2 Kings 24
Butler24 : 8 JEHOIACHIN was eighteen years old when he began to reign ; and he reigned in Jerusalem three months : and his mother’s name was Nehushta the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem. And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father had done. At that time the servants of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up to Jerusalem, and the city was besieged. And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came unto the city, while his servants were besieging it ; and Jehoiachin the king of Judah went out to the king of Babylon, he, and his mother, and his servants, and his princes, and his officers : and the king of Babylon took him in the eighth year of his reign. And he carried out thence all the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king’s house, and cut in pieces all the vessels of gold which Solomon king of Israel had made in the temple of the LORD, as the LORD had said. And he carried away all Jerusalem, and all the princes, and all the mighty men of valour, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and the smiths ; none remained, save the poorest sort of the people of the land. And he carried away Jehoiachin to Babylon ; and the king’s mother, and the king’s wives, and his officers, and the chief men of the land, carried he into captivity from Jerusalem to Babylon. And all the men of might, even seven thousand, and the craftsmen and the smiths a thousand, all of them strong and apt for war, even then the king of Babylon brought captive to Babylon. And the king of Babylon made Mattaniah his father’s brother king in his stead, and changed his name to Zedekiah. Zedekiah was twenty and one years old when he began to reign ; and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem : and his mother’s name was Hamutal the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah. And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that Jehoiakim had done. For through the anger of the LORD did it come to pass in Jerusalem and Judah, until he had cast them out from his presence : and Zedekiah re-
FOLLOWING a practice not uncommon in the East, Nebuchadnezzar, while executing the was sore in the city, so that there was no bread for the people of the land. Then a breach was made in the city, and all the men of war fled, and went forth out of the city by night by the way of the gate between the two walls, which was by the king’s garden; (now the Chaldeans were against the city round about:) and they went by the way of the Arabah. But the army of the Chaldeans pursued after the king, and overtook Zedekiah in the plains of Jericho; and all his army was scattered from him. Then they took the king, and carried him up unto the king of Babylon to Riblah in the land of Hamath; and he gave judgement upon him. And the king of Babylon slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes: he slew also all the princes of Judah in Riblah. And he put out the eyes of Zedekiah; and the king of Babylon bound him in fetters, and carried him to Babylon, and put him in prison till the day of his death.
Josiah had four sons (1 Chron. 3:15)—Johanan, the eldest, who probably died before his father; Jehoiakim, or Eliakim, the second, who was twenty-five years old at his father’s death; Jehoahaz, the third, otherwise called Shallum, who, when his father died, was aged twenty-three; and Mattaniah, the youngest, who must have been then aged ten or nine. It was this fourth son, now grown to manhood, whom Nebuchadnezzar appointed king in Jehoiachin’s room. Hammond.—Zedekiah, the twentieth and last king of Judah, and the youngest son of Josiah and Hamutai, was twenty-one years old at his accession, and reigned eleven years, till the final destruction of Jerusalem. His proper name, Mattaniah, was changed to Zedekiah at his accession. The only events of his reign, except the brief record of the fall of Jerusalem, are those connected with the history of Jeremiah, from whose book we learn the spirit of the times. Zedekiah accepted his royalty over the impoverished remnant of the Jews as the vassal of Nebuchadnezzar, to whom he was bound by every principle of good faith. The fate of his brother and his nephew had proved the hopelessness of rebellion even before the whole strength of the nation had been carried into captivity. The miserable remnant might well envy the condition of their captive brethren, and the time had at length come for piety and patriotism to show themselves in a wise submission to the will of God. Of such a course Jeremiah was the assiduous adviser. P. S.—The events connected with the history of Jeremiah and those connected with the fall of Jerusalem sum up the records of his reign. Established upon the throne by Nebuchadnezzar, after the Temple and palace had been despoiled and the best warriors and artisans of the kingdom had been sent to Babylon, his kingship was only nominal and tributary. Disregarding the counsel of Jeremiah, he followed in the evil courses of Jehoiakim, and was persuaded to break his allegiance to the Babylonish king. His character was rather weak than wicked, yet at the instigation of the Egyptian party, like Manasseh, he shed much innocent blood. B.
