OF JUDAH 8:1624

TRANSLATION

(16) Now in the fifth year of Joram son of Ahab, king of Israel, Jehoshaphat being king of Judah, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign. (17) He was thirty-two years old when he began to reign, and eight years he ruled in Jerusalem. (18) And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel according to all which the house of Ahab did, for the daughter of Ahab was his wife; and he did evil in the eyes of the LORD. (19) Yet the LORD did not desire to destroy Judah for the sake of David his servant as he promised him to give to him a lamp in respect to his children always. (20) In his days Edom rebelled from under the hand of Judah, and made a king over themselves. (21) So Joram went over to Zair, and all the chariots with him; and it came to pass that he arose by night, and smote the Edomites who were surrounding him, and the captains of the chariots and the people fled to their tents. (22) And Edom rebelled from under the hand of Judah until this day. Then Libnah rebelled at the same time. (23) And the rest of the deeds of Joram, and all which he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? (24) And Joram slept with his fathers, and he was buried with his fathers in the city of David; and Ahaziah his son ruled instead of him.

Fifth King of Judah
JEHORAM (or JORAM)
848841 B.C.*
(Exalted by Yahweh)

1Ki. 22:50; 2Ki. 8:16-24; 2 Chronicles 21

Synchronism
Jehoram 1 = Joram 5

Mother: ?

Appraisal: Bad

Give not your . . . ways to that which destroys kings. Pro. 31:3

*coregent from 853 B.C.

COMMENTS

The reign of Jehoram (Joram) of Judah is somewhat confusing. In the seventeenth year of his father (853 B.C.), Jehoram was made coregent. This coregency lasted until the death of Jehoshaphat in 848 B.C.[552] The independent reign of Jehoram lasted eight years, 848841 B.C. (2Ki. 8:17).

[552] The historian gives two synchronisms for the commencement of the reign of Jehoram son of Ahab. One is in terms of the reign of Jehoshaphat (2Ki. 3:1) and one in terms of his coregent Jehoram (2Ki. 1:17).

Jehoram departed from the godly paths of his father, and followed in the way of the house of Ahab in the North. This probably means that he introduced the Phoenician Baal and Asherah cults into Judah. This corrupt worship was the bitter fruit of the alliance with the Northern Kingdom forged by Jehoshaphat in which Jehoram had married the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel.[553] The evil which this king did is amplified in 2 Chronicles 21. Shortly after his accession, he put to death his six brothers in order to solidify his position. At the same time he executed many of the princes of the land, no doubt for the same reason. Soon afterwards he made high places in the mountains of Judah, and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit fornication (i.e., to become idolaters) and compelled Judah thereto (2Ch. 21:11). Such apostasy merited Gods rejection and destruction (cf. Deu. 28:15-37). But God had made promises to David and to his seed after him which would not be fulfilled if Judahs candlestick of national existence were now to be removed. The longsuffering of God with respect to Davids dynasty was demonstrated in that He bore with Judah for about three centuries longer until at last their cup of iniquity was full (2Ki. 8:19).

[553] In 2Ki. 8:18 Jehorams wife is stated to be the daughter of Ahab, in 2Ki. 8:26 the daughter of Omri. In the latter verse, daughter is used in the sense of female descendant.

Though God could not yet destroy Judah, in His providence He did bring about certain political chastisements during the wicked reign of Jehoram. For one thing, the Edomites revolted[554] and appointed for themselves an independent king (2Ki. 8:20). Naturally, Jehoram tried to crush this rebellion, but his efforts were not successful and were almost disastrous. Edomites surrounded his position at Zair.[555] Only by a daring night attack was Jehoram able to break through the enemy lines, especially the Edomite chariot forces, and extricate himself from annihilation. His army, however, was so alarmed by the near catastrophe that they dispersed to their homes (2Ki. 8:21). Jehoram was never in a position to make any further invasion of Edom, and the Edomites remained independent until the time of the writing of the annals from which the author of Kings derived his material. The Chronicler reports on a Philistine invasion during the days of Jehoram (2Ch. 21:16), and it may have been in connection with this invasion that Libnah, located in the lowlands of Judah on the edge of Philistia, revolted (2Ki. 8:22).

[554] Edom had been conquered by Davids general Joab (1Ki. 11:15-16). Solomon seems to have been able to maintain control of Edom during most of his reign, though he was constantly harassed by the nationalist Hadad. At Solomons death, Edom revolted, and it was not until the time of Jehoshaphat that the land was reconquered (1Ki. 22:47).

