... Moses.” Those who were immoral in their own lives, or self-seeking in their ambitions, were not “like Moses.” It was on these grounds that Jeremiah actually attacked the false prophets of his own generation (cf. Jer. 23). In the NT, prophets were subject to testing (cf. 1 Cor. 14:29–32). In our age, when we are faced with the multiplication of prophetic cults and sects, the adulation of people with “prophetic ministries,” and the proliferation of all kinds of “miracle” attested claims on our ...
... and endangering the family’s substance. 21:23 Anyone who is hung on a tree is under God’s curse: There is disagreement in both Jewish and Christian exegesis as to whether the Hb. (“a curse of God is the hanged one”) is a subjective genitive (“accursed by God”) or an objective genitive (“a curse [i.e., an offense] to God”). Both are possible. The majority verdict favors the former (as NIV). Cf. Bernstein, “Early Jewish Exegesis.” It is important to note that the hanging was an expression ...
... God works his purposes out through this house (he has established it), not because even its first two members are perfectly good (these opening chapters of Kings provide quite sufficient evidence that they are not), but because David’s house is the subject of his election. The conditionality of the Davidic promise, then, is only part of the story (see §2 above); its unconditional aspects are also crucially important. And that will remain true throughout the book of Kings. For without grace, law can ever ...
... :17), he has proved equal to the task, for his wisdom is of equal measure (as 4:29 will make explicit). He has devised an economic system that, while it ensures the royal household has enough to eat and drink, does not oppress or deprive the king’s subjects of what they need. It is government by the righteous person; when he thrives (lit. “grows great”) the people rejoice (Prov. 29:2). It is not government by the wicked person who makes the people groan (Prov. 29:2; cf. 1 Sam. 8:10–18). This picture ...
... ; 10:12, 20; 11:1, 22; 13:4; 30:20), where they speak of unswerving human loyalty to God. The Israelite was to love the LORD wholeheartedly (Deut. 6:5). But Solomon’s heart was divided (v. 4); he was a man unable to practice his own advice to his subjects (8:61). And in spite of his pious hope that God would always turn Israelite hearts towards God (1 Kgs. 8:58), we read that in his old age, the king’s wives turned his heart in the opposite direction—after other gods (v. 4). The threat implied in much ...
... should be noted, is also the people’s abandonment of God. This is demonstrated in the plural phrase, they have forsaken me, which reflects the way that in the book of Kings, kings are characteristically models for and representative of the behavior of their subjects. 11:34–39 The mitigation of 11:12–13 is repeated, although in a slightly different way. Solomon will not lose any tribes during his lifetime, and even his son is to retain one tribe so that David will always have a lamp . . . in Jerusalem ...
... by Jeroboam is the obvious one of defence (v. 25). He evidently does not trust Rehoboam to remain in Jerusalem very long. In fact, he does not seem to trust anyone. He is not convinced, in spite of the events of 12:1–20, that his newfound subjects have really given him their total commitment and would not kill him if circumstances demanded it (v. 27). He is not even convinced—in spite of these same events—of the legitimacy of his own kingship; he refers to Rehoboam as their lord (i.e., Israel’s ...
... does not seem entirely adequate. David had done what was right in the eyes of the LORD (v. 5). He was basically committed to God—he had been a faithful king. Yet even David sinned, in the case of Uriah the Hittite. He had, in fact, been the subject of God’s grace every bit as much as his successors. David’s piety is indeed a model for other kings; but it cannot be the complete explanation for the favor shown by God to the Davidic line. 15:9–15 By contrast with his immediately preceding ancestors ...
... more verse to the description of his reign of twenty-four years (15:33) than they do to the two-year reign of Nadab. 16:8–14 Like Jeroboam, Baasha does have a son succeed him, but Elah lasts no longer than Nadab (two years). He, too, is the subject of a conspiracy, though he is murdered, not in battle, but at home (v. 9). The assassin is Zimri, whose butchery on this occasion is not restricted to the family of Baasha only, but extends to friends (v. 11). The devotion of the house of Issachar to worthless ...
... v. 14) and then kills him. 8:11 He stared at him with a fixed gaze until Hazael felt ashamed: The Hb. is lit. “he made his face stand, he set (it), until he was ashamed/embarrassed.” The syntax of the sentence makes it unlikely that the subject of “he made . . .” is Elisha. It is Hazael, rather, who stares at Elisha, perhaps somewhat dazed by what he has heard, until Elisha’s weeping breaks into his reverie. A better paraphrase than the NIV’s is thus: “Hazael stared at him impassively, to the ...
... mystery. 15:16 Because they refused to open their gates . . . : The NIV appears to be offering a paraphrase of the Hb., which is lit. “for he did not open and he smote all its pregnant women, he cut open.” The general direction of the translation is probably correct, although the subject of “did not open” must strictly, in the context, be Menahem. The thought is perhaps that he failed to persuade them to open the gates (i.e., surrender).
... king of Assyria settled various other peoples there, from places both close at hand (e.g., Hamath; cf. 2 Kgs. 14:28) and further away (e.g., Babylon), and these peoples took over Samaria and lived in its towns. It is their religion that is the subject of interest in this last section of the chapter. It is a difficult passage, which can be understood only if we assume that it does not necessarily present the authors’ own point of view. Only thus can we understand the sharp contradiction between verses 25 ...