Zedekiah’s dealings with Jeremiah exhibit him as a weak rather than a wicked man. He had a friendly feeling toward the prophet, a belief in his supernatural gifts, and a desire to shield him from the violence of the nobles, who sought his life. But he had not sufficient strength of character to adopt the course which the prophet recommended, to impose his will upon the nobles, or even to protect Jeremiah from them boldly and openly. He was a man of half measures, timid, impressible, vacillating. He strove to reconcile an acknowledgment of Jehovah with disobedience to His expressed will, kindness toward Jeremiah with complaisance toward his persecutors, renewal of the covenant with flagrant transgressions of its plain requirements (Jer. 34:8-21). Better disposed than any of the later monarchs except Josiah, he nevertheless brought his country to destruction. Having neither sufficient wisdom to perceive what the course of political affairs was likely to be, nor sufficient faith to accept the authoritative announcements made to him of what the course was to be, he undertook an impossible task, and ruined both himself and his country. B. C.
2. K. 24:20. Zedekiah’s rebellion permitted by God for the destruction of Judah. Had he remained true to his allegiance to Babylon, the city and the Temple of Jehovah might have continued, and Zedekiah remained ruler of the Babylonian province of Judah. But God had decreed the captivity of Judah as well as Israel. The cup of Judah’s iniquity was now full, and Nebuchadnezzar was God’s instrument in its final subjection and exile.
2. K. 25:1-3. The closing siege of Jerusalem and its effects. The memorable day is here given in which the armies of Babylon invested the city, and the period of continuance of the siege. It began on the tenth day of the tenth month in the ninth year of Zedekiah’s reign. This day ever afterward was commemorated by the Israelites as a fast. On that day the vast army of Nebuchadnezzar, comprising representatives of all the kingdoms of the earth under his dominion, “pitched against Jerusalem, and built forts round about it.” The siege lasted a year and a half. The result is simply stated in the fact that there was no bread for the people in the city. Intimations in the Book of Lamentations show how terrible were the sufferings of the besieged inhabitants. B.—The final siege of the Jerusalem of the monarchy lasted for eighteen months—a long siege according to our modern ideas, but short compared to many of the great sieges of history. The siege of Troy was ten years, that of Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar occupied thirteen years, and that of Ashdod (or Azotus) by Psammetichus, king of Egypt, twenty-nine years. Of course, these sieges were rather blockades than a series of assaults. The description, in the passage before us, of the capture of Jerusalem, is easily understood from the position and character of the place. The two southern hills, Zion and Moriah, were, under the conditions of ancient warfare, impregnable on the south and east sides, while to the north and west they were flanked by the lower city, where was the chief part of the population, and had inner walls, defensible, should the outer city be stormed. The Chaldean army assaulted on the north side of the lower city, at what was afterward called the second wall, near where the Damascus gate now stands. This was the only part where mounds and battering-rams could be used, the other faces of the city being too steep. Zedekiah and the garrison were in Zion, the city of David, within the inner wall; but they abandoned all attempt at further resistance, and fled. Tristram.
1. Extreme exactness with respect to a date indicates the extreme importance of the event dated. In the whole range of the history contained in the two Books of the Kings, there is no instance of the year, month, and day being all given excepting in the present chapter, where we find this extreme exactness three times (verses 1, 4 and 8). Hammond.—As the final catastrophe approaches, the historian becomes more close and exact in his dates, marking not only the year, but the month and the day, on which the siege began, no less than those on which it closed. Compare Jer. 52: 4 and Ezek. 24: 1, from which last passage we find that on the very day when the host of Nebuchadnezzar made its appearance before Jerusalem, the fact was revealed to Ezekiel in Babylonia, and the fate of the city announced to him (verses 6-14).
