=1‒4= (no parallel in Kings).
THE INVASION OF THE MOABITES AND THEIR ALLIES.
Verses 1‒30 of this chapter present an edifying tale of a miraculous
victory gained by Jehoshaphat over an invading horde of desert tribes,
a victory gained solely through prayer to Jehovah and without a single
blow being struck by a Judean soldier. The whole narrative is an
admirable example of midrashic narrative, and should be compared with
xiv. 9‒15 and xiii. 3‒20, where see notes. Regarding the possibility of
an historical foundation for the tale, see the Introduction § 7, xlix,
l, and compare G. A. Smith, _Historical Geography of the Holy Land_,
pp. 272, 273.
¹And it came to pass after this, that the children of Moab, and
the children of Ammon, and with them some of the Ammonites¹, came
against Jehoshaphat to battle.
¹ Perhaps an error for _Meunim_. So the Septuagint See chapter
xxvi. 7.
=1.= _some of the Ammonites_] Read, =some of the Meunim=. They were
an Arabian people whose name seems to be preserved in that of _Ma‘īn_,
an Edomitic village (south-east of Petra) on the pilgrim route between
Damascus and Mecca. The LXX. here, as also in xxvi. 7; 1 Chronicles iv.
41, has Μειναῖοι (Μιναῖοι), and probably intended thereby the Minaeans,
a people who established a powerful kingdom in South Arabia (see the
note on 1 Chronicles iv. 41).
²Then there came some that told Jehoshaphat, saying, There
cometh a great multitude against thee from beyond the sea from
Syria; and, behold, they be in Hazazon-tamar (the same is
En-gedi).
=2.= _from Syria_] So also LXX., but undoubtedly the correct reading is
=from Edom=. Confusion of two letters of almost identical shape in
Hebrew (a ר for a ד) accounts for the difference.
_Hazazon-tamar_] Genesis xiv. 7. The name seems to describe the place
as _stony_ and as containing _palm-trees_. It is in fact an oasis.
_the same is En-gedi_] Compare G. A. Smith, _Historical Geography of
the Holy Land_ as quoted above, and Bädeker, _Palestine_⁵, p. 171.
En-gedi is on the west coast of the Dead Sea at a point where a rugged
pass leads up into the hill country of Judah.
³And Jehoshaphat feared, and set himself to seek unto the
LORD; and he proclaimed a fast throughout all Judah. ⁴And Judah
gathered themselves together, to seek _help_ of the LORD: even
out of all the cities of Judah they came to seek the LORD.
=3.= _proclaimed a fast_] A fast involved the assembling of the people;
1 Kings xxi. 9, 12; Jeremiah xxxvi. 6, 9; Joel ii. 15. Special fasts
were proclaimed for war, famine, or any other calamity or serious event.
=5‒13= (no parallel in Kings).
THE PRAYER OF JEHOSHAPHAT.
This prayer should be compared with Solomon’s (vi. 14 ff.).
⁵And Jehoshaphat stood in the congregation of Judah and
Jerusalem, in the house of the LORD, before the new court;
=5.= _stood_] Rather, =rose up=.
_before the new court_] The Temple of Solomon, strictly speaking,
had only one court, but the Chronicler speaks of it in terms which
seem more appropriate to the post-exilic Temple with its inner and
outer courts (see the note on iv. 9). The terms he uses, however,
are unhappily vague and it is not quite easy to determine the precise
meaning. Thus here, the word used for “court” is _ḥāṣēr_, which
according to iv. 9 ought to mean the inner court, the court of the
priests, as distinguished from the outer court of the people, the
“_‘azārāh_.” On this view, the phrase means that Jehoshaphat was in the
_‘azārāh_, standing not _in_ but _before_ the _ḥāṣēr_ of the priests.
