1 Kings 22:1

Though Ahab continued under guilt and wrath, and the dominion of the lusts to which he had sold himself, yet, as a reward for his professions of repentance and humiliation, though the time drew near when he should descend into battle and perish, yet we have him blessed with a three years' peace (Kg1 22:1) and an honourable visit made him by Jehoshaphat king of Judah, Kg1 22:2. The Jews have a fabulous conceit, that when Ahab humbled himself for his sin, and lay in sackcloth, he sent for Jehoshaphat to come to him, to chastise him; and that he staid with him for some time, and gave him so many stripes every day. This is a groundless tradition. He came now, it is probable, to consult him about the affairs of their kingdoms. It is strange that so great a man as Jehoshaphat would pay so much respect to a kingdom revolted from the house of David, and that so good a man should show so much kindness to a king revolted from the worship of God. But, though he was a godly man, his temper was too easy, which betrayed him into snares and inconveniences. The Syrians durst not give Ahab any disturbance. But,

I. Ahab here meditates a war against the Syrians, and advises concerning it with those about him, Kg1 22:3. The king of Syria gave him the provocation; when he lay at his mercy, he promised to restore him his cities (Kg1 20:34), and Ahab foolishly took his word, when he ought not to have dismissed him till the cities were put into his possession. But now he knows by experience, what he ought before to have considered, that as the kisses, so the promises, of an enemy are deceitful, and there is no confidence to be put in leagues extorted by distress. Benhadad is one of those princes that think themselves bound by their word no further and no longer than it is for their interest. Whether any other cities were restored we do not find, but Ramoth-Gilead was not, a considerable city in the tribe of Gad, on the other side Jordan, a Levites' city, and one of the cities of refuge. Ahab blames himself, and his people, that they did not bestir themselves to recover it out of the hands of the Syrians, and to chastise Ben-hadad's violation of his league; and resolves to let that ungrateful perfidious prince know that as he had given him peace he could give him trouble. Ahab has a good cause, yet succeeds not. Equity is not to be judged of by prosperity.

II. He engages Jehoshaphat, and draws him in, to join with him in this expedition, for the recovery of Ramoth-Gilead, Kg1 22:4. And here I do not wonder that Ahab should desire the assistance of so pious and prosperous a neighbour. Even bad men have often coveted the friendship of the good. It is desirable to have an interest in those that have an interest in heaven, and to have those with us that have God with them. But it is strange that Jehoshaphat will go so entirely into Ahab's interests as to say, I am as thou art, and my people as thy people. I hope not; Jehoshaphat and his people are not so wicked and corrupt as Ahab and his people. Too great a complaisance to evildoers has brought many good people, through unwariness, into a dangerous fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness. Jehoshaphat had like to have paid dearly for his compliment when, in battle, he was taken for Ahab. Yet some observe that in joining with Israel against Syria he atoned for his father's fault in joining with Syria against Israel, Kg1 15:19, Kg1 15:20.

III. At the special instance and request of Jehoshaphat, he asks counsel of the prophets concerning this expedition. Ahab thought it enough to consult with his statesmen, but Jehoshaphat moves that they should enquire of the word of the Lord, Kg1 22:5. Note, 1. Whithersoever a good man goes he desires to take God along with him, and will acknowledge him in all his ways, ask leave of him, and look up to him for success. 2. Whithersoever a good man goes he ought to take his religion along with him, and not be ashamed to own it, no, not when he is with those who have no kindness for it. Jehoshaphat has not left behind him, at Jerusalem, his affection, his veneration, for the word of the Lord, but both avows it and endeavours to introduce it into Ahab's court. If Ahab drew him into his wars, he will draw Ahab into his devotions.

IV. Ahab's 400 prophets, the standing regiment he had of them (prophets of the groves they called them), agreed to encourage him in this expedition and to assure him of success, Kg1 22:6. He put the question to them with a seeming fairness: Shall I go or shall I forbear? But they knew which way his inclination was and designed only to humour the two kings. To please Jehoshaphat, they made use of the name Jehovah: He shall deliver it into the hand of the king; they stole the word from the true prophets (Jer 23:30) and spoke their language. To please Ahab they said, Go up. They had indeed probabilities on their side: Ahab had, not long since, beaten the Syrians twice; he had now a good cause, and was much strengthened by his alliance with Jehoshaphat. But they pretended to speak by prophecy, not by rational conjecture, by divine, not human, foresight: "Thou shalt certainly recover Ramoth-Gilead." Zedekiah, a leading man among these prophets, in imitation of the true prophets, illustrated his false prophecy with a sign, Kg1 22:11. He made himself a pair of iron horns, representing the two kings, and their honour and power (both of which were signified by horns, exaltation and force), and with these the Syrians must be pushed. All the prophets agreed, as one man, that Ahab should return from this expedition a conqueror, Kg1 22:12. Unity is not always the mark of a true church and a true ministry. Here were 400 men that prophesied with one mind and one mouth, and yet all in an error.