[555] Montgomery (ICC, p. 396) takes Zair to be the Zoar of Gen. 13:10, in which case the place would be located at the southern end of the Dead Sea.

The brief resume of Jehorams reign ends with the standard formula used for most of the kings of Judah. Some of his numerous other acts have been selected from the prophetic annals for inclusion in the Biblical Book of Chronicles, e.g., his reception of a letter from Elijah the prophet (2Ch. 21:12-15); his wars with the Philistines and the Arabs (2Ch. 21:16); his loss of all his sons but one during his lifetime; his long illness and painful death (2Ch. 21:18-19). Jehoram died after an illness lasting two years of an incurable disease of his bowels. The king was buried in that portion of Jerusalem built by David but not, according to 2Ch. 21:20, in the royal tombs there. He was followed by his son Ahaziah, who is called Jehoahaz in 2Ch. 21:17 and Azariah in 2Ch. 22:6.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(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.

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 mth, had died: Now Jehoshaphat the king of Judah had died, an utterly superfluous remark.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

(16-24) The reign of Jehoram, king of Judah. (Comp. 2 Chronicles 21)

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

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.

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.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

The Reign Of Jehoram, King of Judah ( 2Ki 8:16-24 ). c. 848-841 BC Co-regent with Jehoshaphat from 853 BC.

During the time that Jehoram of Judah was on the throne of Judah, Jehoram of Israel (see 2Ki 3:1) was on the throne of Israel, which can tend to result in confusion. It is true that in 2Ki 8:16 Jehoram of Israel is called Joram, but it will be noted that in 2Ki 8:21; 2Ki 8:23 Jehoram of Judah is also called Joram. Thus when we see either name (Joram is merely a shortened form of Jehoram) we need to consider carefully which Jehoram/Joram is being referred to.

Jehoram of Judah married Athaliah, one of Ahab’s daughters, probably as a seal on the alliance between the two countries. But this would turn out to be a mistake, for Athaliah would lead him astray by introducing him to the worship of Baal, and the result was that, unlike his father Jehoshaphat, he was remembered for having ‘done evil in the sight of YHWH’. As so often, an unwise marriage had devastating consequences. For this reason his reign is therefore dealt with briefly and is revealed as having had unfortunate consequences for Judah. During it they lost their sovereignty over the land of Edom, and even over the border city, and previous Canaanite conclave, of Libnah, and as far as the prophetic author of Kings was concerned that summed up his reign. It was a reign of evil living and failure accompanied by judgment from God, and loss for Judah. But due to the mercy of God all was not lost, for the prophetic author assures us that YHWH did not forget His promise to David, and did therefore preserve the realm from final judgment, ensuring the survival of one of his sons, Jehoahaz. And that is the only good that he could say about Jehoram of Judah. (For fuller details of Jehoram’s reign see 2Ch 21:1-20).

There is a significant break in the normal practise here. Following the author’s usual practise we would in fact have expected this description of Jehoram of Judah’s reign to follow a description of the cessation of Jehoram of Israel’s reign, but this order is not adhered to in this case because it will eventually be necessary to co-relate the death of Jehoram of Israel with that of Ahaziah, Jehoram of Judah’s son, as both died around the same time at the hands of Jehu. The record of the death of Jehoram of Israel is therefore reserved until then, and will be described later, although without the usual formula, at the same time as the death of Ahaziah of Judah who succeeded Jehoram of Judah.

Analysis.

a 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. Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem (2Ki 8:16-17).

b And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, as did the house of Ahab, for he had the daughter of Ahab to wife, and he did what was evil in the sight of YHWH, however, YHWH would not destroy Judah, for David his servant’s sake, as he promised him to give to him a lamp for his children always (2Ki 8:18-19).

c In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, and made a king over themselves (2Ki 8:20).

d Then Joram passed over to Zair, and all his chariots with him, and he rose up by night, and smote the Edomites who surrounded him, and the captains of the chariots, and the people fled to their tents (2Ki 8:21).

c So Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah to this day. Then did Libnah revolt at the same time. (2Ki 8:22).

b 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? (2Ki 8:23).

a And Joram slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David, and Ahaziah his son reigned instead of him (2Ki 8:24).