But the inner court must be the old original court, and it seems quite
impossible that the Chronicler, as he does here, should describe it
as _new_: that adjective can be applicable only to a secondary, outer,
court. We must therefore suppose that he here uses the word _ḥāṣēr_ for
the court he elsewhere designates by the special term _‘azārāh_. The
correct interpretation then is that Jehoshaphat stood _before_ the new,
the outer court, i.e. he stood at the inner side of the outer court
with his back towards the inner court and looking out towards the
containing wall and the entrances where the people were grouped. Both
interpretations come to much the same thing, but the point of language
deserves attention.
⁶and he said, O LORD, the God of our fathers, art not thou God
in heaven? and art not thou ruler over all the kingdoms of the
nations? and in thine hand is power and might, so that none is
able to withstand thee.
=6.= _art not thou God_] Compare Joshua ii. 11.
_ruler over all the kingdoms_] Compare Psalms xxii. 28.
_is power_] compare xiv. 11 (Asa’s prayer).
⁷Didst not thou, O our God, drive out the inhabitants of this
land before thy people Israel, and gavest it to the seed of
Abraham thy friend for ever? ⁸And they dwelt therein, and have
built thee a sanctuary therein for thy name, saying,
=7.= _drive out_] compare Deuteronomy ix. 5.
_thy friend_] compare Isaiah xli. 8.
⁹If evil come upon us, the sword¹, judgement, or pestilence, or
famine, we will stand before this house, and before thee, (for
thy name is in this house,) and cry unto thee in our affliction,
and thou wilt hear and save.
¹ Or, _the sword of judgement_.
=9.= _the sword, judgement_] Render with margin =the sword of judgement=
(compare Ezekiel xiv. 17).
¹⁰And now, behold, the children of Ammon and Moab and mount
Seir, whom thou wouldest not let Israel invade, when they came
out of the land of Egypt, but they turned aside from them, and
destroyed them not;
=10.= _mount Seir_] Here, and in verse 23 in the enumeration of
the allied peoples, “Mount Seir” which was situated in the Edomite
territory takes the place of the “Meunim” of verse 1. It is clear,
however, that the same contingent is meant, and no difficulty arises
if Meunim denotes people from the Edomite district near the town Ma‘īn:
see note on verse 1. Even if the south Arabian Minaeans were meant,
it might be said that the two peoples were cognate and that Minaean
invaders in passing through Mount Seir would probably bring along with
them Edomite kinsmen. The region loosely denoted by Mount Seir was
practically synonymous with Edom, extending from the south of the Dead
Sea to the head of the Gulf of Akaba.
_whom thou wouldest not_, etc.] Compare Deuteronomy ii. 4, 5, 9, 19;
see also Numbers xx. 14‒21.
¹¹behold, how they reward us, to come to cast us out of thy
possession, which thou hast given us to inherit.
=11.= _thy possession_] A “possession” means that which one takes
possession of by the sword. Canaan is God’s “possession” because it was
conquered by His arm (Psalms xliv. 3).
¹²O our God, wilt thou not judge them? for we have no might
against this great company that cometh against us; neither know
we what to do: but our eyes are upon thee.
=12.= _our eyes are upon thee_] Compare xiv. 11.
¹³And all Judah stood before the LORD, with their little ones,
their wives, and their children.
=13.= _their little ones ... and their children_] Compare xxxi. 18,
“their little ones ... and their sons and their daughters.” “Little
ones” (Hebrew _ṭaph_) seems always to mean quite small children.
=14‒19= (no parallel in Kings).
THE PROPHECY OF JAHAZIEL.
¹⁴Then upon Jahaziel the son of Zechariah, the son of Benaiah,
the son of Jeiel, the son of Mattaniah, the Levite, of the
sons of Asaph, came the spirit of the LORD in the midst of the
congregation;
=14.= _Jahaziel_] Nothing is known of him beyond what is recorded in
this chapter. His name is significant (“God giveth visions”).
¹⁵and he said, Hearken ye, all Judah, and ye inhabitants of
Jerusalem, and thou king Jehoshaphat: thus saith the LORD unto
you, Fear not ye, neither be dismayed by reason of this great
multitude; for the battle is not yours, but God’s.