V. Jehoshaphat cannot relish this sort of preaching; it is not like what he was used to. The false prophets cannot so mimic the true but that he who had spiritual senses exercised could discern the fallacy, and therefore he enquired for a prophet of the Lord besides, Kg1 22:7. He is too much of a courtier to say any thing by way of reflection on the king's chaplains, but he waits to see a prophet of the Lord, intimating that he could not look upon these to be so. They seemed to be somewhat (whatever they were, it made no matter to him), but, in conference, they added nothing to him, they gave him no satisfaction, Gal 2:6. One faithful prophet of the Lord was worth them all.

VI. Ahab has another, but one he hates, Micaiah by name, and, to please Jehoshaphat, he is willing to have him sent for, Kg1 22:8-10. Ahab owned that they might enquire of the Lord by him, that he was a true prophet, and one that knew God's mind. And yet, 1. He hated him, and was not ashamed to own to the king of Judah that he did so, and to give this for a reason. He doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil. And whose fault was that? If Ahab had done well, he would have heard nothing but good from heaven; if he do ill, he may thank himself for all the uneasiness which the reproofs and threats of God's word gave him. Note, Those are wretchedly hardened in sin, and are ripening apace for ruin, who hate God's ministers because they deal plainly with them and faithfully warn them of their misery and danger by reason of sin, and reckon those their enemies that tell them the truth. 2. He had (it should seem) imprisoned him; for, when he committed him (Kg1 22:26), he bade the officer carry him back, namely, to the place whence he came. We may suppose that this was he that reproved him for his clemency to Ben-hadad (Kg1 20:38, etc.) and for so doing was cast into prison, where he had lain these three years. This was the reason why Ahab knew where to find him so readily, Kg1 22:9. But his imprisonment had not excluded him for divine visits: the spirit of prophecy continued with him there. He was bound, but the word of the Lord was not. Nor did it in the lease abate his courage, nor make him less confident or faithful in delivering his message. Jehoshaphat gave too gentle a reproof to Ahab for expressing his indignation against a faithful prophet: Let not the king say so, Kg1 22:8. He should have said, "Thou art unjust to the prophet, unkind to thyself, and puttest an affront upon his Lord and thine, in saying so." Such sinners as Ahab must be rebuked sharply. However he so far yielded to the reproof that, for fear of provoking Jehoshaphat to break off from his alliance with him, he orders Micaiah to be sent for with all speed, Kg1 22:9. The two kings sat each in their robes and chairs of state, in the gate of Samaria, ready to receive this poor prophet, and to hear what he had to say; for many will give God's word the hearing that will not lend it an obedient ear. They were attended with a crowd of flattering prophets, that could not think of prophesying any thing but what was very sweet and very smooth to two such glorious princes now in confederacy. Those that love to be flattered shall not want flatterers.

VII. Micaiah is pressed by the officer that fetches him to follow the cry, Kg1 22:13. That officer was unworthy the name of an Israelite who pretended to prescribe to a prophet; but he thought him altogether such a one as the rest, who studied to please men and not God. He told Micaiah how unanimous the other prophets were in foretelling the king's good success, how agreeable it was to the king, intimating that it was his interest to say as they said - he might thereby gain, not only enlargement, but preferment. Those that dote upon worldly things themselves think every body else should do so too, and true or false, right or wrong, speak and act for their secular interest only. He intimated likewise that it would be to no purpose to contradict such a numerous and unanimous vote; he would be ridiculed, as affecting a foolish singularity, if he should. But Micaiah, who knows better things, protests, and backs his protestation with an oath, that he will deliver his message from God with all faithfulness, whether it be pleasing or displeasing to his prince (Kg1 22:14): "What the Lord saith to me, that will I speak, without addition, diminution, or alteration." This was nobly resolved, and as became one who had his eye to a greater King than either of these, arrayed with brighter robes, and sitting on a higher throne.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Ch. 1Ki_22:1-12. Ahab resolves to recover Ramoth-gilead. Jehoshaphat joins him. Ahab’s prophets promise him victory (2Ch_18:1-11)

1. they continued three years without war] This probably means after the defeat of Benhadad described in chapter 20. It must have been during this interval of peace that Naboth was put to death.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Ki 22:1 And they continued three years without war between Syria and Israel.

Ver. 1. And they continued three years.] No longer. Reconciliations are but fox-like friendships, and covenants with enemies hold not long:

“ Flamma redardescit, quae modo nulla fuit. ”

Witness the wars betwixt Charles V, emperor, and Francis I king of France, whom being his prisoner, he had dismissed, as Ahab did Benhadad, upon a covenant made at Madrid; but it lasted not many months, for the French king quickly combined with the Pope and State of Venice against the emperor, &c.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Ki 22:1. They continued three years — That is, three years were spent; without war between Syria and Israel — Computed from the last war and league wherewith it was concluded. Both Ahab and Ben-hadad were so weakened and broken by the late wars, that they needed and desired peace to recruit themselves, and repair their former losses.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

SYRIAN WARS AND AHAB’S DEATH, 1Ki_22:1-40.

