| Back to Home Page | Back to Book Index
|
Introduction
to 1 Kings
Summary of the Book of 1 Kings
This summary of
the book of 1 Kings provides information about the title, author(s), date of
writing, chronology, theme, theology, outline, a brief overview, and the
chapters of the Book of 1 Kings.
1 and 2 Kings
(like 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Chronicles) are actually one literary work,
called in Hebrew tradition simply "Kings." The division of this work
into two books was introduced by the translators of the Septuagint (the
pre-Christian Greek translation of the OT) and subsequently followed in the
Latin Vulgate (c. a.d. 400) and most modern versions. In 1448 the division into
two sections also appeared in a Hebrew manuscript and was perpetuated in later
printed editions of the Hebrew text. Both the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate
further designated Samuel and Kings in a way that emphasized the relationship of
these two works (Septuagint: First, Second, Third and Fourth Book of Kingdoms;
Latin Vulgate: First, Second, Third and Fourth Kings). Together Samuel and
Kings relate the whole history of the monarchy, from its rise under the
ministry of Samuel to its fall at the hands of the Babylonians.
The division
between 1 and 2 Kings has been made at a somewhat arbitrary and yet appropriate
place, shortly after the deaths of Ahab of the northern kingdom (22:37)
and Jehoshaphat of the southern kingdom (22:50).
Placing the division at this point causes the account of the reign of Ahaziah
of Israel to overlap the end of 1 Kings (22:51-53)
and the beginning of 2 Kings (ch. 1). The same is true
of the narration of the ministry of Elijah, which for the most part appears in
1 Kings (chs. 17 - 19). However, his final
act of judgment and the passing of his cloak to Elisha at the moment of his
ascension to heaven in a whirlwind are contained in 2 Kings 1:1 -- 2:17.
There is little
conclusive evidence as to the identity of the author of 1,2 Kings. Although
Jewish tradition credits Jeremiah, few today accept this as likely. Whoever the
author was, it is clear that he was familiar with the book of Deuteronomy -- as
were many of Israel's prophets. It is also clear that he used a variety of
sources in compiling his history of the monarchy. Three such sources are named:
"the book of the annals of Solomon" (11:41),
"the book of the annals of the kings of Israel" (14:19),
"the book of the annals of the kings of Judah" (14:29).
It is likely that other written sources were also employed (such as those
mentioned in Chronicles; see below).
Although some
scholars have concluded that the three sources specifically cited in 1,2 Kings
are to be viewed as official court annals from the royal archives in Jerusalem
and Samaria, this is by no means certain. It seems at least questionable
whether official court annals would have included details of conspiracies such
as those referred to in 16:20; 2Ki 15:15.
It is also questionable whether official court annals would have been readily
accessible for public scrutiny, as the author clearly implies in his references
to them. Such considerations have led some scholars to conclude that these
sources were probably records of the reigns of the kings of Israel and Judah
compiled by the succession of Israel's prophets spanning the kingdom period.
1,2 Chronicles makes reference to a number of such writings: "the records
of Samuel the seer, the records of Nathan the prophet and the records of Gad
the seer" (1Ch 29:29),
"the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite" and "the visions of Iddo
the seer" (2Ch 9:29),
"the records of Shemaiah the prophet" (2Ch 12:15),
"the annals of Jehu son of Hanani" (2Ch 20:34),
"the annotations on the book of the kings" (2Ch 24:27),
the "events of Uzziah's reign . . . recorded by the prophet Isaiah son of
Amoz" (2Ch 26:22;
see also 2Ch 32:32)
-- and there may have been others. It is most likely, for example, that for the
ministries of Elijah and Elisha the author depended on a prophetic source
(perhaps from the eighth century) that had drawn up an account of those two
prophets in which they were already compared with Moses and Joshua.
Some scholars
place the date of composition of 1,2 Kings in the time subsequent to
Jehoiachin's release from prison (562 b.c.; 2Ki 25:27-30)
and prior to the end of the Babylonian exile in 538. This position is
challenged by others on the basis of statements in 1,2 Kings that speak of
certain things in the preexilic period that are said to have continued in
existence "to this day" (see, e.g., 8:8, the poles used to
carry the ark; 9:20-21,
conscripted labor; 12:19,
Israel in rebellion against the house of David; 2Ki 8:22, Edom in
rebellion against the kingdom of Judah). From such statements it is argued that
the writer must have been a person living in Judah in the preexilic period
rather than in Babylon in postexilic times. If this argument is accepted, one
must conclude that the original book was composed about the time of the death
of Josiah and that the material pertaining to the time subsequent to his reign
was added during the exile c. 550. While this "two-edition" viewpoint
is possible, it rests largely on the "to this day" statements.
An alternative
is to understand these statements as those of the original source used by the
author rather than statements of the author himself. A comparison of 2Ch 5:9
with 1Ki 8:8
suggests that this is a legitimate conclusion. Chronicles is clearly a
postexilic writing, yet the wording of the statement concerning the poles used
to carry the ark ("they are still there today") is the same in
Chronicles as it is in Kings. Probably the Chronicler was simply quoting his
source, namely, 1Ki 8:8.
There is no reason that the author of 1,2 Kings could not have done the same
thing in quoting from his earlier sources. This explanation allows for positing
a single author living in exile and using the source materials at his disposal.
1,2 Kings
contains no explicit statement of purpose or theme. Reflection on its content,
however, reveals that the author has selected and arranged his material in a
manner that provides a sequel to the history found in 1,2 Samuel -- a history
of kingship regulated by covenant. In general, 1,2 Kings describes the history
of the kings of Israel and Judah in the light of God's covenants. The guiding
thesis of the book is that the welfare of Israel and her kings depended on
their submission to and reliance on Israel's covenant God -- their obedience to
the Sinaitic covenant regulations and their faithful response to God's
prophets.
It is clearly
not the author's intention to present a social, political and economic history
of Israel's monarchy in accordance with the principles of modern
historiography. The author repeatedly refers the reader to other sources for
more detailed information about the reigns of the various kings (see, e.g., 11:41; 14:19,29;
15:7,31;
16:5,14,20,27),
and he gives a covenantal rather than a social or political or economic
assessment of their reigns. From the standpoint of a political historian, Omri
would be considered one of the more important rulers in the northern kingdom.