... v. 11), that Josiah really becomes worried (v. 11). Only then does he comprehend just how far short of divine acceptance Judean worship falls (v. 13). It is, of course, quite understandable that a child brought up in a royal court that was apostate for fifty-seven years and subjected all opposition to a reign of terror should not be aware of the LORD’s demands, and he is not blamed for it. As soon as he was aware of the contents of the book, our authors insist, he acted as a pious king should. He tore his ...
... God—a comfort no doubt to friends, but a threat to enemies. These names would have been familiar to Isaiah’s hearers. Here they are being turned against them. Get relief and avenge myself sound very like each other in Hebrew and combine subjective feelings and objective justice. Yahweh will now get the relief of giving expression to a strongly-felt inner desire to express anger. “Avenge myself” adds the notion of fair punishment; it is a less emotional expression than the English one. I will turn ...
... time Yahweh does this, they can be sung again. The phrase “the Holy One of Israel” closes chapters 1–12 as it nearly opened them (1:4). The failure and the destiny of Jerusalem/Zion and the God of justice and faithfulness, of anger and comfort, are these chapters’ great subject.
... of the word ’erets bring before the eye a vivid impression of calamity affecting a specific country. This country stands for any or every country in the world. Those who hear this vision cannot evade its point; it is as if their land is subject to devastation, their city destroyed. The lovely face of the land is distorted and defiled (v. 1). Religious status, social status, and even economic status offer no protection from this devastation (v. 2). This reminds us again of Tyre in the previous chapter. In ...
... 17 (NIV there “see” and “view”). The eye turns to the other of the two objects of Yahweh’s love and choice that Judah especially treasured (cf. Ps. 132). Zion/Jerusalem is the city of David (29:1; also 32:13), the tent of David (16:5). It was the subject one verse before the reference to the king in 32:1 (31:9, also 4–5; 28:14, 16; 29:8; 30:19). Here fighting, fire and furnace give way to enable it to become a peaceful abode such as Yahweh had imperiled but then promised to restore (32:18 ...
... and Merodach-Baladan and as Jeremiah named Nebuchadnezzar. It is possible that the use of the gods’ names contains a reminder of the two leaders whose own names incorporated them. But the focus is on the gods themselves. These gods have been a prominent subject in earlier chapters (e.g., ch. 41) as Yahweh has challenged them and their devotees to give some evidence that the gods have the power their devotees attribute to them. Now for the first time they are named, as Babylon itself and Cyrus were ...
... acts, the world will see and respond. And it has. The fact that we are reading Jacob-Israel’s book is a result. Additional Notes 49:1–6 R. N. Whybray rightly comments, in view of the fact that in the prophetical books generally the subject of speeches in the first person singular, when it is not Yahweh and not otherwise indicated, is normally the prophet himself, it is remarkable that this identification should have been contested in this case by so many commentators. (Isaiah 40–66, p. 135) There are ...
... up the people who are crushed in mind. That is to come about by bringing good news and announcing the coming of freedom (the word is otherwise used only of the freeing of slaves at the sabbath or jubilee year) and release for these people who are still subject to foreign control (v. 1). This is the moment of Yahweh’s favor on one hand and vengeance on the other. The parallelism signals the fact that these are two sides of one idea. In taking the side of the victims and acting on their behalf, Yahweh will ...
... on Israel’s behalf, suggesting that something more is going on here than the restatement of traditional ideas. 3:25 The NIV they will tie with ropes; you will be bound is overly literal. In Hebrew, the third-person plural can refer to an impersonal indefinite subject. Better is the NRSV “cords shall be placed on you, and you shall be bound with them.” You will be bound so that you cannot go out among the people. Many scholars deal with this curious text by ascribing it to a later expansion of the ...
... of survivors in v. 18). Here there is also a particular word regarding the fate of the temple: “they will desecrate my treasured place; robbers will enter it and desecrate it” (v. 22; see also v. 24). The temple will be the particular subject of the following section, chapters 8–11. Here, Ezekiel specifically links the earlier condemnation of the wealth of Jerusalem with false worship. Like their ancestors at the foot of Sinai, the people of Jerusalem were proud of their beautiful jewelry and used it ...
... :1–8). After all, the prophet asks, what is actually done in the civilized world with dangerous predators? People hunt them down, capture them with hooks, trap them in pits or lock them in cages, and take them away (vv. 4, 8–9). Twice, cubs of the lioness Judah are subject to just this fate. The first (vv. 2–4) was Shallum, son of Josiah, who took the throne name Jehoahaz (2 Kgs. 23:31–35//2 Chr. 36:1–4; see also 1 Chr. 3:15 and Jer. 22:11–12). After Josiah’s death in battle against Pharaoh ...
... chapter God’s sword is the Babylonian army, the sheathing of the sword means the return of that force to Babylon: the place where you were created, in the land of your ancestry (v. 30). The verb “create” (Heb. baraʾ) only takes God as its subject; there can be no doubt for Ezekiel that God fashioned Babylon for this very purpose. However, that does not mean that God will not hold Babylon accountable. Once God has sheathed the sword and carried out the appointed judgment, God declares, “I will judge ...
... 1:3–2:5), those pronouncements concerning Israel’s enemies and rivals lead up to the prophetic judgment on Israel itself, which Amos issues in the same terms (Amos 2:6–16). Ezekiel, too, is addressing his audience of Judeans in exile, even when the subject of his oracles is another nation (as 28:25–26 makes plain). Ezekiel’s collection of oracles against the nations opens with a series of short, pithy oracles directed against Ammon (25:1–7), Moab (25:8–11), Edom (25:12–14), and Philistia (25 ...