1. Three years without war — Three years from the time of the covenant between Ahab and Ben-hadad. 1Ki_20:34.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

THE DEATH OF AHAB

CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES.—

1Ki_22:2. Jehoshaphat the king of Judah came down to the king of Israel—This visit is accounted for in Chronicles (chap. 1Ki_18:1): Jehoshaphat came to Israel for the marriage of his son Jehoram to Ahab’s daughter, Athaliah (see 2Ki_8:18). Ahab entertained with sumptuous hospitality Jehoshaphat and his immense retinue, composed largely of military officers; and then seized the occasion for forming an alliance with the king of Judah against the Syrian king for the recovery of Ramoth-in-Gilead.

1Ki_22:14. I am as thou art—The Chronicles’ account omits the words “my horses as thy horses,” and gives instead וִעִמְּךָ בַּמִּלְחָמָה, “and I am with thee in the war.”

1Ki_22:5. Enquire of the Lord—The king of Judah had conscientious misgivings; such, indeed, as were unlikely to trouble the godless Ahab.

1Ki_22:6. The prophets—The number, “400,” must not mislead. They were not the Astarte prophets again reinstated (1Ki_18:19; 1Ki_18:22), but a group of men who continued Jeroboam’s Jehovah-worship (calf worship) in the land, and were probably employed by Ahab for seductive religious purposes, to estrange the nation from the true worship of Jehovah. Go up; for the Lord shall deliver it into the hands of the king Notice: “it” is in italics; omit the word, and the prophets merely affirm that the Lord shall deliver—what? Ramoth or Israel?—into the hands of the king. What king? Ramoth into Jehoshaphat’s (or Ahab’s) hands, or Israel into the king of Syria’s hands? Couched as their prediction is in ambiguous terms they evade the responsibility of failure. Thus did the Delphian oracle reply to Pysrhus: Aio te Æcida, Romanos vincere posse: Ibis redibis nunquam in bello peribis. “I say to thee Pyrrhus the Romans shall overcome; thou shalt go, thou shalt return never in war shalt thou perish;” which may mean, Pyrrhus shall overcome the Romans; that he should return; never in war should he perish; or, the Romans should overcome Pyrrhus, he should return never; in war he should perish. All depended on the punctuation of the sentence. This prophecy is alike equivocal.

1Ki_22:7. Is there not a prophet of the Lord besides?—Perhaps Jehoshaphat had heard rumours of Elijah, and referred to him.

1Ki_22:8. Micaiah the son of Imlah—Who was this? Strong probabilities favour the conclusion that he was the nameless prophet of chap. 1Ki_20:13; 1Ki_20:35-41. Whether this man or not, Micaiah had incurred the guilty king’s hatred, which is to the honour of the prophet, for Ahab counted every man his “enemy” (1Ki_21:20) who denounced his iniquitous conduct.

1Ki_22:9. Hasten hither Macaiah—He was doubtless then in the prison to which he was afterwards carried back (1Ki_22:27).

1Ki_22:10. In a void place—בְּגֹּרָן, probably an open threshing-floor.

1Ki_22:11. Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah—One of the “four hundred” who sought to convince the kings by assuming the symbolic manners of a prophet, probably for the misapplication in the present instance of the grand promise formerly made to Ephraim (Deu_33:17).

1Ki_22:15. Go and prosper, &c.—Micaiah repeats the delusive words, as in irony. The angry king sees it to be mockery (1Ki_22:16); yet he resents with greater indignation the “true” word.

1Ki_22:19. I saw the Lord sitting on His throne—This is not a parabolic form of speech, but a solemn recital of a prophetic vision.

1Ki_22:20. Persuade Ahab—Entice.

1Ki_22:21. A spirit—הָרוּהַ, the spirit; definite art., i.e., the prophetic spirit which moved the prophets to speak (1Sa_10:6; 1Sa_10:10; 1Sa_19:20; 1Sa_19:23). Jehovah permits this “spirit” (which must not be identified with the Spirit Divine) to use the perverted prophetic gifts of Ahab’s prophets for Ahab’s merited ruin. Ahab would have false prophecy, false prophecy he shall have. God gave him over to believe a lie (Rom_1:28).

1Ki_22:22. I will be a lying spirit—רוּחַ שָׁקָר—not Satan, assuredly, nor aliquem ex Satanæ familia (as Grot.): for this spirit only assumed falsity for the time, whereas Satan was “a liar from the beginning.”

1Ki_22:24. Zedekiah … smote Micaiah—Feeling himself, after his ostentatious conduct (1Ki_22:11), especially insulted. Keil thinks Zedekiah could only have come thus boldly forward “because he was conscious to himself that he had not feigned his oracle.” Possibly so; then this proves how the “spirit” had really moved these men to prophecy falsely unknowingly to themselves. Zedekiah’s insolence called out no rebuke from Ahab, nor Micaiah’s endurance his praise.

1Ki_22:28. And he said, Hearken, O people, every one of you—These are the words with which Micah the prophet opens his book (Mic_1:2), and manifestly were interpolated by some scribe who identified Micaiah with Micah.