He established a powerful dynasty and made Samaria the capital city. According
to the Moabite Stone, Omri was the ruler who subjugated the Moabites to the
northern kingdom. Long after Omri's death, Assyrian rulers referred to Jehu as
the "son of Omri" (either mistakenly or merely in accordance with
their literary conventions when speaking of a later king of a realm). Yet in
spite of Omri's political importance, his reign is dismissed in six verses (16:23-28)
with the statement that he "did evil in the eyes of the Lord and sinned
more than all those before him" (16:25).
Similarly, the reign of Jeroboam II, who presided over the northern kingdom
during the time of its greatest political and economic power, is treated only
briefly (2Ki 14:23-29).
Another example
of the writer's covenantal rather than merely political or economic interest
can be seen in the description of the reign of Josiah of Judah. Nothing is said
about the early years of his reign, but a detailed description is given of the
reformation and renewal of the covenant that he promoted in his 18th year as
king (2Ki 22:3
-- 23:28).
Nor is anything said of the motives leading Josiah to oppose Pharaoh Neco of
Egypt at Megiddo, or of the major shift in geopolitical power from Assyria to
Babylon that was connected with this incident (see notes on 2Ki 23:29-30).
It becomes
apparent, then, that the kings who receive the most attention in 1,2 Kings are
those during whose reigns there was either notable deviation from or
affirmation of the covenant (or significant interaction between a king and
God's prophet; see below). Ahab son of Omri is an example of the former (16:29
-- 22:39).
His reign is given extensive treatment, not so much because of its
extraordinary political importance, but because of the serious threat to
covenant fidelity and continuity that arose in the northern kingdom during his
reign. Ultimately the pagan influence of Ahab's wife Jezebel through Ahab's
daughter Athaliah (whether she was Jezebel's daughter is unknown) nearly led to
the extermination of the house of David in Judah (see 2Ki 11:1-3).
Manasseh (2Ki 21:1-18)
is an example of a similar sort. Here again it is deviation from the covenant
that is emphasized in the account of his reign rather than political features,
such as involvement in the Assyrian-Egyptian conflict (mentioned in Assyrian
records but not in 2 Kings). The extreme apostasy characterizing Manasseh's
reign made exile for Judah inevitable (2Ki 21:10-15;
23:26-27).
On the positive
side, Hezekiah (2Ki 18:1
-- 20:21)
and Josiah (2Ki 22:1
-- 23:29)
are given extensive treatment because of their involvement in covenant renewal.
These are the only two kings given unqualified approval by the writer for their
loyalty to the Lord (2Ki 18:3;
22:2).
It is noteworthy that all the kings of the northern kingdom are said to have
done evil in the eyes of the Lord and walked in the ways of Jeroboam, who
caused Israel to sin (see, e.g., 16:26,31;
22:52; 2Ki 3:3; 10:29).
It was Jeroboam who established the golden calf worship at Bethel and Dan
shortly after the division of the kingdom (see 12:26-33;
13:1-6).
While the
writer depicts Israel's obedience or disobedience to the Sinai covenant as
decisive for her historical destiny, he also recognizes the far-reaching
historical significance of the Davidic covenant, which promised that David's
dynasty would endure forever. This is particularly noticeable in references to
the "lamp" that the Lord had promised David (see 11:36
and note; 15:4; 2Ki 8:19; see also
note on 2Sa 21:17).
It also appears in more general references to the promise to David (8:20,25)
and its consequences for specific historical developments in Judah's later
history (11:12-13,32;
2Ki 19:34;
20:6).
In addition, the writer uses the life and reign of David as a standard by which
the lives of later kings are measured (see, e.g., 9:4; 11:4,6, 33,38;
14:8; 15:3,5,11;
2Ki 16:2;
18:3; 22:2).
Another
prominent feature of the narratives of 1,2 Kings is the emphasis on the
relationship between prophecy and fulfillment in the historical developments of
the monarchy. On at least 11 occasions a prophecy is recorded that is later
said to have been fulfilled (see, e.g., 2Sa 7:13
and 1Ki 8:20;
1Ki 11:29-39
and 1Ki 12:15;
1Ki 13
and 2Ki 23:16-18).
The result of this emphasis is that the history of the kingdom is not presented
as a chain of chance occurrences or the mere interplay of human actions but as
the unfolding of Israel's historical destiny under the guidance of an
omniscient and omnipotent God -- Israel's covenant Lord, who rules all history
in accordance with his sovereign purposes (see 8:56; 2Ki 10:10).
The author also
stresses the importance of the prophets themselves in their role as official
emissaries from the court of Israel's covenant Lord, the Great King to whom
Israel and her king were bound in service through the covenant. The Lord sent a
long succession of such prophets to call king and people back to covenant
loyalty (2Ki 17:13).
For the most part their warnings and exhortations fell on deaf ears. Many of
these prophets are mentioned in the narratives of 1,2 Kings (see, e.g., Ahijah,
11:29-40;
14:5-18;
Shemaiah, 12:22-24;
Micaiah, 22:8-28;
Jonah, 2Ki 14:25;
Isaiah, 2Ki 19:1-7,20-34;
Huldah, 2Ki 22:14-20),
but particular attention is given to the ministries of Elijah and Elisha (1Ki 17-19; 2Ki 1-13).
Reflection on
these features of 1,2 Kings suggests that it was written to explain to a people
in exile that the reason for their condition of humiliation was their stubborn
persistence in breaking the covenant. In bringing the exile upon his people,
God, after much patience, imposed the curses of the covenant, which had stood
as a warning to them from the beginning (see Lev 26:27-45;
Dt 28:64-68).
This is made explicit with respect to the captivity of the northern kingdom in 2Ki 17:7-23;
18:9-12,
and with respect to the southern kingdom in 2Ki 21:12-15.
The reformation under Josiah in the southern kingdom is viewed as too little,
too late (see 2Ki 23:26-27;
24:3).