Note that in ‘a’ we have the details of the commencement of his reign, and in the parallel the details of its cessation. In ‘b’ we learn of the worst of the acts of Jehoram of Judah, and in the parallel we are referred elsewhere for details of his further acts. In ‘c’ Edom revolted against Judah, and the same in the parallel. Centrally in ‘d’ we have a vivid description of how the king managed to avoid death or capture and disgrace at the hands of the Edomites.

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.’

It is made clear here that Jehoram of Judah ‘became king’ while his father Jehoshaphat was still alive. He was thus for a period co-regent with his father. He commenced his sole reign in the fifth year of Joram (Jehoram) of Israel. Note the unusual fact that the name of his mother is not given. This may have been because she was already dead, and thus could not become ‘queen mother’.

2Ki 8:17

‘He was thirty and two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem.’

His sole reign began when he was thirty two years of age, and he reigned in Jerusalem (‘the city which YHWH (for David’s sake) chose out of all the tribes of Israel to put His name there’ (1Ki 14:21)). He was, in other words, heir to the promises to David (compare 2Ki 8:19).

2Ki 8:18

‘And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, as did the house of Ahab: for he had the daughter of Ahab to wife, and he did what was evil in the sight of YHWH.’

But his unfortunate marriage to Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab, resulted in his ‘walking in the ways of the kings of Israel’ by being coerced into the worship of Baal (compare 11,18), with the consequence that, like Solomon before him (1Ki 11:6), he ‘did evil in the sight of YHWH’. His heart was consequently not right towards YHWH and he led many of the people of Judah astray (2Ch 21:13). How important it is for us to marry the right person, one who will encourage us in the true worship of God.

2Ki 8:19

‘However, YHWH would not destroy Judah, for David his servant’s sake, as he promised him to give to him a lamp for his children always.’

But YHWH in His goodness and faithfulness never forgot His promises to David, and thus in spite of Jehoram’s behaviour He did not destroy Judah, even though He did chasten it. He preserved it ‘for David His servant’s sake’. And this was because He had promised David ‘a lamp’ in Jerusalem for the sake of His children. In accordance with previous mentions of ‘the lamp’ this refers to the heir of David (compare 1Ki 11:36; 1Ki 15:4), the one who should have brought light to Judah through the covenant. God’s purposes will thus be brought about by His sovereign will.

‘His children’ may refer to YHWH’s children, and thus His people, or it may refer to the people seen as David’s children, or it may refer to David’s household to whom the reigning king would be a ‘lamp’, shining out as the evidence of YHWH’s covenant with them

2Ki 8:20

‘In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, and made a king over themselves.’

Nevertheless YHWH did chasten him for it was in Jehoram’s day that the Edomites finally broke loose from Judah on a permanent basis, establishing their own sole king (previously their king had been a deputy appointed by Judah (1Ki 22:47), even though sometimes called ‘king’ – 2Ki 3:9). This rebellion by Edom was probably connected with attacks on southern Judah by the Arabians (2Ch 21:16) and had much to do with control of the southern trade routes. It may also have been encouraged by the Philistine attacks on Judah (2Ch 21:16) and the continual threat posed to Judah by Aram and Assyria which kept Jehoram occupied elsewhere.

2Ki 8:21

‘Then Joram passed over to Zair, and all his chariots with him, and he rose up by night, and smote the Edomites who surrounded him, and the captains of the chariots, and the people fled to their tents.’

Jehoram (now Joram, a shortened form of the same name) went south to quell the rebellion, but seemingly with insufficient forces, with the result that he was outmanoeuvred and surrounded by what was probably a much larger force of Edomites. Rather than recording it as a defeat, however, his annalists ignored that idea (in typical Near Eastern fashion) and described the heroic way in which, in a surprise night foray, by means of his chariot force he broke through the ranks of the enemy who considerably outnumbered him, thus allowing many of his people to escape with him. But the truth comes out in that these then ‘fled to their tents (homes)’, always a sign of defeat. In other words his defeated army dispersed. ‘Fled to their tents’ was a technical phrase brought forward from wilderness days.

Zair was probably Zior (Jos 15:54), eight kilometres (five miles) north east of Hebron, which was probably where he mustered his forces preparatory to his advance, rather than being the actual site of the battle. Alternately it may be an unidentified city in Edom.

2Ki 8:22

‘ So Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah to this day. Then did Libnah revolt at the same time.’