HOMILETICS OF 1Ki_22:1-28

THE FAITHFUL PROPHET

1Ki_22:1. Is indispensable in great emergencies.

1. Is appealed to in times of national difficulty (1Ki_22:1-7). A coalition had been formed between the kings of Israel and Judah. The common danger to which they were exposed from the growing power of Syria led them to forget for a time their differences, and to combine for mutual protection. War was determined upon to wrest from the hands of Benhadad one of the cities he had failed to give up according to treaty (1Ki_20:34). The four hundred prophets of Ahab declared unanimously in favour of the war, and assured the allied monarchs of victory. But there was something wanting. The pious Jehoshaphat was suspicious of the four hundred; and, in so grave a crisis, demanded a clearer indication of the Divine will. The faithful prophet was needed. Great national emergencies demand the utmost care and thought of men of piety and intelligence.

2. Is appealed to despite the hatred of those who are compelled against their will to consult him (1Ki_22:8). Probably it was this Micaiah who uttered against Ahab the oracle referred to in 1Ki_20:42. “O corrupt heart of self-condemned Ahab! If Micaiah spake true to thee, how was it evil? If others said false, how was it good? And if Micaiah spake from the Lord, why dost thou hate him? This hath wont to be the ancient lot of truth, censure and hatred: censure of the message, hatred of the bearer.” Yet, however much the faithful counsellor is disliked, his services are valued, and often anxiously sought. Cincinnatus was twice called from his farm to the dictatorship of the Roman commonwealth, though the opposing parties would have dispensed with his services if they could.

II. Is favoured with signal opportunities of declaring the will of God (1Ki_22:9-12). The two kings were seated on their thrones in a conspicuous place, robed in royal vestments, attended by the gaily dressed officers of the court and by the ministering priests, and surrounded by warlike horsemen and infantry. The leading representatives of church and state were assembled together, and the people in great number. It was an opportunity not to be neglected. The faithful, earnest worker will never lack opportunities; and his divinely implanted instincts will teach what are the great opportunities of life, when God can be most honoured.

III. Declares only what is divinely revealed.

1. He spurns all attempts at bribery (1Ki_22:13-14). The messenger who went for Micaiah seeks to influence him to speak to the same effect as the false prophets, and assured him that by doing so he would win the royal favour. “Those who adore earthly greatness think every man should doat on their idols, and hold no terms too high for their ambitious purchases. Faithful Micaiah scorns the notion: he knows the price of the word, and condemns it. Neither fears nor favours can tempt the holily resolute. They can trample upon dangers or honours with a careless foot; and, whether they be smiled or frowned on by the great, dare not either alter or conceal their errand.”

2. Is not intimidated by the presence of royalty

(1). Ironically exposes and rebukes the false (1Ki_22:15). Micaiah uttered the same words as the four hundred prophets; but by his manner of voice and look imitated the irony of Elijah at Carmel, as if to suggest to Ahab how misleading and unworthy of Jehovah was such an ambiguous oracle as theirs. This mocking manner, which might be familiar to Micaiah, galls by its contemptuousness: it is a dangerous weapon; should be judiciously used; in some hands it is strikingly effective.

(2). Speaks the truth, though it is unpleasant to royal ears (1Ki_22:16-18). Micaiah wholly changes his tone, becomes profoundly serious, and relates his vision, the meaning of which Ahab could not possibly mistake, especially as the metaphor of “sheep and shepherd” for king and people was familiar to the Israelites from the prayer of Moses (Num_27:17). “He was resolved to speak the naked truth, though he were sure to kiss the stocks for his stiffness.” The man who is inspired to declare the Divine will is raised far above the fear of his fellow-creatures, whether they are robed in silks or in rags.

IV. Is sustained and confirmed in his work by heavenly visions (1Ki_22:19-23). A vision like this of the ineffable glory of Jehovah was a great favour, and only granted on special occasions and for special ends. It was granted to Isaiah (Isa_6:1), who immediately supposed he must die, because he had seen the King, the Lord of Hosts; to Ezekiel (Eze_1:26); to Daniel (1Ki_7:9); and in Christian times it was allowed to Stephen (Act_7:56) and John (Rev_4:2). Thus God prepares His servants for special work by a course of training and discipline in every way suited to bring about its faithful accomplishment—by special arrangements of His providence, and by special and striking displays of His glory. The man who sees the Lord, and gains an insight into heavenly realities, will be filled with indomitable courage and perseverance.

V. Is often called to suffer for his faithfulness (1Ki_22:24-27). The king to whom his fidelity was disagreeable had cast Micaiah into prison, and the leading spirit of the four hundred prophets, whose falseness and delusion he had exposed, struck the bound and helpless prisoner, unrebuked by the great ones in whose presence the insult and injury were committed. “It was enough for Ahab to punish with the hand: no weapon was for Zedekiah but his tongue; neither could this rude presumption have been well taken, if malice had not made magistracy insensible of this usurpation. Ahab was well content to see that hated mouth beaten by any hand. It is no new condition of God’s faithful messengers to smart for saying truth. Falsehood does not more betray itself in anything than in blows: truth suffers, while error persecutes. None are more ready to boast of the Spirit of God than those that have the least; as in vessels, the full are silent.”