The book, then,
provides a retrospective analysis of Israel's history. It explains the reasons
both for the destruction of Samaria and Jerusalem and their respective kingdoms
and for the bitter experience of being forced into exile. This does not mean, however,
that there is no hope for the future. The writer consistently keeps the promise
to David in view as a basis on which Israel in exile may look to the future
with hope rather than with despair. In this connection the final four verses of
the book, reporting Jehoiachin's release from prison in Babylon and his
elevation to a place of honor in the court there (2Ki 25:27-30),
take on added significance. The future remains open for a new work of the Lord
in faithfulness to his promise to the house of David.
It is important
to note that, although the author was undoubtedly a Judahite exile, and
although the northern kingdom had been dispersed for well over a century and a
half at the time of his writing, the scope of his concern was all Israel -- the
whole covenant people. Neither he nor the prophets (see Isa 10:20-21;
11:11-13;
Jer 31;
Eze 48:1-29;
Hos 11:8-11;
Am 9:11-15;
Zec 9:10-13)
viewed the division of the Israelite kingdom as a divine rejection of the ten
tribes, nor did they see the earlier exile of the northern kingdom as a final
exclusion of the northern tribes from Israel's future. As a matter of fact,
many from the north had fled south during the Assyrian invasions so that a
significant remnant of the northern tribes lived on in the kingdom of Judah and
shared in its continuing history.
1,2 Kings
presents the reader with abundant chronological data. Not only is the length of
the reign of each king given, but during the period of the divided kingdom the
beginning of the reign of each king is synchronized with the regnal year of the
ruling king in the opposite kingdom. Often additional data, such as the age of
the ruler at the time of his accession, are also provided.
By integrating
Biblical data with those derived from Assyrian chronological records, the year
853 b.c. can be fixed as the year of Ahab's death and 841 as the year Jehu
began to reign. The years in which Ahab and Jehu had contacts with Shalmaneser
III of Assyria can also be given definite dates (by means of astronomical
calculations based on an Assyrian reference to a solar eclipse). With these
fixed points, it is then possible to work both forward and backward in the
lines of the kings of Israel and Judah to give dates for each king. By the same
means it can be determined that the division of the kingdom occurred in 930,
that Samaria fell to the Assyrians in 722-721 and that Jerusalem fell to the
Babylonians in 586.
The
synchronistic data correlating the reigns of the kings of Israel and Judah
present some knotty problems, which have long been considered nearly insoluble.
In more recent times, most of these problems have been resolved in a satisfactory
way through recognizing such possibilities as overlapping reigns, coregencies
of sons with their fathers, differences in the time of the year in which the
reign of a king officially began, and differences in the way a king's first
year was reckoned (e.g., see notes on 15:33; 2Ki 8:25; see also
chart, pp. 670-671.
1,2 Kings
narrates the history of Israel during the period of the monarchy from the
closing days of David's rule until the time of the Babylonian exile. After an
extensive account of Solomon's reign, the narrative relates the division of the
kingdom and then presents an interrelated account of developments within the
two kingdoms. In this account, special attention is given to the ministries of
Elijah and Elisha in the northern kingdom, with almost a third of the book
(nearly equal to the amount of narrative given to Solomon's reign) devoted to
God's efforts through his prophets to turn that kingdom away from its
apostasies back to covenant faithfulness (see note on 1Ki 12:25
-- 2Ki 17:41).
Kingship in the
northern kingdom was plagued with instability and violence. Twenty rulers
represented nine different dynasties during the approximately 210 years from
the division of the kingdom in 930 b.c. to the fall of Samaria in 722-721. In
the southern kingdom there were also 20 rulers, but these were all descendants
of David (except Athaliah, whose usurping of the throne interrupted the
sequence for a few years) and spanned a period of about 345 years from the
division of the kingdom until the fall of Jerusalem in 586.
1,2 Kings can be broadly
outlined by relating its contents to the major historical periods it describes
and to the ministries of Elijah and Elisha.
I.
The Solomonic Era (1:1;12:24)
A.
Solomon's Succession to the Throne (1:1;2:12)
F.
Solomon's Reign Characterized (9:10;10:29)
II.
Israel and Judah from Jeroboam I/Rehoboam to Ahab/Asa (12:25;16:34)
III.
The Ministries of Elijah and Other Prophets from Ahab/Asa to
Ahaziah/Jehoshaphat (chs. 17-22)
IV.
The Ministries of Elijah and Elisha during the Reigns of Ahaziah
and Joram (2ki 1:1;8:15)
V.
Israel and Judah from Joram/Jehoram to the Exile of Israel (8:16;17:41)
VI.
Judah from Hezekiah to the Babylonian Exile (chs. 18-25)
Chronology of Foreign Kings
This is a
chronology of selected foreign kings mentioned in this study Bible.
|
ASSYRIA |
|
|
Tilgath-Pileser
III |
745-727 * |
|
|
|
|
BABYLONIA |
|
|
Nebuchadnezzar
II |
605-562 |
|
|
|
|
PERSIA |
|
|
Cyrus the
Great |
559-530 |
* All dates are
b.c. and are those of the kings' reigns.
──《New International Version》
Introduction to 1 Kings
The history now before us accounts for the
affairs of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, yet with special regard to the
kingdom of God among them; for it is a sacred history. It is earlier as to
time, teaches much more, and is more interesting than any common histories.
── Matthew Henry《Concise Commentary on 1 Kings》
00 Overview
1 KINGS
INTRODUCTION
The Book of Kings and the Pentateuch
It can hardly fail to strike the reader how, in almost every
chapter of 1 Kings, the thread and tissue of the narrative is interwoven with
the thoughts and phraseology of the Books of Moses. Such a chapter as that
which contains Solomon’s dedication prayer is largely expressed in the words of
Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. That chapter might, had it stood alone,
have been ascribed to some later writer familiar with the language of the
Mosaic writings, and if those books or large portions of them were of late
composition, the dedicatory prayer might also be set down as of a late date.