Against Jerusalem. The army seems to have at first spread itself over all Judea. It fought, not only against Jerusalem, but “against all the cities of Judah that were left”—and especially against Lachish and Azekah (Jer. 34: 7), two cities of the south (2 Chron. 11: 9), which had probably been strongly garrisoned in order to maintain the communication with Egypt. This division of the Babylonian forces encouraged the Egyptians to make an effort. After the siege of Jerusalem had continued for a certain time, news arrived that Hophra had put his troops in motion and was advancing to the relief of his Jewish allies (Jer. 37: 5). On hearing this, Nebuchadnezzar, who saw the importance of concentrating his forces, broke up from before Jerusalem, and marched away to the south. There he probably effected a junction with the detachments which were besieging Azekah and Lachish, thus saving them from destruction, and at the same time showing to the Egyptians his readiness to give them battle. It appears that the display was enough. The timid southerners, finding their enemy prepared to receive them, shrank back, returned into their own country (Jer. 37: 7; Ezek. 17: 17), and took no further part in the war. Nebuchadnezzar then led back his army, and once more invested the city. B. C.
In the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month. Upon this very day Ezekiel, in captivity, announced to the exiles about him that siege had been laid to the city (Ezek. 24: 1, 2), and that it should certainly be taken, and the sanctuary profaned. This crisis in the affairs of the capital city was a turning-point likewise in Ezekiel’s ministry. Up to this time the exiles had maintained their confidence that the city of God could not be taken, and that the captivity would be of short duration; and, in consequence of these fallacious hopes, they did not submit with penitence and humility to this Divine discipline. It was necessary, therefore, for Ezekiel constantly to utter the language of denunciation and warning, and to insist upon the certainty and necessity of the overthrow of the city. From the day of the beginning of the siege until word was brought him of the fall of the city (Ezek. 24: 27; 33: 21, 22) he was dumb as to the exercise of his ministry, and discontinued his disclosures on that subject. Thenceforward his ministry was one of consolation and blessing, setting forth the assurance that God would protect and regather His captive people. W. H. G.
3. The famine. That the city yielded only to famine—famine which brought pestilence in its train—is apparent from many passages of Jeremiah (21:7, 9; 32:24; 38:9, etc.). The intensity of the suffering endured may be gathered from Lamentations, Ezekiel and Josephus. The complexions of the men grew black with famine (Lam. 4:8; 5:10); their skin was shrunk and parched (ibid. 4:8); the rich and noble women searched the dunghills for scraps of offal (ibid. 4:5); the children perished for want, or were even devoured by their parents (ibid. 2:20; 4:3, 4, 10; Ezek. 5:10); water was scarce, as well as food, and was sold at a price (Lam. 5:4); a third part of the inhabitants died of the famine and the plague which grew out of it (Ezek. 5:12). B. C.
2. K. 25:4, 5. The escape, pursuit, and capture of Zedekiah and his army. A breach was made in the walls, and the city was entered at midnight (Josephus; Ezek. 12:2-12). The entrance was effected by the northern gate. Through the darkness of the night, lit up, if at all, only by the nine days’ moon, the Chaldean guards silently made their way from street to street, till they suddenly appeared in the centre of the Temple court, in the middle gateway which opened directly on the great brazen altar. Never before had such a spectacle been seen in the inviolable sanctuary of Jerusalem. Then the sleeping city woke. A clang and cry resounded through the silent precincts at that dead hour of night. The first victims were those who, whether from religious or superstitious feelings and duties, were habitually occupants of the sacred buildings. The virgin marble of the courts ran red with blood, like a rocky wine-press in the vintage (Lam. 1:15). The alarm soon spread to the palace. In the twilight of the early summer dawn, these dreadful scenes were dimly discerned from the palace below; and before the sun had risen, the king, with his wives and children and the royal guard, escaped, not by any of the regular gates, but by a passage broken through a narrow alley confined between two walls, at the southeastern corner of the city, which the Chaldean army had not been able completely to invest. They passed out with their heads muffled, either for disguise, or to express their sense of the greatness of the calamity, and bearing on their shoulders such articles of value as they hoped to save. As in the case of David, the object of the king was to escape to the east of the Jordan. He and his companions descended, unobserved, by the royal gardens, and down the steep descent to Jericho. There he was overtaken by the Chaldean soldiers, who had received intelligence of his flight from deserters; and in that wide plain, the scene of the first triumph of Joshua, was fought the last fight of the expiring monarchy. His troops fled, and were scattered to the winds. Stanley.