=15.= _the battle is not yours, but God’s_] Jahaziel gives a special
turn to the general truth, “The battle is the Lord’s” (David to Goliath,
1 Samuel xvii. 47).
¹⁶To-morrow go ye down against them: behold, they come up by the
ascent of Ziz; and ye shall find them at the end of the valley,
before the wilderness of Jeruel.
=16.= _the ascent of Ziz_] The exact positions of this and of the
“valley” and of the “wilderness” mentioned in this verse are uncertain,
but probably the invaders followed not the direct road from En-gedi to
Beth-lehem, but one a little to the left of this.
_the valley_] (Hebrew _naḥal_), strictly “ravine” or “water-course.”
¹⁷Ye shall not need to fight in this _battle_: set yourselves,
stand ye still, and see the salvation of the LORD with you, O
Judah and Jerusalem: fear not, nor be dismayed: to-morrow go out
against them; for the LORD is with you. ¹⁸And Jehoshaphat bowed
his head with his face to the ground: and all Judah and the
inhabitants of Jerusalem fell down before the LORD, worshipping
the LORD.
=17.= _stand ye still, and see the salvation of the LORD_] This
saying magnificently expresses the very essence of this story of
deliverance won by faith. And further it reveals the deepest aspect
of the Chronicler’s attitude to life. It is the living heart of the
whole history as he tells it. We are impatient of the mechanical and
grandiose elements in his work, because the taste for such exaggeration
has passed away and the necessity for laying stress on the ritual of
religion has little relevance for our times. But all criticism of the
books of Chronicles is superficial which fails to see that the writer
is inspired by a splendid faith in God and a grand determination to
maintain the religious attitude as the one ultimate key to life’s
meaning. The present story is intended to assert the value of reliance
upon God, in the midst of overwhelming peril still “trust in God and
do the right”; and to assert this in the strongest conceivable terms.
Thus it is related that the victory was gained without any need for
Jehoshaphat’s _grande armée_ of 1,160,000 men! Turn from the tale to
the circumstances of the post-exilic Jewish community, and the heroism
of such teaching leaps to light. It is when we are surrounded by
unscrupulous and powerful foes and have not 1000 soldiers, far less
1,000,000, that the reality of our trust in God and goodness is put
to the test. “Aye,” says the Chronicler, “but, if like Jehoshaphat you
_had_ 1,000,000, it is still the supreme duty of man to rely on God.”
Great teaching, and greatly followed by the enfeebled yet indomitable
Jews. While they were thus helpless, Jehovah wrought for Israel, even
as the Chronicler relates that He destroyed the enemies of Jehoshaphat
in the wilderness of Jeruel. “The Jews stood still and saw the working
out of their deliverance; great Empires wrestled together――Babylonian,
Persian, Greek, and Roman――like Moab, Ammon, and Edom, in the agony
of the death struggle: and over all the tumult of battle Israel heard
the voice of Jehovah, ‘The battle is not yours, but God’s; ... set
yourselves, stand ye still, and see the deliverance of Jehovah with
you, O Judah and Jerusalem’” (Bennett, _Chronicles_, p. 387). Certainly
the post-exilic Jews were so weak that trust in their own armed power
was at almost all times manifestly absurd, yet this does not mean
that they were thereby driven to the policy of quiet faith. There was
an alternative ever before them――despair and unbelief: _that_ they
resolutely refused. Such were the stern realities which ought to be
weighed when we seek to realise the moral and spiritual worth of the
Chronicler and his doctrines.
¹⁹And the Levites, of the children of the Kohathites and of the
children of the Korahites, stood up to praise the LORD, the God
of Israel, with an exceeding loud voice.
=19.= _the Korahites_] The Korahites were a branch of the Kohathites (1
Chronicles vi. 22 [7, Hebrew], 37, 38 [22, 23, Hebrew]); the Chronicler
simply defines his first statement; those who stood up to praise were
Kohathites by clan, Korahites by family.