But it is not one single chapter which re-echoes the Mosaic diction,
resemblances of a like kind exist throughout in considerable abundance. And we
cannot think that the compiler of Kings, taking in hand documents which existed
long before his day, some as far back as the time of Solomon himself, changed
their whole character by introducing language, which, according to some, was
not existent before the days of King Josiah. We cannot read the long address of
David to Solomon (1 Kings 2:2-3), or Solomon’s
injunction concerning Joab’s death, “that it should take away the innocent
blood” (1 Kings 2:31), or the same king’s
description of his people (1 Kings 3:8), without feeling that
the thoughts and language of Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy were very
familiar to writers of these chapters, chapters which are due in all
probability in their substance not to the compiler of the Book of Kings, but to
Nathan the seer, Ahijah the Shilonite, and Iddo the seer, quoted (2 Chronicles 9:29) as the several
authorities for the records of Solomon’s reign Again, in such a history as that
of the trial and execution of Naboth, the whole narrative carries us back to
the laws, manners, and customs which have their rise in the Books of Moses. So
too do the frequent phrases which occur of such a kind as that “the eyes and
heart of God shall be perpetually upon His house,” that offending Israel shall
be “a proverb and a byword” among all people, and the proverbial phrase
occurring more than once, him that is shut up and left in Israel.” The list of
such expressions can be largely increased . . . The evidence drawn from such
abundant resemblance points to a much earlier date for the books of the law
than the reign of Josiah, to which time their composition has been in part
assigned; and makes it difficult to ascribe the largely prevailing similarity
of language to any other cause than that the prophetic writers, not only in the
days of Jeremiah, but in the days of Nathan, Ahijah, and Iddo, were very
familiar with the phraseology of the Pentateuch. (J. R. Lumby, D. D.)
Relation of Kings to Chronicles
As regards the relation of the Books of Kings to those of
Chronicles, it is manifest, and is universally admitted, that the former is by
far the older work. The language, which is quite free from the Persicisms of
the Chronicles and their late orthography, and is not at all more Aramaic than
the language of Jeremiah, clearly points out its relative superiority in regard
to age. Its subject also, embracing the kingdom of Israel as well as Judah, is
another indication of its composition before the kingdom of Israel was
forgotten, and before the Jewish enmity to Samaria, which is apparent in such
passages as 2 Chronicles 20:37; 2 Chronicles 20:25., and in those
chapters of Ezra (1-6) which belong to Chronicles, was brought to maturity.
While the Books of Chronicles, therefore, were written especially for the Jews
after their return from Babylon, the Book of Kings was written for the whole of
Israel, before their common national existence was hopelessly quenched. Another
comparison of considerable interest between the two histories may be drawn in
respect to the main design, that design being: marked relation both to the
individual station of the supposed writers, and the peculiar circumstances of their
country at the time of their writing. Jeremiah was himself a prophet. He lived
while the prophetic office was in full vigour, in his own person, in Ezekiel,
and Daniel, and many others, both true and false. In his eyes, as in truth, the
main cause of the fearful calamities of his countrymen was their rejection and
contempt of the Word of God in his mouth and that of the other prophets; and
their one hope of deliverance lay in their hearkening to the prophets who still
continued to speak to them in the name of the Lord. Accordingly we find in the
Books of Kings great prominence given to the prophetic office. Not only are
some fourteen chapters devoted more or less to the history of Elijah and
Elisha, the former of whom is but once named, and the latter not once in
Chronicles, but besides the many passages in which the names and sayings of
prophets are recorded alike in both histories, the following may be cited as
instances in which the compiler of Kings has notices of the prophets which are
peculiar to himself, 1 Kings 13:1-34; 1 Kings 14:1-31; 1 Kings 16:1-34.: and the reference
to the fulfilment of the word of God in the termination of Jehu’s dynasty, in 2 Kings 15:12; the reflexions in 2 Kings 17:7-23; and above all, as
relating entirely to Judah, the narrative of Hezekiah’s sickness and recovery
in 2 Kings 20:1-21., as contrasted with
that in 2 Chronicles 32:1-33., may be cited
as instances of that prominence given to prophecy and prophets by the compiler
of the Book of Kings. Ezra, on the contrary, was only a priest. In his days the
prophetic office had wholly fallen into abeyance. That evidence of the Jews
being the people of God, which consisted in the presence of prophets among
them, was no more. But to men of his generation, the distinctive mark of the
continuance of God’s favour to their race was the rebuilding of the Temple at
Jerusalem, the restoration of the daily sacrifice and the Levitical worship,
and the wonderful and providential renewal of the Mosaic institutions. Hence we
see at once that the chief care of a good and enlightened Jew of the age of
Ezra, and all the more if he were himself a priest, would naturally be to
enhance the value of the Levitical ritual and the dignity of the Levitical
caste. And in compiling a history of the past glories of his race, he would as
naturally select such passages as especially bore upon the sanctity of the
priestly office. Hence the Levitical character of the Books of Chronicles.
Compare 2 Chronicles 29:1-36; 2 Chronicles 30:1-27; 2 Chronicles 31:1-21., with 2 Kings 18:1-37, also 2 Chronicles 26:16-21 with 2 Kings 15:5, also 2 Chronicles 11:13-17; 2 Chronicles 13:9-20; 2 Chronicles 15:1-15; 2 Chronicles 23:2-8 with 2 Kings 11:5-9. (W. Smith,
D. D.)
Sources of information used by the compiler
As regards the sources of information, it may truly he said that
we have the narrative of contemporary writers throughout. There was a regular
series of state annals both for the kingdom of Judah and for that of Israel,
which embraced the whole time comprehended in the Books of Kings, or at least
to, the end of the reign of Jehoiakim, 2 Kings 24:5. These annals, cited by
name as “the Book of the Acts of Solomon,” 1 Kings 11:41; and, after Solomon,
“the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, or Israel,” e.g. 1 Kings 14:29; 1 Kings 15:7; 1 Kings 16:5; 1 Kings 16:14; 1 Kings 16:20; 2 Kings 10:34; 2 Kings 24:5, and it is manifest
that the author of Kings had them both before him, while he drew up his
history, in which the reigns of the two kingdoms are harmonised, and these
annals constantly appealed to. But in addition to these national annals, there
were also extant, at the time that the Books of the Kings were compiled,
separate works of the several prophets who had lived in Judah and Israel, and
which probably bore the same relation to the annals which the historical parts
of Isaiah and Jeremiah bear to those portions of the annals preserved in the
Books of Kings, i.e. were, in some instances at least, fuller and
more copious accounts of the current events, by the same hands which drew up
the more concise narrative of the annals, though in others perhaps mere
duplicates. Thus the acts of Uzziah, written by Isaiah, were very likely
identical with the history of his reign in the national chronicles, and part of
the history of Hezekiah we know was identical in the Chronicles and in the
prophet. The chapter in Jeremiah 52:1-34. is identical with that
in 2 Kings 24:1-20; 2 Kings 25:1-30. These works, or at
least many of them, must have been extant at the time when the Books of Kings
were compiled, as they certainly were much later when the Books of Chronicles
were put together by Ezra. But whether the author used them all, or only those
duplicate portions of them which were embodied in the national chronicles, it
is impossible to say, seeing he quotes none of them by name, except the acts of
Solomon, and the prophecy of Jonah. On the other hand, we cannot infer from his
silence that these books were unused by him, seeing that neither does he quote
by name the vision of Isaiah as the ChrOnicler does, though he must, from its
recent date, have been familiar with it, and that as many parts of his
narrative have every appearance of being extracted from these books of the
prophets, and contain narratives which it is not likely would have found a
place in the chronicles of the kings (see lKi 14:4, 16:1; 2 Kings 17:1-41., etc. (W. Smith,
