| 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》