=20‒25= (no parallel in Kings).
THE DELIVERANCE.
²⁰And they rose early in the morning, and went forth into the
wilderness of Tekoa: and as they went forth, Jehoshaphat stood
and said, Hear me, O Judah, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem;
believe in the LORD your God, so shall ye be established;
believe his prophets,
=20.= _Tekoa_] The modern _Teḳu‘a_, a ruin on a hill 2790 feet above
the sea, about six miles south of Beth-lehem. It was an ancient place;
xi. 6; 1 Chronicles ii. 24; 2 Samuel xiv. 2; Amos i. 1. The “wilderness
of Tekoa” means that part of the “wilderness of Judah” which was near
Tekoa.
_believe ... so shall ye be established_] Compare Isaiah vii. 9, “If
ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.” In both
places there is a play on the words in the Hebrew; “believe” and “be
established” representing two voices of the same verb _ha’amīnū ...
tē’āmēnū_.
²¹so shall ye prosper. And when he had taken counsel with the
people, he appointed them that should sing unto the LORD, and
praise the beauty¹ of holiness, as they went out before the army,
and say, Give thanks unto the LORD; for his mercy _endureth_ for
ever.
¹ Or, _in the beauty of holiness_.
=21.= _them that should sing unto the LORD, and praise_] Compare the
preliminaries of the Battle of the Standard fought between the Scots
and English in 1138.
_the beauty of holiness_] Render =in holy attire=, i.e. in priestly
garments. Compare 1 Chronicles xvi. 29 (note).
_before the army_] Contrast Joshua vi. 7, 9 (the armed men precede the
Ark).
_Give thanks_] compare 1 Chronicles xvi. 41.
²²And when they began to sing and to praise, the LORD set liers
in wait against the children of Ammon, Moab, and mount Seir,
which were come against Judah; and they were smitten.
=22.= _the LORD set liers in wait_] Comparing Joshua viii. 2, where
Joshua is bidden by God to set an ambush, we might suppose that the
present phrase implies simply that the Lord suggested to Jehoshaphat
the plan of setting an ambush. Such a view, however, seems antagonistic
to verse 17, where the Judeans are told only to stand still and see the
salvation wrought by God; and indeed it would detract immensely from
the value of the tale as an awe-inspiring marvel. It is preferable
to suppose that certain supernatural Divine agents were meant by the
Chronicler. If the tradition has an historical basis, some sudden
assault was probably made by the inhabitants of the invaded district
before the main army from Jerusalem arrived (see the Introduction pp.
xlix, l). G. A. Smith (_Historical Geography of the Holy Land_, p. 272)
points out that the country between En-gedi and Tekoa is well suited
for attack by surprise.
²³For the children of Ammon and Moab stood up against the
inhabitants of mount Seir, utterly to slay and destroy them: and
when they had made an end of the inhabitants of Seir, every one
helped to destroy another.
=23.= _For the children of Ammon_] Render, =And the children of Ammon=.
The sudden attack of the “liers in wait” caused a panic and a suspicion
of treachery among the allies; so at Gideon’s surprise of Midian every
man turned his sword against his fellow (Judges vii. 22).
_utterly to slay_] Literally _to devote_, or _put to the ban_ (Hebrew
ḥerem); i.e. to undertake the partial or total destruction of the
foe and his possessions as a sacred duty to be performed in honour of
God――compare Leviticus xxvii. 28, 29, and Driver’s note on Exodus xxii.
20 in this series. Compare 1 Chronicles iv. 41.
²⁴And when Judah came to the watch-tower of the wilderness, they
looked upon the multitude; and, behold, they were dead bodies
fallen to the earth, and there were none that escaped.
=24.= _to the watch-tower_] Rather “=to the outlook-point=,” i.e. some
spot from which they were able to survey the scene of the disaster in
the valley by which the enemy were advancing.
²⁵And when Jehoshaphat and his people came to take the spoil
of them, they found among them in abundance both riches and
dead bodies¹, and precious jewels, which they stripped off for
themselves, more than they could carry away: and they were three
days in taking of the spoil, it was so much.