D. D.)
The contents of the Books of Kings
Considering the conciseness of the narrative, and the simplicity
of the style, the amount of knowledge which these books convey of the
characters, conduct, and manners of kings and people during so long a period is
truly wonderful. The insight they give us into the aspect of Judah and
Jerusalem, both natural and artificial, into the religious, military, and civil
institutions of the people, their arts and manufactures, the state of education
and learning, their resources, commerce, exploits, alliances, the causes of
their decadence, and finally of their ruin, is most clear, interesting, and
instructive. In a few brief sentences we acquire more accurate knowledge of the
affairs of Egypt, Tyre, Syria, Assyria, Babylon, and other neighbouring nations
than had been preserved to us in all the other remains of antiquity up to the
recent discoveries in hieroglyphical and cuneiform monuments. If we seek in
them a system of scientific chronology, we may indeed be disappointed But it is
for their deep religious teaching, and for the insight which they give us into
God’s providential and moral government of the world, that they are above all
valuable. The books which describe the wisdom and the glory of Solomon, and yet
record his fall; which make us acquainted with the painful ministry of Elijah,
and his translation into heaven; and which tells us how the most magnificent
temple ever built for God’s glory, and of which He vouchsafed to take
possession, was consigned to the flames, for the sins of those who worshipped
in it, read us such lessons concerning both God and man, as are the best
evidence of their Divine origin, and make them the richest treasure to every
Christian man. (Wm. Smith, D. D.)
Division of the history into periods
The space of time thus covered is about 410 years, and it divides
itself naturally into three periods--the time of the undivided monarchy under
Solomon, the time of the divided kingdom till the fall of Samaria, and the time
of the surviving kingdom of Judah till the Captivity by Nebuchadnezzar. First
Period: Solomon’s Reign. This period is treated at greater length
than any subsequent reign, its record occupying eleven chapters. Two of these,
however, relate to the circumstances that led to Solomon’s accession to the
throne while his father David was alive, and the greater part of the remaining
chapters is taken up with the account of the building of the Temple and of the
royal palace. In this section of the book there is little evidence of a
literary plan, but we are made distinctly aware of the intention of the book
and the point of view of the writer. That so much space is devoted to the
description of the Temple, as compared with the few particulars relating to the
king’s palace, is not merely owing to the author’s better acquaintance with the
courts and furniture of the sacred house than with the interior of the royal residence,
but to the fact that he regarded the erection of the Temple as of prime
importance for the history which he is writing. And that this is meant to be a
sacred, and not merely a secular, history is further evinced by the fact that,
along with the glowing accounts of the greatness and fame of Solomon, there are
significant hints of the dangers underlying all the magnificence, and the fatal
tendency of the introduction of foreign habits, with insistence on the fact
that national prosperity was conditional on fidelity to the national religion.
The section closes with a plain intimation that the seeds of evil sown in
Solomon’s reign were already germinating, and an enumeration of the
“adversaries” who were already raised up to destroy the fair fabric of the
empire of all Israel Second Period: The Two Kingdoms. This
period, of somewhat more than two centuries, from the disruption of the kingdom
after the death of Solomon, about b.c. 933 to the fall of Samaria in b.c. 722,
is the subject of the greater part of the book, the narrative extending from
the beginning of 1 Kings 12:1-33. to the end of 2 Kings 17:1-41. Here the treatment
of the materials is more systematic, and a literary plan, simple, though
somewhat artificial, is followed. It is to be observed that the writer strives
to maintain a synchronism in the history; for when he returns alternately to a
new reign in the Northern or Southern Kingdom, he mentions that it was in such
and such a year of the reign of a king in the sister state that so and so began
to reign in the other. In the laying out of the particulars of the successive reigns there is to be
observed a recurrence of set phrases which give a certain monotony to the
narrative, but indicate the point of view from which the history is regarded.
Notwithstanding the rigidity of framework and the stereotyped diction, this
part of the book is far from
being a mere state chronicle of political events. As in the former section, so
in this, the writer regards the whole as a sacred history. Third Period:
The Surviving Kingdom of Judah. In this style and in this vein the
writer brings the history
down to the time when the Northern Kingdom was brought to an end by the capture of Samaria
in b.c. 722, devoting a whole chapter to the causes which led to the
catastrophe, and the subsequent fate of that part of the country. The remainder
of the book is devoted to the history of the surviving kingdom of Judah, the
latest point to which the narrative is brought down being the thirty-seventh
year of the captivity of Jehoiachin, viz., b.c. 562. This section, accordingly,
embraces a period of sixty years, and extends to eight chapters. (The Temple
Bible.)
Date of the Book of Kings
To the date of the compilation of the Book of we are guided by the
latest events that are mentioned in it. The last chapter (2 Kings 25:1-30.) concludes with the
thirty-seventh year of Jehoiachin’s captivity, when Evil-Merodack released him
from prison. This happened b.c. 561. But this last chapter and a few verses,
18-20 of chap. 24., are identical with chap. 52. of the prophecy of Jeremiah.