With this account of the siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar should be compared the narrative of its later destruction by Titus (A.D. 70). History does not always repeat itself; but in this instance it does so with marvellous fidelity. The close investment of the city, the desperate resistance, the horrors of famine within, the incidents of the capture, the burning of the Temple, the demolition of the walls, and the captivity of the people, present striking parallels in the two cases. By one of those rare coincidences that sometimes occur, it was on the very same month and day of the month on which the Temple was burned by Nebuchadnezzar, that the sanctuary was fired by the soldiers of Titus. The earlier destruction fulfilled the predictions of the prophets; the later, the predictions of our Lord. One stands appalled at so complete a wreck of a city which God had once honored by making it the place of His abode, and for which He had done such great things in the past. But the lesson we are to learn from it is that nothing can reverse the action of moral laws. God is terrible in His justice. Though a person or place is as “the signet upon His right hand,” yet will He pluck it thence, if it abandons itself to wickedness (Jer. 22:24, 28). J. O.
4. Ezekiel (Ezek. 12:12) prophesied the very details of the flight. It was to be “in the dark,” the king himself was to “carry” some of his valuables, they were to “dig through” the earthen ramparts; and all appears to have been literally fulfilled. The flight was taken in the opposite direction from the entrance of the besiegers; two walls, which probably ran down the valley between Zion and the Temple mount, afforded cover to the fugitives as far as to the south city wall, and there some postern let them out to the king’s garden. That is a tragic touch. It was no time then to gather flowers. The forlorn and frightened company seems to have scattered when once outside the city; for there is a marked contrast in verse 4 between “they fled” and “he went.” In the description of his flight, Zedekiah is still called, as in verses 1 and 2, the king; but after his capture he is only “Zedekiah.” A. M.
6. They brought him to Ribiah. Nebuchadnezzar had, some time before, left Nebuzaradan in command; and as he was carrying on the siege of Tyre at the same time, had himself pitched his camp at Riblah, where the caravan route from Chaldea across the desert enters the upper Syrian plain, and then divides, one road leading south to Samaria and Judea, and another southwest under the spurs of Lebanon toward Tyre. It is situated on the side of a stream near the mountains, in a wide fertile plain, and was a regular outpost of Assyrian armies. It still retain its ancient name. From this position, then, the king could control the operations of both the besieging armies. Tristram.—And they gave judgment upon him. As a rebel, who had broken his covenant and his oath (Ezek. 17 : 16, 18), Zedekiah was brought to trial before Nebuchadnezzar and his great lords. The facts could not be denied, and sentence was therefore passed upon him, nominally by the court, practically by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 52 : 9). By an unusual act of clemency, his life was spared; but the judgment was still sufficiently severe. Hammond.
7. This king, Zedekiah, both weak and wicked, met a fearful doom—his sons slain before his eyes, himself brought to look face to face into the eyes of the Chaldean king against whom he had faithlessly rebelled. Then his eyes were put out, and himself taken in chains to Babylon to die there. With singular minuteness all the apparently conflicting prophecies concerning him were precisely fulfilled. Ezekiel (chap. 12 : 13) had said of him, “I will bring him to Babylon, yet shall he not see it, though he shall die there.” Precisely so. He was borne there, yet never to see that great city not the light of day there. These nobles of Judah, whom we have seen exerting a sway so absolute and so pernicious over this weak king, are all slain. H. C.—Thus were fulfilled two prophecies that seemed to contradict one another; the first that of Jeremiah, that “Zedekiah’s eyes should behold the eyes of the king of Babylon” (Jer. 32 : 4), and the other that of Ezekiel, that “he should not see Babylon, though he should die there.” W. Loeth.
He was made to witness the execution of his own sons, and of all the princes of his court. These fearful executions were then indelibly impressed upon his mind by the destruction of his own sight. He was then bound in chains, and remained in prison until his death.