VI. Is not hindered by suffering from proclaiming his message (1Ki_22:28). Though smitten and dragged back to prison, and threatened with the harshest treatment (1Ki_22:27), the faithful Micaiah persists in maintaining the truthfulness of his message, and calls upon the people to bear witness to it. How little do we know of suffering compared with what our forefathers endured for the truth. We should be more energetic and earnest than they in making known the will of God. There is danger that immunity from suffering should render us less, rather than more, concerned in upholding and propagating the truth. We prize that most for which we suffer most.

LESSONS:—

1. It is a calamity to a nation when every faithful voice it hushed.

2. The faithful prophet is often alone in his witness-bearing.

3. The faithful are nevertheless sustained by Jehovah, and will be by-and-by acknowledged and rewarded by Him.

THE MAN WHO SAW THE LORD (1Ki_22:19)

The prophets frown; the king turns pale; the people hiss; while the uncompromising man of God delivers the unwelcome message. He is the master spirit of that great multitude. How are we to account for his commanding power? The text (1Ki_22:19) is the line that fathoms the mystery, the key which unlocks the secret. “I saw the Lord.” We are no longer astonished at the effect now we know the cause. We think we can understand the man’s behaviour; after such a sight, earth’s poor pomp must have appeared trivial indeed. Faith’s perception of God has ever been the strength of the Church. True—

“Not with our mortal eyes,

Have we beheld the Lord,”

yet, Moses like, the Church “endures,” as seeing Him invisible. Notice—

I. The man who sees the Lord can best understand life’s mysteries.

1. We need not attempt to prove that life has its mysteries. The Psalmist was not the only one who had been perplexed by them (Psa_73:2-17). Many a good man’s faith has staggered under the burden of mysterious providences. Micaiah was a “man of like passions” to ourselves. It must have sorely tried him to see godless Ahab upon a throne; godless prophets basking in royal favour and popular esteem; whilst he—who, true to his convictions, had trodden the path of duty—was shut up in a dungeon. But God’s presence can transform a dungeon to a palace. The dungeon was heaven’s ante-room. “I saw the Lord”—such a sight would wean his soul from earthly delights, and help him to understand the hollowness of earthly grandeur and pomp.

2. Micaiah also understood the mysteries of the Divine government. “The secret of the Lord is with them that fear Him, and He will show them His covenant.” The imprisoned prophet had seen the moving power—the unseen forces that had acted upon the four hundred prophets. He had heard the evil spirit obtain permission to lure Ahab to his ruin. He knew that the king was given over to believe a delusion and a lie, that his damnation might be more speedy. He alone, of all the crowd, regarded him as a ruined man. While others were feasting their eyes with the trappings of royal pageantry, he saw the fingers writing “Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin.” He understood the unanimity of the prophets. There were four hundred Ayes, to one No; a miserable minority, the people said, and Jehoshaphat thought so too, or he would not have accompanied the doomed expedition. But truth is never in a minority. The man who has God on his side is always with the majority. Such was Moses in Pharaoh’s court; Luther before the Diet at Worms; Whitfield amid the showers of rotten eggs on Kennington Common. Such is the God-fearing young man in the shop or warehouse; who, amid the taunts of ungodly associates, maintains a Christian bearing, and testifies to the Gospel’s worth.

II. The man who sees the Lord can best perform life’s duties.

1. God sometimes calls His people to very unpleasant duties. It is not pleasant to run counter to the wishes of friends by giving our protest against their cherished projects. Yet this was what Micaiah had to do. He knew the consequences of such a course; he would exasperate a king whom he had already offended; he would make his own punishment more severe and intolerable than it had already been; he would become the object of popular hatred and contempt. Yet “none of these things moved him.” God had the first claim. He had seen the Lord, and that sight had changed unpleasant duties into delightful pleasures

2. The sight of the Lord is essential to the possession of qualifications necessary for religious work. ’Tis the basis upon which faith rests. Strong faith is the mainspring of earnest work. Unbelief paralyzes Christian effort. The man who has never seen the Lord is not the man for church work. Colleges cannot give this qualification. Ten minutes beside the burning bush was more useful in preparing Moses for his work, than all the years he had spent in acquiring “all the wisdom of the Egyptian.” It took Gamaliel years to train young Saul to be a bigoted persecutor. It didn’t take five minutes for Christ to change him to a devoted Apostle, and from that hour his life testified the truth of his assertion, that he “looked at the things which are not seen.”