There, however, the closing words of chap. 51., “Thus far are the words of
Jeremiah,” plainly show that what follows was added by one who thought it no
integral part of the prophecy, but added it to complete the historical notices found
in other parts of that book, and added it most likely from this Book of Kings.
We may therefore conclude that this book was compiled b.c. 561. But the
compiler has no word, even of hope, to record concerning the final deliverance
of the nation from captivity. That deliverance commenced with the decree of
Cyrus, b.c. 536, though the final migrations did not take place till the days
of Nehemiah, nearly a century later, b.c. 445. Had he known of any movement in
the direction of a return, the writer would surely have made mention of it. He
is cheered, apparently at the close of his work, by the clemency shown to
Jehoiachin. He would hardly have passed over any agitation for the national
redemption without a word of notice. The book was therefore finished before
b.c. 536, and its date lies between that year and b.c. 561. (J. R. Lumby, D.
D.)
The compiler’s purpose and point of view
That the writer had a distinct plan and purpose before him and
occupied a distinct point of view, we have already seen. And what the plan and
point of view were he makes quite evident, both in the brief notes introducing
or summing up the various reigns, and in the longer reviews of periods and the
detailed narratives of a prophetical character which are woven into the
history. Standing at the close of Israel’s national independence, he will
describe the whole course of history from the bloom-period of Solomon to the
collapse of the State under the pressure of the Babylonian Empire; and having
noted the influences, human and Divine, which had been at work, he will exhibit
for the instruction of his readers the causes of the varying fortunes of his
people. The author himself gives us what we may call his philosophy of the
history in his review of the causes that brought about the downfall of the
Northern Kingdom (2 Kings 17:7-23). The same
fundamental principles are stated in more positive terms elsewhere. Thus, at
the very opening of the history, the keynote of the whole is struck in David’s
parting charge to Solomon (1 Kings 2:2-4). So also, on the
occasion of Solomon’s first vision at Gibeon (1 Kings 3:14), and of his second
vision, after the completion of the building of Temple and palace (1 Kings 9:1-9), the principle is
stated almost in the same terms, with the addition, in the last passage, of the
warning. The three great principles, therefore, on which the author proceeds
are: that a special choice had been made of David and his house, that
whole-hearted devotion to the national God (without swerving into heathen ways)
was the condition of national prosperity, and that the worship at local
shrines, the so-called “high places,” was inconsistent with the pure Mosaic
worship. The second may be called the underlying principle of all prophecy; and
the third, though slow to be recognised, as the even the examples of the “good”
kings show, comes into prominence in reforms carried out by Hezekiah, and
finally triumphed, for a time at least, in the more thorough reform of Josiah’s
days. (The Temple Bible.)
1 KINGS
INTRODUCTION
The Book of Kings and the Pentateuch
It can hardly fail to strike the reader how, in almost every
chapter of 1 Kings, the thread and tissue of the narrative is interwoven with
the thoughts and phraseology of the Books of Moses. Such a chapter as that
which contains Solomon’s dedication prayer is largely expressed in the words of
Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. That chapter might, had it stood alone,
have been ascribed to some later writer familiar with the language of the Mosaic
writings, and if those books or large portions of them were of late
composition, the dedicatory prayer might also be set down as of a late date.
But it is not one single chapter which re-echoes the Mosaic diction,
resemblances of a like kind exist throughout in considerable abundance. And we
cannot think that the compiler of Kings, taking in hand documents which existed
long before his day, some as far back as the time of Solomon himself, changed
their whole character by introducing language, which, according to some, was
not existent before the days of King Josiah. We cannot read the long address of
David to Solomon (1 Kings 2:2-3), or Solomon’s
injunction concerning Joab’s death, “that it should take away the innocent
blood” (1 Kings 2:31), or the same king’s
description of his people (1 Kings 3:8), without feeling that
the thoughts and language of Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy were very
familiar to writers of these chapters, chapters which are due in all
probability in their substance not to the compiler of the Book of Kings, but to
Nathan the seer, Ahijah the Shilonite, and Iddo the seer, quoted (2 Chronicles 9:29) as the several
authorities for the records of Solomon’s reign Again, in such a history as that
of the trial and execution of Naboth, the whole narrative carries us back to
the laws, manners, and customs which have their rise in the Books of Moses. So
too do the frequent phrases which occur of such a kind as that “the eyes and
heart of God shall be perpetually upon His house,” that offending Israel shall
be “a proverb and a byword” among all people, and the proverbial phrase
occurring more than once, him that is shut up and left in Israel.” The list of
such expressions can be largely increased . . . The evidence drawn from such
abundant resemblance points to a much earlier date for the books of the law
than the reign of Josiah, to which time their composition has been in part
assigned; and makes it difficult to ascribe the largely prevailing similarity
of language to any other cause than that the prophetic writers, not only in the
days of Jeremiah, but in the days of Nathan, Ahijah, and Iddo, were very
familiar with the phraseology of the Pentateuch. (J. R. Lumby, D. D.)
Relation of Kings to Chronicles
As regards the relation of the Books of Kings to those of
Chronicles, it is manifest, and is universally admitted, that the former is by
far the older work. The language, which is quite free from the Persicisms of
the Chronicles and their late orthography, and is not at all more Aramaic than
the language of Jeremiah, clearly points out its relative superiority in regard
to age. Its subject also, embracing the kingdom of Israel as well as Judah, is
another indication of its composition before the kingdom of Israel was
forgotten, and before the Jewish enmity to Samaria, which is apparent in such
passages as 2 Chronicles 20:37; 2 Chronicles 20:25., and in those
chapters of Ezra (1-6) which belong to Chronicles, was brought to maturity.
While the Books of Chronicles, therefore, were written especially for the Jews
after their return from Babylon, the Book of Kings was written for the whole of
Israel, before their common national existence was hopelessly quenched. Another
comparison of considerable interest between the two histories may be drawn in
respect to the main design, that design being: marked relation both to the
individual station of the supposed writers, and the peculiar circumstances of
their country at the time of their writing. Jeremiah was himself a prophet. He
lived while the prophetic office was in full vigour, in his own person, in
Ezekiel, and Daniel, and many others, both true and false. In his eyes, as in
truth, the main cause of the fearful calamities of his countrymen was their
rejection and contempt of the Word of God in his mouth and that of the other
prophets; and their one hope of deliverance lay in their hearkening to the
prophets who still continued to speak to them in the name of the Lord.