As a result of this defeat Edom had gained its independence ‘until this day’. This latter phrase may be the comment of the original annalist, or of the final author in whose day Edom was certainly independent. Not that further attempts were not made on Edom by Judah. Indeed under Uzziah of Judah they were probably at least partly subjugated, for Uzziah controlled Elath, and thus the trade routes through the Negeb and to the Red Sea (2Ki 14:22). But that situation was not permanent.

The city of Libnah revolted at the same time. This demonstrates that Libnah, in the Shephelah and not far from Lachish, saw themselves at this stage as independent of Judah. Libnah was on the Philistine border, and this rebellion was presumably connected with the Philistine incursions (2Ch 21:16).

2Ki 8:23

‘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?’

As regularly the author was not interested in the king’s general history and refers the reader/hearer to the official annals of Judah. He considered that he had said enough to demonstrate how YHWH had chastened Judah under Jehoram. And that had been his aim.

2Ki 8:24

‘And Joram slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David, and Ahaziah his son reigned instead of him.’

Jehoram died peacefully, and was buried ‘with his fathers in the city of David’, a testimony to his part in the continuing line. We learn, however, from the Chronicler that he was not buried in the sepulchres of the kings, possibly because he had been a worshipper of Baal.

The main lesson that comes out of this passage is similar to that which comes out with regard to the majority of the kings, and that is that if we walk faithfully with God and are obedient to His will and covenant, we can be sure that He will bless us in our lives in the long term, but that if we turn from Him and disobey His laws and covenant He will finally bring chastisement and judgment on us. This is indeed the author’s continual emphasis.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

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.

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.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

FIFTH SECTION

the monarchy under jehoram and ahaziah in judah, and the elevation of jehu to the throne in israel.

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 servants 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 mothers 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 Jehus 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. Rsch (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 Jehus 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 Bhrs 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 Bhr 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, or (in 2Ki 1:17 and 2Ch 22:6, both are called , in 2Ki 9:15; 2Ki 9:17; 2Ki 9:21, is the name of the king of Israel; in 2Ki 8:16; 2Ki 8:29, the king of Israel is called , and the king of Judah , while in 2Ki 8:21; 2Ki 8:23-24, the king of Judah is called ), 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 ( ) 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 latters 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, Jehoshaphats 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 fathers 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 : , which Clericus supplements by , 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 after , 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 , 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 Ahabs 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 Uzziahs 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. 625688). 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 Israels) 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 Davids 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 Jehorams 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 , 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 , 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 , 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 4:46. Thenius approves this, but thinks that 2Ch 21:17 is inconsistent with 2Ki 10:3, which assigns a different fate to Ahaziahs kindred.W. G. S.]

2Ki 8:25. Did Ahaziah begin to reign. The chronicler states Ahaziahs age at his accession as forty-two (II., 2Ki 22:2). This is the result of a mistake of for , 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 [Ahaziahs] 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 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 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 , 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 kings 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 in 2Ki 8:28 is to be struck out. There is, however, no ground for this (see Thenius on the verse), for , 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. [ is not the prep. but the case-sign with the nominative; is therefore the subject of , 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 (); 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 Knige 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 (1827); (b) how they came to choose this way (1827); (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 Gods long-suffering and goodness, and, on the other, for the warnings of Gods 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 Ahabs 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 Gods 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 Gods 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 Bhr and the English translators take 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 before ; 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. 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 , see on 1Ki 11:36. , i.e., referring to, or, according to the sense, through, or by means of, his children (Thenius, Bhr, Keil, Bunsen, and others). A mans posterity is spoken of as his light. It burns until his descendants die out. God promised that Davids 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.[ 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 which have sometimes been explained as part. kal, and some desire to punctuate this , still regarding it as part. kal, but explaining it by the last-mentioned analogy. Bttcher, however ( 994, 3), disposes otherwise of every one of those forms, and thus destroys that analogy. He punctuates this . 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. 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.[ is not the prep., but the case-sign. Bttcher 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 , 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:

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

I would have the Reader remark with me on the character here given of pious Jehoshaphat’s son, how dreadful it must have been to such a father to have so degenerate a son. Grace is not hereditary. Jehoshaphat could not give it to Joram. And it is to be feared, by what we read in the history, short as it is, that the good man did not take the likeliest means to obtain it. For he made, or suffered to be made, a dreadful alliance for him with Ahab’s daughter. And add to this, he gave up the kingdom to him before his death, thereby feeding his pride and vanity. Reader! have you never remarked (I have), how frequently pious parents, from consulting natural feelings more than gracious ones, awfully indulge their children to their hurt, and thereby give displeasure to the Lord. What an awful reproof was that of God to Eli, 1Sa 2:27 , etc.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