3. A sight of the Lord will cause men to regard worldly interests and personal comforts as secondary matters. The narrative does not give the name of the officer who conducted the prisoner into the royal presence. John Bunyan would call him Worldly Wiseman. The man regarded his prisoner with something akin to pity; his haggard face and bent form moved him to advise him concerning his conduct before the king: “Behold now, the words of the prophets declare good unto the king with one mouth; let thy word, I pray thee, be like the word of one of them, and speak that which is good.” The man didn’t mean what he said; he meant: “Speak that which is pleasing.” And Micaiah said: “As the Lord liveth, what the Lord saith unto me, that will I speak.” How that reply would annoy the officer, who would regard him as an obstinate and foolish man, whose singular folly merited all the punishment he would get. He would not understand such a man. A word, and his rags would be exchanged for purple and fine linen: from a dungeon to a court; from famine to plenty; from degradation to position and fame. But he would not speak the word; he was no time-server to pander to popular taste. “What the Lord saith unto me, that will I speak.”

III. The man who sees the Lord can best endure life’s sufferings. The prison is no longer a prison if God is there. God loves to favour His suffering people with manifestations of His presence, whether it be the three young men in the fiery furnace, or Paul in prison, or John on Patmos; all alike shall testify that “He is a very present help in trouble.” It was, probably, when Paul had been beaten so severely by his foes as to be unconscious of all around him, afterwards unable to tell whether he was “in the body or out of the body,” that he was caught up into the third heaven, and heard God say: “My grace is sufficient for thee.” We know it was when they had many stripes laid upon them, after they had been subjected to the rough violence of a brutal mob, and had spent hours with their swollen limbs in the stocks, that “at midnight Paul and Silas sang, and the prisoners heard them.” Such sounds had never before been heard through the gloomy corridors of the prison; groans and curses had been frequently heard there, but joyous Christian song, never. That inner cell was dark—so dark, that though bolts and bars and fetters were felt, they could not be seen; but the apostles saw the Lord that night, and “endured as seeing Him who is invisible.” A wild, excited mob is dragging a prisoner along to execution; the most brutal passions are depicted in their countenance; they cannot reserve their insults and cruelty until they reach the spot where the bloody scene is to be enacted; as they drag, they beat and stone him. But mark his face, how calm, how joyous! And when they reach the place, the victim stands until the stones bruise and gash his frame, but the blood cannot wash out the expression of joy from holy Stephen’s face. We can account for that joy: had he not just said: “Behold I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” Such a sight enabled him to endure the suffering; and, in an atmosphere charged with the hatred of hell, and amid a storm of death-dealing missiles, he calmly lay down and “fell asleep.” The presence of God is the saints’ solace under suffering. Micaiah saw more splendours in his prison than Ahab in his palace. That cell was illuminated by the ineffable light, and visited by the aristocracy. Rutherford compared his dungeon to the king’s cellar, where all the best wines were kept; and like Micaiah he would sing—

“Thy presence, Lord, can cheer

This dungeon where we dwell;

’Tis heaven itself if Thou art near—

If Thou depart ’tis hell.”

IV. The man who sees the Lord can best wait for life’s rewards. Alas! how many have sacrificed truth and a good conscience for earthly rewards! Micaiah could wait for future rewards. Ahab could not have rewarded him—he had nothing that could have satisfied him. He had seen the Lord, and the light of the Divine presence revealed how valueless earth’s poor tinsel baubles are. Nothing but heaven could satisfy him—

“Had I a glance of Thee, my God,

Kingdoms and men should vanish soon;

Vanish as though I saw them not,

As a dim candle dies at noon.”

We can imagine the same officer taking him back, and, as the jailor pushed him into his dark cell, he would say—“Serve him right!” And then he would tell the jailor about the events of the day, and how foolish the prisoner had behaved in being so blind to his own interests, and then they would talk about what Ahab meant by keeping him until “I come in peace.” Did he mean to restore him to liberty then? They knew better than that. The day of Ahab’s return would be the day of Micaiah’s death. Such would be their rational conclusion. How much or how long he suffered we cannot tell, but we know it was well with him to the last. “Say ye to the righteous, it shall be well with him.”—Condensed from The Christian Age for 1873.

GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES

1Ki_22:1-28. King Ahab appears here in the last act of his career, just as we have seen him always hitherto, devoid of religious or moral character. His penitence, which seemed so earnest, and which certainly falls in the period immediately preceding the renewed war with the Syrians, had, as we see from the story before us, borne no fruit. His attitude towards Jehovah and his covenant remained the same. There is not a sign of any change of heart. He is now enraged against Benhadad, whom, after the battle of Aphek, he called his “brother,” and suffered to depart out of weakness and vanity. He summons the chief soldiers to a war against Benhadad, and calls for Jehoshaphat’s aid also, in order to make sure of destroying him. As Jehoshaphat desired, before engaging on the expedition, to hear an oracle of Jehovah in regard to it, Ahab summoned only those in regard to whose declarations he could be sure they would accord with his own wishes; and when Micaiah, being called at the express wish of Jehoshaphat, gives another prophetic declaration, Ahab explains this as the expression of personal malice, as he had once done in regard to Elijah’s declarations (1Ki_21:20). He allows Zedekiah to insult and abuse Micaiah, and even orders the latter into close confinement. Then, again, he becomes alarmed at the prophet’s words, though before he was passionate and excited; and he goes into battle disguised.—Lange.

1Ki_22:1-4. National alliances.