In the death of Zedekiah ended the royal house of David. And thus was closed the sad experiment of monarchy in Israel. It had been begun nearly five hundred years before, by the people’s rejection of Jehovah’s personal rule and their choice of Saul as their king. Broken in twain at Solomon’s death, the severed parts had each nineteen kings (or twenty, if we count Tibni and Athaliah). The great root-sin in each kingdom was idolatry; the source of all the long series of calamities, as it was the cause of successive Divine judgments. For this cause at last God was constrained to extirpate the desired monarchy, and to depopulate the very land which He had originally given to their fathers. But the great evil was eradicated by the long captivity in Babylon. In the sad years of exile the remnant of God’s people learned the lesson taught by a discipline so severe. Strangers in a strange land, the faithful ones among them pondered the teachings of the prophets, whose books they had borne with them. And God interposed still in their behalf by merciful providences, and communicated with them by the living prophets Daniel and Ezekiel. Thus He prepared them, when at length they utterly gave up their idolatry, for the period of return and partial restoration in the land of their fathers. B.
The sinful heart remains unwarned and untouched by the most fearful consequences of others’ sin, though these are seen ever so clearly. Zedekiah and his princes received warning upon warning, not only by the mouth of Jeremiah, but by the successive visitations of calamity during the three preceding brief reigns. Yet they would not learn these multiplied lessons; but in the face of consequences so terrible they filled up the measure of their own iniquities. And such has ever been the course of the naturally deceitful, desperately wicked heart of man. Even when sentence is executed speedily upon others, their hearts remain set in them to do evil.
God’s strange work of judgment will at last be performed. By the legitimate effect of his own evil doing upon the transgressor, and by the natural instrumentality of other wicked men, His visitations of punishment are finally wrought. Thus was it with the people of Judah in these closing reigns. And this is one of the strongly significant lessons of these reigns. God will not be mocked, nor will He stay His avenging hand, when the day of His mercy is overpassed.
This captive, blinded, imprisoned, crushed and hopeless king presents to us a signal type of the end of every wilful transgressor against Divine mercy. Under sin’s cruel mastery the soul is at last bound and blinded, and hopelessly crushed forever in the prison of despair.
Yet God is rich in mercy to all that call upon Him. He desires not that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. And He will save to the uttermost all that come unto Him by Christ Jesus. B.
The story of the Judean captivity brings to view, as every other great event in history does, these two distinct lines of purpose—the line of God and the line of man. To effect God’s will in the fulfilment of ancient prophecy, this one man must suffer the barbarities of ancient warfare, and die at last a dethroned prince, a childless father, a blind old man, in an enemy’s country, and in a dungeon. Yet the great wheels of Providence moved on calmly and relentlessly, crushing out that one life as if no being in the universe cared for it. No friendly ear seemed to hear the death-cry of the victim.
Of the many truths which the passage before us teaches, this mysterious intervolution of the plans of God with the plans of men will seem to some minds the most impressive. The enclosure of the plans of men within the plans of God is such that commonly men appear to be left very much to themselves. This unfortunate prince, whose lot it was to close the line of independent monarchs on the throne of Judah, does not appear to have been overruled by any visible network of Divine purposes. Yet all the while a plan of God enveloped him, which touched and checked at all points his plans, directed his workings to God’s ends, and wrought out over and around him a chapter of universal history, which was to concern the world in distant ages, and nations yet unborn. Such is the sublime involution of every human life with the purposes of God. So noiseless is His working, that, when men are defeated, His agency is not forced upon their notice. They need not see Him if they choose not to see Him. Commonly they do not see Him. They say of their misfortunes, “Luck was against me.”
In leaving men to themselves in the forming and working of their own plans, Divine control does not prevent the occurrence of very shocking catastrophes. God does seem to leave men to their fate at times, as if death-throes were no concern of His. All happy things at such times appear to mock human agony with a ferocity all the more unbearable because it is so still and so beautiful, yet so cold-blooded. Individuals are left to work out their own ruin. Tempters do devil’s work on the young and the unwary. Innocent ones suffer with the guilty. Nations trample out nations in the rage of their huge passions. The millions are dragged under by the pride of one. Helpless women and little children are the victims. The great wheels crash into and crumple up the little wheels. Happy homes give place to battle-grounds. Wheat-fields grow rank, fertilized by human blood. Artillery thunders in cemeteries, and ploughs open graves. So human life goes on. This is history.