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.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Jehoshaphat being then king. Jehoram associated with him in Joram’s filth year, and reigned solely in Joram’s sixth year. Compare 2Ki 9:29. Joram (of Ahab) began in Jehoshaphat’s eighteenth year (2Ki 3:1). His fifth year is therefore Jehoshaphat’s twenty-third year, when Jehoram is associated with him as king, in the third year before his death. See App-50.

began to reign: i.e. in consort with his father.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

2Ki 8:16-19

2Ki 8:16-19

TWO DIFFERENT JEHORAM’S REIGNING IN BOTH JUDAH AND ISRAEL

“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. Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem. And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, as did the house of Ahab: for he had the daughter of Ahab to wife; and he did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah. Howbeit Jehovah would not destroy Judah, for David his servant’s sake, as he promised to give unto him a lamp for his children alway.”

“It was the religious solidarity of the Judean kings with the apostasy of Northern Israel” that led to the inclusion of the record of their reigns just here. The lamp of truth burned very dimly in Israel at this time, in both kingdoms. Only by God’s direct intervention was it kept burning. That intervention was planned in this chapter and executed in 2 Kings 9.

“Joram … Jehoram” (2Ki 8:16). “These names are the same, Joram being merely an abbreviation of the other.” The Jehoram of Israel was generally referred to as Joram. Only a very brief record of the reign of Jehoram in Judah is given here, but there is a much fuller account of all his wickedness in 2 Chronicles 21.

“It is confusing that these two Jehorams reigned simultaneously in Israel and Judah for about three years.”

“For he had the daughter of Ahab to wife” (2Ki 8:18). This evil woman, of course, was the daughter of Jezebel. “That disastrous political marriage which Jehoshaphat unwisely allowed,” was the instrument by which Satan almost removed faith in Jehovah from the chosen people. Athaliah, here called the daughter of Ahab (and Jezebel) is also called “the granddaughter of Omri” (2Ki 8:26 RSV), and “the daughter of Omri” (2Ki 8:26 KJV). The words “son” and “daughter” are used nine different ways in the Bible, and one of the meanings is “descendant of” (Mat 1:1). Snaith mentioned these variations, referring to “daughter of Omri” as incorrect; but, of course, in the light of Biblical usage throughout the Holy Scriptures, all of these designations are absolutely correct!

“He did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah” (2Ki 8:18). Of course, when we discuss 2 Chronicles 21, we shall understand more fully the implications of this. “One of the worst of Jehoram’s terrible sins was his ruthless murder of his six brothers merely for the purpose of seizing their wealth (2Ch 21:4).”

To be sure, the gross wickedness of Jehoram would have resulted in the total destruction of him and his dynasty, “If the Lord had not promised to preserve a shoot to the royal family for David’s sake.” The nature of this promise to David is revealed in 2Sa 7:13-16, in which the Lord said, “If thy children forsake my Law, and walk not in my statutes, I will visit their offenses with the rod, and their sin with scourges, but I will not utterly take away, nor suffer my truth to fail. My covenant I will not break.” In this very chapter, we shall see evidences of the rod, and of the scourges. Also, see 2Ch 21:12-19.

E.M. Zerr:

2Ki 8:16. Joram and Jehoram were forms of the same name. Ahab, king of Israel, and Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, each had a son with that name. The wording of this verse is somewhat unusual. The writer seems eager to give us plenty of details. The meaning is that the Jehoram who was the son of Jehoshaphat began to reign in the fifth year of the Jehoram who was the son of Ahab. The extra detail is put in, that Jehoshaphat was still reigning in. Judah, down to the fifth year of Jehoram, king in Israel. The reader should again consult the comments at 1Ki 12:17.

2Ki 8:17. The item of where the kings reigned is given because there were two kingdoms of the children of Israel. Jerusalem was the capital of one, Samaria the other.

2Ki 8:18. There was no law against marrying into another tribe. The fact of Jehoram’s taking the daughter of Ahab to wife is stated, therefore, to help account for his evil reign. It is a strong argument against marriage with a family of doubtful principles, because of the evil influences. See 1Co 15:33.