Accordingly we find in the Books of Kings great prominence given to the
prophetic office. Not only are some fourteen chapters devoted more or less to
the history of Elijah and Elisha, the former of whom is but once named, and the
latter not once in Chronicles, but besides the many passages in which the names
and sayings of prophets are recorded alike in both histories, the following may
be cited as instances in which the compiler of Kings has notices of the
prophets which are peculiar to himself, 1 Kings 13:1-34; 1 Kings 14:1-31; 1 Kings 16:1-34.: and the reference
to the fulfilment of the word of God in the termination of Jehu’s dynasty, in 2 Kings 15:12; the reflexions in 2 Kings 17:7-23; and above all, as
relating entirely to Judah, the narrative of Hezekiah’s sickness and recovery
in 2 Kings 20:1-21., as contrasted with
that in 2 Chronicles 32:1-33., may be cited
as instances of that prominence given to prophecy and prophets by the compiler
of the Book of Kings. Ezra, on the contrary, was only a priest. In his days the
prophetic office had wholly fallen into abeyance. That evidence of the Jews
being the people of God, which consisted in the presence of prophets among
them, was no more. But to men of his generation, the distinctive mark of the
continuance of God’s favour to their race was the rebuilding of the Temple at
Jerusalem, the restoration of the daily sacrifice and the Levitical worship,
and the wonderful and providential renewal of the Mosaic institutions. Hence we
see at once that the chief care of a good and enlightened Jew of the age of
Ezra, and all the more if he were himself a priest, would naturally be to
enhance the value of the Levitical ritual and the dignity of the Levitical
caste. And in compiling a history of the past glories of his race, he would as
naturally select such passages as especially bore upon the sanctity of the
priestly office. Hence the Levitical character of the Books of Chronicles.
Compare 2 Chronicles 29:1-36; 2 Chronicles 30:1-27; 2 Chronicles 31:1-21., with 2 Kings 18:1-37, also 2 Chronicles 26:16-21 with 2 Kings 15:5, also 2 Chronicles 11:13-17; 2 Chronicles 13:9-20; 2 Chronicles 15:1-15; 2 Chronicles 23:2-8 with 2 Kings 11:5-9. (W. Smith,
D. D.)
Sources of information used by the compiler
As regards the sources of information, it may truly he said that
we have the narrative of contemporary writers throughout. There was a regular
series of state annals both for the kingdom of Judah and for that of Israel,
which embraced the whole time comprehended in the Books of Kings, or at least
to, the end of the reign of Jehoiakim, 2 Kings 24:5. These annals, cited by
name as “the Book of the Acts of Solomon,” 1 Kings 11:41; and, after Solomon,
“the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, or Israel,” e.g. 1 Kings 14:29; 1 Kings 15:7; 1 Kings 16:5; 1 Kings 16:14; 1 Kings 16:20; 2 Kings 10:34; 2 Kings 24:5, and it is manifest
that the author of Kings had them both before him, while he drew up his history,
in which the reigns of the two kingdoms are harmonised, and these annals
constantly appealed to. But in addition to these national annals, there were
also extant, at the time that the Books of the Kings were compiled, separate
works of the several prophets who had lived in Judah and Israel, and which
probably bore the same relation to the annals which the historical parts of
Isaiah and Jeremiah bear to those portions of the annals preserved in the Books
of Kings, i.e. were, in some instances at least, fuller and more
copious accounts of the current events, by the same hands which drew up the
more concise narrative of the annals, though in others perhaps mere duplicates.
Thus the acts of Uzziah, written by Isaiah, were very likely identical with the
history of his reign in the national chronicles, and part of the history of
Hezekiah we know was identical in the Chronicles and in the prophet. The
chapter in Jeremiah 52:1-34. is identical with that
in 2 Kings 24:1-20; 2 Kings 25:1-30. These works, or at
least many of them, must have been extant at the time when the Books of Kings
were compiled, as they certainly were much later when the Books of Chronicles
were put together by Ezra. But whether the author used them all, or only those
duplicate portions of them which were embodied in the national chronicles, it
is impossible to say, seeing he quotes none of them by name, except the acts of
Solomon, and the prophecy of Jonah. On the other hand, we cannot infer from his
silence that these books were unused by him, seeing that neither does he quote
by name the vision of Isaiah as the ChrOnicler does, though he must, from its
recent date, have been familiar with it, and that as many parts of his
narrative have every appearance of being extracted from these books of the
prophets, and contain narratives which it is not likely would have found a
place in the chronicles of the kings (see lKi 14:4, 16:1; 2 Kings 17:1-41., etc. (W. Smith,
D. D.)
The contents of the Books of Kings
Considering the conciseness of the narrative, and the simplicity
of the style, the amount of knowledge which these books convey of the
characters, conduct, and manners of kings and people during so long a period is
truly wonderful. The insight they give us into the aspect of Judah and
Jerusalem, both natural and artificial, into the religious, military, and civil
institutions of the people, their arts and manufactures, the state of education
and learning, their resources, commerce, exploits, alliances, the causes of
their decadence, and finally of their ruin, is most clear, interesting, and
instructive. In a few brief sentences we acquire more accurate knowledge of the
affairs of Egypt, Tyre, Syria, Assyria, Babylon, and other neighbouring nations
than had been preserved to us in all the other remains of antiquity up to the
recent discoveries in hieroglyphical and cuneiform monuments. If we seek in
them a system of scientific chronology, we may indeed be disappointed But it is
for their deep religious teaching, and for the insight which they give us into
God’s providential and moral government of the world, that they are above all
valuable. The books which describe the wisdom and the glory of Solomon, and yet
record his fall; which make us acquainted with the painful ministry of Elijah,
and his translation into heaven; and which tells us how the most magnificent
temple ever built for God’s glory, and of which He vouchsafed to take
possession, was consigned to the flames, for the sins of those who worshipped in
it, read us such lessons concerning both God and man, as are the best evidence
of their Divine origin, and make them the richest treasure to every Christian
man. (Wm. Smith, D. D.)