Yet the plans of God envelop and use the plans of men with more than motherly tenderness for every man, every woman, every child. In infinite pity He looks down upon man, woman, child, one by one. The remoteness of His hiding is only the measure of His love. All the mystery springs from the fact that His melting eye looks so far ahead, and His soft hand reaches down to the roots of suffering, so far beyond our sight, or even our will to see. God only knows the love of God. This truth in its fulness we owe to the Bible. Through the whole range of the Old Testament this idea runs—that God is a personal and faithful friend to every one who will be His friend. Do we venture to say, “Our Father”? He responds, “As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort thee.” The New Testament declares the same with yet more intense significance. Taking this key from God’s word, we can unlock the whole mystery of life so far as suffering is concerned. To eyes once opened to this truth, it throws a flood of golden light over the blackest and most tempestuous midnight of a troubled life. Such a man knows that there is a God in heaven whom the heaven of heavens cannot contain, but who deigns to dwell in the homes of men. You can neither prove it to him nor disprove it. He knows it.
The interlacing of the plans of God with the plans of men goes far toward explaining the mystery of shocking and exceptional calamity. Starting with the inexplicable fact of sin, there is little mystery left in any kind or degree or combinations of suffering. In a world overrun with sin and steeped in guilt as this world is, suffering is no mystery. It is God’s great remedial antidote to sin. The mystery would be fearful if there were none. Suffering is a wonderful fertilizer to the roots of character. The great object of this life is character. This is the only thing we can carry with us into eternity. Benevolent discipline, therefore, is aimed at the accumulating, the consolidating, and the purifying, of character. To gain the most of it, and the best of it, is the object of probation. For such an object, suffering must often take on a surgical severity.
The interworking of the plans of God with the plans of men suggests the only true method of happy as well as holy living. It is to make our plans one with God’s plans. Thus blessedness is sure for both worlds. Study God’s plans; study His providences; study His word; hearken for the whispers of His Spirit. Make much of still hours. Find out thus your place in God’s purposes of procedure. Then drop into that place trustfully and contentedly. Move with His moves, start at His bidding, go here, go there, stay, as He directs. Lie still and suffer, if that be the order from above. Have no will but His. Phelps.
The last verse of chapter 51 runs: “Thus far the words of Jeremiah.” This 52d chapter is not Jeremiah’s work; it is not his style. The author of it writes Jehoiachin; Jeremiah writes him always Jeconiah, or Coniah. It is merely historical. The author, whoever he was, relates the capture of Jerusalem, the fate of Zedekiah, the pillage and burning of the city and the Temple. He mentions also certain persons of distinction who were slain by the Chaldeans. He mentions the number of the captives that were carried to Babylon at three different times; and concludes with the deliverance of King Jehoiachin from prison in Babylon, in which he had been for thirty-seven years. It is very likely that the whole chapter has been compiled from some chronicle of that time; or it was designed as a preface to the Book of the Lamentations; and would stand with great propriety before it, as it contains the facts on which that inimitable poem is built. A. C.
This chapter was confessedly added by some one after Jeremiah’s time, probably by Ezra, or whoever revised the sacred writings after the return of the Jews from Babylon, and collected them into one body. It contains a brief history of the captivity, nearly the same, word for word, as it is related in the second Book of Kings, chap. 24: 18-20 and 25, together with some few additions. Some have supposed it placed here as a proper introduction to the Book of Lamentations. But more probably the design was, by immediately subjoining this historical narrative of the desolations of the Jewish nation to the predictions of Jeremiah concerning them, to hold forth a nearer view of the exact accomplishment of the Divine word of prophecy. Blayney.—It is by no means unnatural that a judicious compiler should deem it important to append to such a book of prophecies a succinct historical sketch of the fall of Jerusalem, the disposal made of the captives, and the ultimate fortunes of their surviving king, Jehoiachin. If Jeremiah had written this chapter, there is no reason apparent why it should not have come in its natural order with chap. 39, where, in verses 1-10, he gives his account of the capture of the city. If these views are correct, this chapter should appropriately have been styled, not Jeremiah, chap. 52, but “A supplement to Jeremiah by the compiler.” H. C.