2Ki 8:19. In spite of the evil conduct of Jehoram, God suffered the kingdom of Judah to continue for the time, in respect for David. A light means a representative to sit on the throne in the royal line.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Athaliahs Wicked Husband and Sons

2Ki 8:16-29

Jehorams history furnishes a terrible example of how an ill-marriage may mar a mans life. He had a good father, but a bad wife, and the latter more strongly influenced him than the former, 2Ch 21:6. The fuller story of Jehorams reign, and the apparent extinction of the royal family, is told in 2Ch 22:1-12. But notice especially 2Ki 8:19. The lamp was kept burning for Davids sake, Psa 132:17. Surely the grace of God can keep that same lamp burning in the hearts of our children. A lamp, as we learned from the Chicago fire, may make a very great conflagration.

Ahaziah followed in the steps of his parents. What could be expected from the training of such a mother! Misled by her, he followed the dreary steps of Ahab. The close intimacy between the two houses led to alliance in war and a common fate. Little did Jehoshaphat realize all the evil that would result from his dealings with Ahab, 1Ki 22:4. The story told in these pages is sad reading, but through it all Gods purpose moves on. See Mat 1:8. As a water-lily grows from a muddy bottom, so the pure life of Christ came, on the human side, out of this family. Gods purpose shall finally emerge from this present strife in a further revelation of the Son of man.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Jehoram

(Exalted by Jehovah)

(1Ki 22:50; 2Ki 8:16-24; 2 Chron. 21)

Give not thyways to that which destroyeth kings.-Pro 31:3

Of the seven sons of Jehoshaphat, Jehoram was the eldest; and to him his father gave the kingdom, because he was the first-born. It would seem, from 2Ki 8:16, that he associated Jehoram with him on the throne during his lifetime. He probably foresaw and feared what was likely to occur after his death; and to avert, if possible, any such disaster, he endeavored to have the throne well secured to Jehoram before his decease. And to conciliate his remaining six sons, he gave them great gifts of silver, and of gold, and of precious things, with fenced cities in Judah. They were not, probably, all children of one mother, as two of them bear exactly the same name-Azariah. This would make dissension among them all the more likely, and it is a warning to all to see Jehoshaphat ending his days with this threatening storm-cloud hanging over his house.

It was all the result of his ill-advised alliance with the ungodly house of Ahab, and what he sowed he, by dread anticipation at least, reaped. And his pos- terity were made to reap it actually, in a most terrible way. Now when Jehoram was risen up to the kingdom of his father, he strengthened himself, and slew all his brethren with the sword, and divers also of the princes of Israel. He had married the daughter of a murderer (2Ki 6:32), and as a natural consequence he soon imbrued his own hands in blood. Jehoram was thirty and two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem. And he walked in the ways of the kings of Israel, like as did the house of Ahab: for he had the daughter of Ahab to wife: and he wrought that which was evil in the eyes of the Lord.

Decadence of power at once set in, which the neighboring nations were not slow to perceive, and take advantage of. In his days the Edomites revolted from under the dominion of Judah, and made themselves a king. Then Jehoram went forth with his princes, and all his chariots with him: and he rose up by night, and smote the Edomites which compassed him in, and the captains of the chariots. This happened at Zair (2Ki 8:21), in Idumea, south of the Dead Sea. He barely escaped destruction, or capture, being surrounded by the enemy. He managed to extricate himself by a night surprise, but the expedition was a failure. So the Edomites revolted from under the hand of Judah unto this day. The spirit of rebellion spread: The same time also did Libnah revolt from under his hand; because he had forsaken the Lord God of his fathers.

His attitude toward idolatry was the exact reverse of that of his father. He made high places in the mountains of Judah, and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit fornication, and compelled Judah thereto, or, seduced Judah (N. Tr.). He undid, so far as lay in his power, all the good work of his father Jehoshaphat. But how dearly he paid for his wickedness! And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet (written prophetically before his translation, evidently), saying, Thus saith the Lord God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah, but hast walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and hast made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to go a whoring, like to the whoredoms of the house of Ahab, and also hast slain thy brethren of thy fathers house, which were better than thyself: behold, with a great plague will the Lord smite thy people, and thy children, and thy wives, and all thy goods: and thou shalt have great sickness by disease of thy bowels, until thy bowels fall out by reason of the sickness day by day.