Division of the history into periods
The space of time thus covered is about 410 years, and it divides
itself naturally into three periods--the time of the undivided monarchy under
Solomon, the time of the divided kingdom till the fall of Samaria, and the time
of the surviving kingdom of Judah till the Captivity by Nebuchadnezzar. First
Period: Solomon’s Reign. This period is treated at greater length
than any subsequent reign, its record occupying eleven chapters. Two of these,
however, relate to the circumstances that led to Solomon’s accession to the
throne while his father David was alive, and the greater part of the remaining
chapters is taken up with the account of the building of the Temple and of the
royal palace. In this section of the book there is little evidence of a
literary plan, but we are made distinctly aware of the intention of the book
and the point of view of the writer. That so much space is devoted to the
description of the Temple, as compared with the few particulars relating to the
king’s palace, is not merely owing to the author’s better acquaintance with the
courts and furniture of the sacred house than with the interior of the royal
residence, but to the fact that he regarded the erection of the Temple as of
prime importance for the history which he is writing. And that this is meant to
be a sacred, and not merely a secular, history is further evinced by the fact
that, along with the glowing accounts of the greatness and fame of Solomon,
there are significant hints of the dangers underlying all the magnificence, and
the fatal tendency of the introduction of foreign habits, with insistence on
the fact that national prosperity was conditional on fidelity to the national
religion. The section closes with a plain intimation that the seeds of evil
sown in Solomon’s reign were already germinating, and an enumeration of the
“adversaries” who were already raised up to destroy the fair fabric of the
empire of all Israel Second Period: The Two Kingdoms. This
period, of somewhat more than two centuries, from the disruption of the kingdom
after the death of Solomon, about b.c. 933 to the fall of Samaria in b.c. 722,
is the subject of the greater part of the book, the narrative extending from
the beginning of 1 Kings 12:1-33. to the end of 2 Kings 17:1-41. Here the treatment
of the materials is more systematic, and a literary plan, simple, though
somewhat artificial, is followed. It is to be observed that the writer strives
to maintain a synchronism in the history; for when he returns alternately to a
new reign in the Northern or Southern Kingdom, he mentions that it was in such
and such a year of the reign of a king in the sister state that so and so began
to reign in the other. In the laying out of the particulars of the successive reigns there is to be
observed a recurrence of set phrases which give a certain monotony to the
narrative, but indicate the point of view from which the history is regarded.
Notwithstanding the rigidity of framework and the stereotyped diction, this
part of the book is far from
being a mere state chronicle of political events. As in the former section, so
in this, the writer regards the whole as a sacred history. Third Period:
The Surviving Kingdom of Judah. In this style and in this vein the
writer brings the history
down to the time when the Northern Kingdom was brought to an end by the capture of Samaria
in b.c. 722, devoting a whole chapter to the causes which led to the
catastrophe, and the subsequent fate of that part of the country. The remainder
of the book is devoted to the history of the surviving kingdom of Judah, the
latest point to which the narrative is brought down being the thirty-seventh
year of the captivity of Jehoiachin, viz., b.c. 562. This section, accordingly,
embraces a period of sixty years, and extends to eight chapters. (The Temple
Bible.)
Date of the Book of Kings
To the date of the compilation of the Book of we are guided by the
latest events that are mentioned in it. The last chapter (2 Kings 25:1-30.) concludes with the
thirty-seventh year of Jehoiachin’s captivity, when Evil-Merodack released him
from prison. This happened b.c. 561. But this last chapter and a few verses,
18-20 of chap. 24., are identical with chap. 52. of the prophecy of Jeremiah.
There, however, the closing words of chap. 51., “Thus far are the words of
Jeremiah,” plainly show that what follows was added by one who thought it no
integral part of the prophecy, but added it to complete the historical notices
found in other parts of that book, and added it most likely from this Book of
Kings. We may therefore conclude that this book was compiled b.c. 561. But the
compiler has no word, even of hope, to record concerning the final deliverance
of the nation from captivity. That deliverance commenced with the decree of
Cyrus, b.c. 536, though the final migrations did not take place till the days
of Nehemiah, nearly a century later, b.c. 445. Had he known of any movement in
the direction of a return, the writer would surely have made mention of it. He
is cheered, apparently at the close of his work, by the clemency shown to
Jehoiachin. He would hardly have passed over any agitation for the national
redemption without a word of notice. The book was therefore finished before
b.c. 536, and its date lies between that year and b.c. 561. (J. R. Lumby, D.
D.)
The compiler’s purpose and point of view
That the writer had a distinct plan and purpose before him and
occupied a distinct point of view, we have already seen. And what the plan and
point of view were he makes quite evident, both in the brief notes introducing
or summing up the various reigns, and in the longer reviews of periods and the detailed
narratives of a prophetical character which are woven into the history.
Standing at the close of Israel’s national independence, he will describe the
whole course of history from the bloom-period of Solomon to the collapse of the
State under the pressure of the Babylonian Empire; and having noted the
influences, human and Divine, which had been at work, he will exhibit for the
instruction of his readers the causes of the varying fortunes of his people.
The author himself gives us what we may call his philosophy of the history in
his review of the causes that brought about the downfall of the Northern
Kingdom (2 Kings 17:7-23). The same
fundamental principles are stated in more positive terms elsewhere. Thus, at
the very opening of the history, the keynote of the whole is struck in David’s
parting charge to Solomon (1 Kings 2:2-4). So also, on the
occasion of Solomon’s first vision at Gibeon (1 Kings 3:14), and of his second
vision, after the completion of the building of Temple and palace (1 Kings 9:1-9), the principle is
stated almost in the same terms, with the addition, in the last passage, of the
warning. The three great principles, therefore, on which the author proceeds
are: that a special choice had been made of David and his house, that
whole-hearted devotion to the national God (without swerving into heathen ways)
was the condition of national prosperity, and that the worship at local
shrines, the so-called “high places,” was inconsistent with the pure Mosaic
worship. The second may be called the underlying principle of all prophecy; and
the third, though slow to be recognised, as the even the examples of the “good”
kings show, comes into prominence in reforms carried out by Hezekiah, and
finally triumphed, for a time at least, in the more thorough reform of Josiah’s
days. (The Temple Bible.)
──《The Biblical Illustrator》