¹ According to some ancient authorities, _garments_.
=25.= _they found among them in abundance both riches and dead bodies_]
The Hebrew text is faulty. Following the LXX. εὖρον κτήνη πολλὰ καὶ
ἀποσκευὴν καὶ σκῦλα, read probably =they found much cattle and goods
and garments=.
=26‒30= (no parallel in Kings).
THE SEQUEL OF THE DELIVERANCE.
²⁶And on the fourth day they assembled themselves in the valley
of Beracah¹; for there they blessed the LORD: therefore the name
of that place was called The valley of Beracah, unto this day.
²⁷Then they returned, every man of Judah and Jerusalem, and
Jehoshaphat in the forefront of them, to go again to Jerusalem
with joy; for the LORD had made them to rejoice over their
enemies. ²⁸And they came to Jerusalem with psalteries and harps
and trumpets unto the house of the LORD.
¹ That is, _Blessing_.
=26.= _valley of Beracah_] A deserted village _Bereikūt_ (south of
Tekoa) where there are some very ancient ruins seems to preserve the
name. It is possible that the “valley of Jehoshaphat” mentioned by
Joel (iii. [iv., Hebrew] 2) is to be identified with the scene of
Jehoshaphat’s deliverance.
²⁹And the fear of God was on all the kingdoms of the countries,
when they heard that the LORD fought against the enemies of
Israel. ³⁰So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet: for his God
gave him rest round about.
=29.= _was on all_] Rather, =came upon all=; compare xiv. 14, xvii. 10.
_the kingdoms of the countries_] a characteristic phrase with the
Chronicler; compare xii. 8, xvii. 10 and 1 Chronicles xxix. 30.
=31‒34= (= 1 Kings xxii. 41‒45).
THE SUMMARY OF JEHOSHAPHAT’S REIGN.
There are several variations of text between Kings and Chronicles here;
and in particular the Chronicler omits the statement that Jehoshaphat
made peace with Israel.
³¹And Jehoshaphat reigned over Judah: he was thirty and five
years old when he began to reign; and he reigned twenty and five
years in Jerusalem: and his mother’s name was Azubah the
daughter of Shilhi.
=31.= _reigned over Judah_] In Kings, _began to reign over Judah in the
fourth year of Ahab king of Israel_. The Chronicler will not date the
accession of a southern king by the year of an ungodly northern king.
³²And he walked in the way of Asa his father, and turned not
aside from it, doing that which was right in the eyes of the
LORD.
=32.= _of Asa his father_] compare xvii. 3 (note).
³³Howbeit the high places were not taken away; neither as yet
had the people set their hearts unto the God of their fathers.
=33.= _the high places_] Precisely the contrary is asserted in xvii. 6,
where see note. On the meaning of “high place” see the note on xv. 17.
_neither as yet had the people set their hearts_] compare xii. 14.
In Kings it is said particularly that the people sacrificed and burnt
incense at the high places.
³⁴Now the rest of the acts of Jehoshaphat, first and last,
behold, they are written in the history¹ of Jehu the son of
Hanani, which is inserted² in the book of the kings of Israel.
¹ Hebrew _words_.
² Or, _who is mentioned_.
=34.= _Jehu the son of Hanani_] See xix. 2 (note).
_which is inserted_] Chronicles of different events were joined
together to form one continuous Chronicle; i.e. the _history of
Jehu_ means a special section of the Book of the Kings of Israel――see
Introduction § 5, p. xxxii.
=35‒37= (compare 1 Kings xxii. 48, 49).
THE DESTRUCTION OF JEHOSHAPHAT’S FLEET.