Elijahs ministry and field of labor had been, it would seem, exclusively among the ten tribes, the kingdom of Israel. But the servant of God is used here for a message to the king of Judah. And as it was prophesied to him, so it came to pass. The Lord stirred up against Jehoram the spirit of the Philistines, and of the Arabians, that were near the Ethiopians: and they came up into Judah, and brake into it, and carried away all the substance that was found in the kings house, and his sons also, and his wives; so that there was never a son left him, save Jehoahaz (called Ahaziah, 2Ch 22:1), the youngest of his sons. And after all this, (terrible as the stroke was) the Lord smote him in his bowels with an incurable disease. And it came to pass, that in process of time, after the end of two years, his bowels fell out by reason of his sickness: so he died of sore diseases. And his people made no burning for him, like the burning of his fathers. What a terrible recompense for his murders and idolatries! God made a signal example of him, that his successors might see it and fear.

Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem eight years, and departed without being desired [regretted]. Howbeit they buried him in the city of David, but not in the sepulchres of the kings. He is one of the most unlovely of all the kings of Judah. Exalted by Jehohovah, he was for his wickedness thrust down to a dishonored grave. He took the kingdom when raised to its highest glory since the days of Solomon, and left it, after a reign of eight short years, with Ichabod ( the glory is departed) written large upon it.

The proverb, One sinner destroyeth much good (Ecc 9:18), was sadly exemplified in this unhappy Jehorams life. The lifetimes labor of some devoted man of God may be easily and quickly ruined, or marred, by some such sinner. We see this illustrated in the case of Paul. After his departure, grievous wolves entered in among the flocks gathered by his toils and travail; also of their own selves men arose, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. And even before his martyrdom he wrote, weeping, of the enemies of the cross of Christ, and was compelled to say, All seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christs. Also, All they which be in Asia are turned away from me. And one has only to compare the writings of the earliest Greek fathers (so-called) with the writings of the apostle, to see how widespread and complete was the departure from the truth of Christianity. Nevertheless [blessed word!] the foundation of God standeth sure. And,the exhortation is, let every one that nameth the name of the Lord depart from iniquity (2Ti 2:19). Oh, let not me be the sinner to destroy the work of God (Rom 14:20).

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

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.

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

am 3112, bc 892

Jehoram: 2Ki 1:17, 1Ki 22:50, 2Ch 21:1-20

began to reign: Heb. reigned, “Began to reign in concert with his father.

Reciprocal: 1Ki 22:42 – thirty and five 2Ki 3:1 – Jehoram 2Ki 8:25 – General 2Ki 9:29 – in the eleventh 2Ki 11:2 – Joram Mat 1:8 – Joram

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

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 fathers 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.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

8:16 And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel, Jehoshaphat [being] then king of Judah, {i} Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign.

(i) Read 2Ki 1:17.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

5. Jehoram’s evil reign in Judah 8:16-24

Jehoshaphat appointed his son Jehoram coregent the year Jehoshaphat went off to join forces with Ahab in battle at Ramoth-gilead (853 B.C.). For the next five years Jehoram served with his father. In 848 B.C. he began ruling alone and did so for the next eight years (until 841 B.C.). His reign overlapped the reigns of Ahaziah and Jehoram (whom the NASB called Joram from now on) in Israel. It is possible that the writing prophet Obadiah ministered and wrote the Bible book that bears his name during Jehoram’s reign. [Note: Walter L. Baker, "Obadiah," in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 1453-54.]

Rather than following the godly example of his father, Jehoram chose to pursue idolatry and infidelity to Yahweh like his wife Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel. If it had not been for His promise to David (2Sa 7:12-15), God would have cut off Jehoram’s line for his wickedness (2Ki 8:19). Instead, he disciplined him and Judah by allowing Edom and Libnah to revolt against Judah successfully. Edom had come under Judah’s control during Jehoshaphat’s administration (2Ch 20:1-29; cf. 1Ki 22:47). Zair is another name for Seir or Edom. Chariots did not save Jehoram from defeat (2Ki 8:21). Libnah was a town near the border between Judah and Philistia that seems to have revolted when the Philistines invaded Judah (2Ch 21:16-17). Judah became weaker under Jehoram because of his wickedness. The king himself died a painful death (2Ch 21:18-19).

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

(1) JEHORAM BEN-JEHOSHAPHAT OF JUDAH

B.C. 851-843

(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.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary