Commentary on the Old Testament Volume 2-4, Biblical commentary 1 · 2 Kings · Chapter 1
CHAP. I.
THe history of Ahaziah king of Israel, begun in the first Book, is here continued to his death, which followed shortly after, viz. within two yeares; and as is probably thought, the very next year after his father, with whom he had reigned one, and in the second he died. For as he was exceeding wicked, so he was pursued with judgement after judgement in this short time of his reign. First, as was before shewed, his ships which he made together with Iehoshaphat, were broken. Secondly, Moab rebelled against him immediatly after his fathers death, v. 1. Thirdly, V. 1.he fell out of a window and was sore bruised, v. 2. Fourthly, going on in his wickednesse and sending to enquire of Baalzebub, whether he should recover, he lost some companies of his men by fire from heaven. Fifthly, he heard the dreadfull newes of death from the prophet Elijah, and then he died, when by all these calamities he had been moved to repentance, but in vain.
Touching his fall, of which his mortall sicknesse came, it was most probably V. 2.through a window upon the battlement of his house, where he walked for his recreation, for the Iews built their houses with flat tops to walk upon, and thus his Note. pleasure, by the just judgement of God, was turned to his ruine for his sinnes: for as all things shall work together for good to the faithfull, so to the wicked all shall work to bring them to destruction. For the god, to whom he sent for help in this case, viz. Baalzebub the god of Ekron or Accharon, as the vulgar Latin hath it, the same in the Gospel is called Belzebub, signifying the lord of flies, because that country being much annoyed by flies, they held that by his help they were driven away, so Vatablus. The Septuagint and Iosephus render it, the one, the lord the flye, Vatablus. Theodoret.the other, the god the flye. And accordingly Theodoret writeth of it, as if it were the image of a flye, saying, they deified not onelyonly greater creatures, but even the least and vilest. For what is more vile, then a flye? and yet they called the image thereof a god; and leaving the true living God, sought to it for life, yea they called the dead image of that a god, which they drove away with flye-flaps being alive. Procopius Procopius.saith, that the devill was called Belzebub, or rather a certain little old woman, whom they put into the number of goddesses. Pausanius saith, that Pausan. in Eliacis. l. 5.Hercules the sonne of Alcmena, when he could not drive away the flies that molested him, sacrificed to Iupiter, and imploring his help, and then they flew all away immediatly beyond Alpheus. Hence the Elians took occasion to continue the like sacrificing. And this I rather take to be the truth touching this idol, that i… was the image of Iupiter, thus called, because of him help was sought against the anoyance by flyes, then that of Theoderet, and because he was the chiefe of the heathen gods, which were devils, Belzebub was by the Iewes called the Prince of devils. And by Accaron, where his shrine was, hell is set forth amongst the Poets, as the saying,
Flectere cum superos nequeo, Ac haronta movebo.
But the same Bel or Baal was now served in Israel, as well as in Acearon of the Philistins, why then did the king of Israel send thither? It may be concieved that the prophets of the idoll whom he served, had deceived his father, and lied unto him to his destruction at Ramoth Gilead, and therefore though he served him as his father had done, and his mother, yet he thought it not safe to trust to him, but rather to send out of the land to another Baal. But why sent he not to Michaiah, or to Elijah, whom he knew to be true Prophets? Ans. Hee was doubtlesse of the same mind with his wicked father, he hated them, as being against him and such as hee was, and therefore not likely to speak any comfort, but terrour unto him.
Martyr saith, that some hold that idol to be called Belzebub by the godly in P. Martyr.contempt; but he approveth rather the former reason, because even by Ahaziah, he was so called. And he addeth, that idolaters used to send in time of sicknesse, both to enquire, and for help to idols; and sometime, that they might be the more deded, obtained it, as some that sent to the temples of Aesculapius,
To these messengers of Ahaziah when they were on the way to Baalzebub, was Elijah sent by an Angell to threaten death unto him, because hee sent to an V. 3.idol out of the land, this being derogatory from the God of Israel. But seeing by his fall he was mortally bruised some make a quere, how his sending to enquire of Baalzabub, could be said to be the cause. Tostatus answereth well to this, that either Tostatus.his hurt was such, as would not have caused such, and then the turning of it to be the cause of death, was manifestly by the hand of God offended at his sending, or else it was mortall, and then his sending is said to be the cause, for so much as God happily would otherwise have healed him, if he had been sought unto, as he did Hezekiah afterwards of his deadly sicknesse. Where Elijah was, when the Angell sent h im forth to meet these messengers, it is not said; but v. 9. it appeareth, that the place to which he returned, was the top of mount Carmel, at the foot whereof he had a cave, in which he dwelt, and Elishah after him, saith Adricomius, Adricom.and there also was a spring. But how happened it then, that the Angell bad him ascend or goe up to meet the messengers? Ans. Herein respect was had to the way, in which he was to meet them, which was from Samaria, that stood upon a mountain, so that he must needs goe up to meet them coming from thence, although he first descended to the foot of mount Carmel. The messengers hearing him, soon returned to the King without going further on their intended journey; as appeareth by the kings asking of them why they are returned, v. 5. At which if any man shall marvaile, seeing Elijah was to them unknown, and in appearance but a mean and poor man; it is to be considered, that his very speech discovered him to be a prophet of the Lord, in that he shewed hereby, that he knew whether they were going, and to what end. For he said, is it because there is no God in Israel, that V. 4.yee send to enquire of the god of Ekrons and that the king lay then sick upon his bed, in that he said, thou shalt not come down from thy bed, &c. For how should any other, but a prophet of God, know all these secrets? Being then hereby convinced, that hee was a prophet of God, and that he gave them a true answer, they thought it but vain to goe further to enquire about the same thing, and happily they feared that they might be in danger of death also; if contemning that, which a prophet of the Lord said unto them, they had presumed still to goe on their way to enquire of another god. Martyr saith, that there are by some assigned two other reasons, why they P. Martyr.presently returned, because they gathered from his speech that he was an Angell, seeing he knew whether they were going, &c. 2. Because they gathered no lesse from the manner of his departure, he vanished. But it is not so said of the prophet, but that he went away.
When these messengers had related the saying of the prophet unto him, he enquired V. 8.…hat manner of man he was, they answered, an hairy man, and girt about with a lether girdle, then he knew that it was Elijah the Tishbite, and sent immediately V. 9.to have him fetcht unto him. The king might well so readily gather who it was, because he had doubtlesse sometime seen him in the dayes of Ahab his father, and being a prophet most famous for his zeale and courage to speak against any, how great soever, he could not but conjecture, before he heard him described, that it was he. He is said to be hairy according to some, because his body, hands and Cald. paraph. praeditus capillis. S. Capillo oblongo & horrido. Sept. Joseph. pilosus … Esau.face were hairy; according to *Tostat Jo. Hicrosol. clothed with Badgers skinnes. Lyra. P. Martyr.others, because his garments were hairie and course, as Iohn the Baptist, the most probable is, that he washairie both wayes. And they were thus apparrelled, saith Martyr, because they preached repentance, which in those dayes was in sack or haire cloth, that they might by outward sign as well as by word move men to repent; contrary to which is done now by chiefe preachers, Bishops and Cardinals, whose apparell and ornaments are most costly, but preachers should indeed by their example learn to flye such worldly pompe, and not to wear so much as gold chain or ring, but that which may shew and teach others humility. For the kings sending to have him brought unto him, it was by a Captain over fifty, who went with his fifty men by force to bring the Prophet to him, happily that he might make him reverse his sentence, or otherwise put him first to death, who was so bold to threaten him with death. This Captain found him sitting uppon the top of mount Carmell, to which place saith Vatablus, he ascended for fear Vatablus.of Ahaziah; but seeing the top of a mount is no place for a man to hide himself in but rather some cave in a lower place, and more hidden from mens eyes; I cannot think that to be the reason of his ascent, but rather to pray, as sometime before hee had done, 1 King. 18. The Capt. having found him biddeth him in the kings name to come down saying, [O man of God, &c.] which Procopius and Vatablus think, was spoken ironically by him & in scorn, as sleighting him and the Lord whom he served, as if his Lord were of more power to fetch him to him, then God to hold and keep Procopius.him out of his hands. And this seemeth to be true by the Prophets answer, If I be a man of God, let fire come down from heaven and consume thee and thy fifty. For it V. 10.is not to be thought, that meerly for obeying the king, and coming to fetch him to him, when he was sent, that the Prophet was so much incensed against him; but for his pride and prophane insolency, which shewed him to be a man according to the kings own heart, a wicked idolater, and one that regarded not the true God, nor his servants, but rather rejoyced to be an instrument of persecuting them, and like unto him most probably were his souldiers also; wherefore Theodoret saith well, Theodoret perspicuum est eos quinquagenarios & qui cis parebant convenisse cum scopo & instituto cius qui eos misit, &c.it is manifest that these two Captaines and their fifties went out with the same scope and purpose that he had, who sent them, and therefore they suffered these punishments. And Procopius following him addeth, that because they mocked at the Prophet, they were destroyed for example, and to teach others not to raile and mock at the righteous. So that if any call this proceeding of the Prophet tyrannicall, as some doe saith Theodoret, they sharpen their tongues against God, who moved Elijah by his spirit to call for this fire, and when he called for it, sent it, and destroyed them therewith. If any shall wonder why one Captain was sent thus after another, and how it happened, that he took not warning by his fellow, but came and called to the Prophet in the like insolent manner? It is conceived, that Carmel being farre from Samaria, from whence they were sent, viz. as Adrichomius saith, two dayes journey, neither the King nor he knew what had befalne the first Captain, therefore the king impatient of further delay, seeing that he returned not again, sent out this second; that if the other with his men could not bring him, they might doe it with their forces joyned together, or if he could not find him that was first sent out, but was gone to seek him one way, this might go another. And when he came to the place of the Prophets abode and found him there, but no Captain or souldiers, for the fire had consumed them, supposing that he with his men were delayed upon some occasion, as they went another way, he began to speak tauntingly to Elijah, as the first had done, and was together with his men horribly consumed V. 11, 12. P. Martyr.by fire coming down from heaven also. Martyr, who agreeth with that, which hath been said touching their calling of Elijah [thou man of God] in scorn, yet differeth, in that he thinketh it to have been known to the King and the second Captain, what had befalne the first and his 50 men, and that the king hearing such news sent not again immediately; but being terrified, desisted for a time; but that hardening himselfe he sent again, and that the second Captain commended himselfe to his gods to be protected, so as he supposed that the former happily did not, and then adventured to goe, to this effect also Pellican. But seeing no man would be so foolehardy to adventure himselfe upon so apparant deadly danger; neither is there any thing said in the text, which implyeth and delay in the king, or newes brought of the first Captaines destruction, or this Captaines taking of a better course, as being warned by his fellowes example. I rather think with others, that neither King nor Captain knew what had been done, and this made him so bold, not onelyonly to bid the prophet in the kings name to come down, but in hast in such an imperious manner, as that he would have him know, he both could and would fetch him down by force, if he descended not immediately. If it be demanded, why Christ would not have the like done to a city of the Samaritans, which would not receive him, when two of his Disciples requested it, but rebuked them saying, ye know not of what spirit ye are; Martyr answereth well, that this was done not only to shew the lenity of the Gospell and the rigour and severity of the law, according to many; for Peter also smote Ananias and Saphyra with death, Acts 5. and Paul, Elimas, with Act. 5. Acts. 13. 11.blindnesse; but because they were moved by their own, Elijah by the spirit of God to doe this execution upon grosse idolaters and contemners of the true God, and of his servants. A like example of revenge taken by fire from heaven, were Chorah, Dathan, and Abiram made, when they envied at Moses and Aaron, and stirred Numb. 16.up others against them. The revenging of the wrongs done to Gods Prophets should be a warning to all men, not to touch his annointed, nor to doe his Prophets Note. any harme; and the revenge by fire intimated the last revenge upon all the wicked by fire at the day of judgement, according to 2 Thes. 1. 8. For as fire now came down from heaven and consumed some, so then it shall come down for the destruction of all Gods enemies, and the enemies of his servants, that none may remaine incredulous; but being assured, that he who sent down fire now in one part, both can and will send it down in all places of the world, according to his word, repent, that they may escape this dreadfull judgement of the Lord.
To proceed in the history, the mad king nothing moved to desist from his furious enterprize against Elijah, by their not returning, whom he had sent one after another with so great power to fetch him (although it might have moved any man to suspect some judgement befalling them, and happily by this time news was come to the Court how they were destroyed, as may be gathered from the speech of him, that was next sent) calls in haste for another Captain, and his 50 men, and sendoth them to fetch Elijah to him. Now he knowing what had been dox to V. 13.his two predecessours, instead of commanding, humbled himselfe to Elijah, praying him that his life might be precious in his sight, & confessing in effect, that the judgment sent upon the former two, and their men was just, because they came as armed with a greater power from a king, a mortall man, then that of Almighty God; sith, that otherwise they would never have so insolently behaved themselves; He therefore contrariwise believing Gods power to be above all, and that Elijah was truly the man of God, came to him in another way, viz. by entreaty, and not bearing himselfe upon his power of men which he brought with him, neither meaning to use any violence, but if he would goe voluntarily, as he had sometime dox to king Ahab, he and his men were readly only to wait upon him thither, but not by So likewise Johan. Hierosol. and that he turned Disciple to Elliah, and had the gift of prophesying bestowed upon him.any means to lay hands upon him. And this Captain, say the Hebrewes and Lyra, Comestor, and Hugo after them, was Obadiah, who had before found him, when none else could, and foreshewed to king Ahab his coming to him. And this is not improbable, for he then fell upon his face before him, as now upon his knees; and if Ahaziah had yet heard of the destruction of his two former Captains, it is not to be thought that he was so tyrannicall, that he would put another upon the same danger with 50 men more, and therefore now chose one who was gracious with the Prophet, and knew how to deale so with him, as that he would bring him with him; and who could this more probably be, then Obadiah? Certainly it was either he, or some other of like condition of him, that reverenced Gods Prophets, that the king made now choice of to send out, seeing another an idolatrous wicked Captain, would have scorned thus to bow and crouch to a poor prophet, although he had dyed for it.
With this captain the Angel of the Lord biddeth Elijah to go, and fear nothing, V. 15.and so he came and spake to his face, as he had done before to his messengers, neither do we reade of any revenge, that he attempted therefore against the prophet, but that he died according to his word. God, who hath the hearts of kings in his hands, so strook him, when he heard the sentence of death against him denounced from the prophets own mouth, that he had no further courage to attempt any thing against him, but languished and soon after this died.
And Iehor am reigned in his stead, for he had no sonne, the second year of Iehoram V. 17.the sonne of Iehoshaphat king of Iudah.] Here a most difficult question ariseth, how it could be the second year of Iehoram of Iudah, when as Iehoshaphat was still living and reigning, for he reigned 25. years, Ahaziah was made King in his 17. year, and reigned but two years, therefore unlesse there were an inter-regnum, Iehoram began to reign the 19. or 20. of Iehoshaphat, and 5. or 6. yeares before his son Iehoram; yea, it is expresly said chap. 3. 1. that he began his reign the 18. of Iehosha phat, and that king Iehoshaphat holp him in his war against Moab. And a King. 8. 16. that Iehoram of Iudah began his reign the fifth year of Iehoram king of Israel, how then can he be said to have begun his reign in the second of Iehoram king of Iudah? I finde two wayes, that Expositours labour to reconcile these differences, either by saying, that Iehoram the king of Israel was not of full age, when his brother Ahaziah died, and therefore although he were immediately made king, yet the kingdome was under the government of a protectour certain years, even till the second of Iehoram king of Iudah, at whose entrance upon his reign he had been king four years, and was then upon the fifth, and yet his father made him king, together with himself some years before he died; for which cause it is said, 2 King. 8. 16. that he began to reign, whilest Iehoshaphat his father yet reigned. Or, they reconcile it by saying, that Iehoshaphat made his sonne Iehoram King, 7. years before his death, to avoid contention betwixt him and his brethren, for he had many, for whom their father otherwise provided, that every one might be content, although it fell out otherwise through the bloud-thirstinesse of idolatro us Iehoram, as is shewed, 2 Chron. 21. 4. And if this be received, it is to be understood here, that Iehoram of Israel began to reign the second year of Iehorams reigning together with his father, and that this Iehoram began to reign alone, his father being now dead the fifth year of Iehoram king of Israel, thus the Hebrew expositours, and after Hebraei. Lyra. Junius.them Lyra. But against this make two things, although it be followed also by Iunius and some other learned expositours; first, that Iehoshaphat is said yet to be living and reigning; secondly, that Iehoram of Israel began his reign the 18. year of Iehoshaphat, which was not according to this account the second, but the first of Iehoram of Iudah, and when he began to reign alone, was not the fift, but the seventh of Iehoram of Israel. There is a necessitie then of leaving this way of reconciliation and looking back again to the former, which together with the other is mentioned by Martyr, but neither preferred, but only after the meantioning left to the P. Martyr.readers choise. According to that, if we say that Iehoram of Iudah began his reign the 17. year of his fathers reign; the other Iehorams reign will begin the second year of his, and 18. of Iehoshaphats, and if Iehoram of Israel, although king, reigned not by reason of his minority, but the kingdome was administred by a protectour, till three years after, then Iehoram of Iudah came to reign alone in the fifth of Iehoram of Israel, and so all differences will be reconciled. OnelyOnly whereas this may seem to make against us in this way, that Iehoshaphats 18. year was the last of Ahabs, for he began the fourth of Ahabs reign, understanding it to be even now at an end, and so his first was Ahabs fifth, who is said to have reigned 22. because he was entring upon 22. when he was cut off, as hath been shewed upon 2 King. 22. 41. And if Ahab died the 18. of Iehoshaphat, and Ahaziah succeeded before Iehoram reigning two years, he, that is Iehoram, could not then begin till the 19. or 20. It is answered, that Ahaziah was made king, whilest his father lived, as the other Iehoram, whilest Iehoshaphat his father lived, and so died the same year with his father. And if this shall seem to make against it, that Iehoram of Iudah his beginning to reign the fifth year of Iehoram of Israel, is said to have been whilest Iehoshaphat reigned, 2 King. 8. 16. For if it be meant of his beginning to reign alone after his fathers death, here seemeth to be a manifest contradiction: but if the text be well considered, there is not, for there is no more said, but this, and Iehoshaphat king of Iudah, it being left to be supplied from that, which was said before 1 King. 22. 17. And Iehoshaphat king of Iudah having reigned hitherto with his sonne, from the beginning of that Iehorams reign over Israel, and two years also before that having made him consort with him in his kingdome, whereupon it was there said, that this Iehoram began in the second year of his reign, now the said son of Iehoshaphat, Iehoram began his reign over Iudah alone, his father being dead. For this must needs either be yielded to, to be the meaning, or the writer of the sacred history to be very forgetfull of what he had formerly written, which is not without blasphemy to be suffered to enter into any mans minde. Or to make all yet more plain, it may be said, that Iehoram of Israel came not to the kingdome, till anno 18. of Iehoshaphat, and the time spoken of here was anno 23. when Iehoram his sonne began to reign alone, and so the meaning of these words [and Iehoshaphat king of Iudah] is, Iehoshaphat king of Iudah still living. For haply he now waxing old, desired to spend the rest of his time in de votion, and so gave all over to his sonne before his death, as David to Solomon, and the rather, that before his death he and the rest being setled, might live together the more peacefully after. Pellican maketh Pellican.short work of that which we have dwelt thus long upon, saying, that either there was a fault in the coppier out of this history, or else he confesseth himself plainly to be ignorant how it may be reconciled. But it is not safe to yield to any errour in copying out the Scriptures, except some true copie remained whereby the erring might be corrected. Let the judicious reader consider, and if he cannot finde a better way of reconciling, follow this with me, which is the most without all exception.