The Chronicler gives a somewhat different account of this incident
from that in Kings. According to the latter, Jehoshaphat made ships of
Tarshish (i.e. a particular kind of vessel) to sail to Ophir for gold,
and _refused_ the offer of Ahaziah to cooperate in the enterprise. It
is then added that the enterprise failed, as the ships were wrecked
at Ezion-geber. The Chronicler, on the other hand, expressly asserts
that Jehoshaphat “joined himself” with the wicked Ahaziah in this naval
enterprise, and interprets the wreck as a Divine punishment for the sin
of the alliance (the disaster being foretold by a prophet). Further he
has misunderstood the term “ships of Tarshish” (see note, verse 36) and
makes Tarshish, and not Ophir, the object of the voyage. The whole is
said to constitute an instructive example of the freedom with which
the narrative in Kings could be handled in the interests of religious
teaching. The second divergence, “ships to Tarshish,” is only an error
of ignorance, but the first is important. Without, however, denying
that the Chronicler has been careful to point the moral of his tale,
it may be urged that his version is not obtained simply by an arbitrary
alteration of Kings, but rather reflects an _independent_ account of
the affair, perhaps more reliable than that in Kings. Almost certainly
Jehoshaphat was still virtually subject to Israel, and the Chronicler’s
tradition may be true to fact in representing him as partner with
Ahaziah from the start of the enterprise. At least the possibility must
not be ruled out because the story suited the Chronicler’s religious
predilections. Again it is quite improbable that the story of the seer
of Mareshah is wholly an invention of the Chronicler (see notes on
verse 37). The passage therefore yields some evidence of access to
traditions other than those in Kings; and their value deserves to be
fairly considered.
³⁵And after this did Jehoshaphat king of Judah join himself
with Ahaziah king of Israel; the same did very wickedly: ³⁶and
he joined himself with him to make ships to go to Tarshish: and
they made the ships in Ezion-geber.
=36.= _ships to go to Tarshish_] In Kings, _ships of Tarshish to go
to Ophir_: compare ix. 21 (= 1 Kings x. 22), note. In both passages
the reading of Kings, “ships (or ‘navy’) _of_ Tarshish,” i.e. large
sea-going ships (compare Psalms xlviii. 7), is correct, because
(1) Ezion-geber was a port for vessels sailing eastward, while Tarshish
was in the west, (2) gold, the object of the voyage (compare 1 Kings
xxii. 48), came from Ophir (viii. 18; 1 Kings ix. 28, x. 11; Psalms
xlv. 9).
_Tarshish_] compare 1 Chronicles i. 7 (note).
_Ezion-geber_] compare viii. 17 (note).
³⁷Then Eliezer the son of Dodavahu of Mareshah prophesied
against Jehoshaphat, saying, Because thou hast joined thyself
with Ahaziah, the LORD hath destroyed¹ thy works. And the ships
were broken, that they were not able to go to Tarshish.
¹ Or, _made a breach in_.
=37.= _Then Eliezer ... of Mareshah prophesied_] Cook (_Expository
Times_, August, 1906, p. 191) points out how suitable Mareshah is
as the home of a prophet antagonistic to Jehoshaphat. The town was
situated in the Shephelah (see xi. 8, note; and also Peters and
Thiersch, _Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa_); and would be
in close touch with the Philistine and Edomite (Arabian) districts,
which were “stirred up” to revolt in the time of Jehoram, Jehoshaphat’s
son. Note also the association of Mareshah in the tradition of Zerah’s
invasion in Asa’s reign (xiv. 10). It is unlikely that the Chronicler
would have “invented” Mareshah as the home of Eliezer; rather is it
reasonable to infer that he is utilising an old tradition, independent
of Kings and at least noteworthy for its consistency.
_Dodavahu_] The LXX. (Lucian), Δουδίου, indicates that the original
form of the name was _Dodiah_ דודיה, signifying probably “kinsman of
Jehovah”; for euphemistic reasons this was softened to _Dodavahu_.
The name therefore is almost certainly characteristic of an early
period, and is not such as would naturally occur to the Chronicler’s
imagination. Here again then we find reason for thinking that the
Chronicler was relying on the current form of an old tradition (see
G. B. Gray, _Hebrew Proper Names_, pp. 62, 232).