1. Are justifiable against a dangerous and powerful enemy.

2. Are always attended with peril where there is want of harmony in religious beliefs.

3. Cannot result in permanent good without the Divine blessing.

1Ki_22:3. It is a misfortune when great men have a fondness for war. They are not satisfied when they must be still, but seek war without necessity, and imperil their country. Do ye not know that heaven is ours, yet we be still! So should those cry out to their hearers who are charged with the cure of souls, and should encourage them to take the kingdom of heaven by force (Mat_11:12).—Wurt. Summ.

1Ki_22:5-12. The delusion of falsehood. I. All the more dangerous when it is the consentaneous declaration of acknowledged religious leaders (1Ki_22:6; 1Ki_22:12). II. Never lacks an audacious and ingenious champion (1Ki_22:11). III. Meanly obsequious in the presence of royal pomp and circumstance (1Ki_22:10). IV. Fears exposure from the tongue of the faithful (1Ki_22:8). V. Is ever suspected by the truly good (1Ki_22:5; 1Ki_22:7).

1Ki_22:7. Their number consent; confidence hath easily won credit with Ahab: we do all willingly believe what we wish. Jehoshaphat is not so soon satisfied. These prophets were, it is like, obtruded to him for the true prophets of the true God. The judicious king sees cause to suspect them, and now, perceiving at what altars they served, hates to rest in their testimony. “Is there nowhere a prophet of the Lord besides?” One single prophet speaking from the oracles of God is worth more than four hundred Baalites. Truth may not ever be measured by the poll. It is not number, but weight, that must carry it in a council of prophets. A solid verity in one mouth is worthy to preponderate light falsehood in a thousand.—Bp. Hall.

1Ki_22:10-12. There is nothing that is more sinful and worthy of punishment than to flatter the great, who need to hear the truth. This is more sinful, however, in the clergy than in others. Who is not disgusted by those who fashion their words by popular favour? Yet he who would go on smoothly, easily, and prosperously must do this. Then he will not meet with opposition, nor lose his place at Jezebel’s table, nor his other emoluments. All the four hundred agreed unanimously, and yet their prophecy was false. In matters of Divine truth it matters not how many agree. Here voices ought to be weighed, not counted. The number of the unbelieving or the superstitious was always greater than that of the believers, for men agree in error or falsehood much more easily than in truth. Be not deceived, though thousands may think and say the same thing, and though the greatest and most learned may be amongst them; but cling thou to the word of Him who said, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away.” Unanimity of opinion, even in the largest congregations of theologians, is not always a proof of truth, for a great company may err.—Lange.

1Ki_22:12-28. Here we see the marks of the true and false prophets. The false teachers say what is popular, so as to enjoy rewards; they rely upon their numbers; they say that they have God’s Word, though they have it not, and claim to be in all things equal to the true teachers; they dispute more with blows and screams than with proofs from the Word of God; they are held in high esteem. On the contrary, true teachers do not speak to please anybody, but they preach fearlessly the truth of God’s Word, letting it strike whom it will, refusing to be turned aside and submitting to persecution.—Wurt. Summ.

1Ki_22:12. These were fit helves for such a hatchet as Ahab was; fit lettuce for such lips. Itching ears shall have clawing preachers.—Trapp.

1Ki_22:13-28. The intrepidity of truth. I. Is superior to the influence of bribery (1Ki_22:13-14). II. Teaches when to use judiciously the weapon of irony (1Ki_22:15-16). III. Fearlessly declares what is divinely revealed, irrespective of consequences (1Ki_22:17-18). IV. Is explicit and uncompromising in the exposure of falsehood (1Ki_22:19-23). V. Refuses to be silent, though threatened and afflicted with severest sufferings (1Ki_22:24-28).

1Ki_22:19-23. Heavenly visions. I. Present sublime and elevating revelations of truth. II. Sustain and strengthen the suffering faithful. III. Are intended to guide and instruct in a crisis of national and religious difficulty. IV. Aggravate national ruin when wilfully disregarded.

1Ki_22:22. The difficulties which attach to this passage are considerable. While, on the one hand, it is hard to suppose that one of the holy angels would undertake to be, and be permitted to be, a “lying spirit,” on the other, it is not what we should have expected, to find Satan, or an evil spirit, included among the host of heaven (1Ki_22:19), and acting as the minister of God. Still, as Satan appears sometimes to present himself to God among the angels (Job_1:6; Job_2:1), he may have done so on this occasion; and the service which he offered may have been accepted. On the other hand, we scarcely know enough of the Divine government in its action upon evil to say that the holy angels may not sometimes be employed, when God “sends men strong delusion that they should believe a lie” (1Th_2:12). Finally, it may be doubted whether we ought to take literally, and seek to interpret exactly, each statement of the present narrative. Visions of the invisible world can only be a sort of parables; revelations, not of the truth as it actually is, but of so much of the truth as can be shown through such a medium. The details of a vision, therefore, cannot safely be pressed, any more than the details of a parable. Portions of each must be accommodations to human modes of thought, and may very inadequately express the realities which they are employed to shadow forth to us.—Speaker’s Comm.

1Ki_22:23. These men called prophets were only pretenders to prophecy, whom the wicked king of Israel had in his pay, and who knew how to suit his humour and flatter his vanity. Micaiah distinctly calls them Ahab’s prophets. The address of Micaiah is not a real representation of anything done in the heavenly world, as if the Almighty were at a loss for expedients, or had any hand in the sins of his creatures. It is a parable, and tells in figurative language the events shortly to take place, and the permission on the part of God for these agents to act. It is a known idiom of the Hebrew language to express things in an imperative and active form which are to be understood only permissively.—T. H. Horne.

1Ki_22:24-28. Micaiah’s suffering for the truth.

1. He is publicly insulted by Zedekiah, the chief of the prophets (Mat_5:11).

2. He is thrown into prison by the godless king Ahab (1Pe_2:19).

3. He is left unprotected by the pious king Jehoshaphat (Mat_26:56).

1Ki_22:26-28. Ahab’s conduct towards the witness of the truth. I. It was tyrannical. There is no greater tyranny than to suppress by force the Divine Word and the truth. II. It was foolish. We cannot accomplish anything against the truth (2Co_13:8). We can put the advocates of it in prison, but not the truth. It cannot be bound in chains, nor starved. It escapes and spreads, and only gains in glory by our attempts to oppress it.—Lange.

1Ki_22:26. To prison, whence he was fetched, and whereof he might say, as that martyr did to the bishop who reviled and threatened him: Send me back to my frogs and toads, where I may be free to pray for your lordship.

1Ki_22:27. This is the emphatic clause of Ahab’s speech. Micaiah is to be once more put in prison, but not on the same terms as before. In order to punish him for his uncomplying spirit, he is to be placed upon a poorer and scantier diet than he had been previously allowed; and this is to continue until Ahab returns in peace. Ahab introduces this expression purposely, in order to show his entire disbelief of Micaiah’s prophecy.—Speaker’s Comm.

1Ki_22:28. The hope of unjust men perisheth (Pro_11:7). Julian, for instance, when he went out to war against the Persians, breathed out threatenings against the Christians on his return, which was never. And that French king who promised to see with his eyes a certain female martyr burnt, had, before that time, one of his eyes thrust out at the jousts, of which wound he died.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

Allied Campaign of Ahab and Jehoshaphat against the Syrians at Ramoth, and Death of Ahab (compare 2 Chron 18:2-34). - Kg1 22:1. "And they rested three years; there was no war between Aram and Israel," ישׁב here is to keep quiet, to undertake nothing, as in Jdg 5:17, etc. The subject to ויּשׁבוּ is Aram and Israel mentioned in the second clause. The length of time given here points back to the end of the war described in 1 Kings 20.

Kg1 22:2-4

In the third year (not necessarily "towards the end of it," as Thenius supposes, for Jehoshaphat's visit preceded the renewal of the war) Jehoshaphat visited the king of Israel, with whom he had already formed a marriage alliance by marrying his son to Ahab's daughter (Ch2 18:1; Kg2 8:18). Ahab then said to his servants that the king of Syria had kept the city of Ramoth in Gilead (probably situated on the site of the present Szalt: see at Deu 4:43), which he ought to have given up, according to the conditions of the peace in Kg1 20:34, and asked Jehoshaphat whether he would go with him to the war against Ramoth, which the latter promised to do. "I as thou, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses;" i.e., I am at thy service with the whole of my military power. In the place of the last words we have therefore in the Chronicles ועמך בּמּלחמה, "I am with thee in the war," i.e., I will assist thee in the war.

Kg1 22:5-7

But as Jehoshaphat wished also to inquire the word of the Lord concerning the war, Ahab gathered together about 400 prophets, who all predicted as out of one mouth a prosperous result to the campaign. These 400 prophets are neither the 400 prophets of Asherah who had not appeared upon Carmel when Elijah was there (Kg1 18:19-20), nor prophets of Baal, as some of the earlier commentators supposed, since Ahab could not inquire of them את־דּבר יהוה. On the other hand, they were not "true prophets of Jehovah and disciples of the prophets" (Cler., Then.), but prophets of Jehovah worshipped under the image of an ox, who practised prophesying as a trade without any call from God, and even if they were not in the pay of the idolatrous kings of Israel, were at any rate in their service. For Jehoshaphat did not recognise them as genuine prophets of Jehovah, but inquired whether there was not such a prophet still in existence (Kg1 22:7), that they might inquire the will of the Lord of him (מאותו).

Kg1 22:8

Ahab then named to him one, but one whom he hated, because he never prophesied good concerning him, but only evil,

(Note: Just as Agamemnon says to Calchas in Il. iv. 106: μάντι κακῶν, ου ̓ πώποτέ μοι τὸ κρήγουν εἶπας, κ.τ.λ.)

namely, Micah the son of Jimlah. Josephus and the Rabbins suppose him to have been the prophet, whose name is not given, who had condemned Ahab in the previous war for setting Benhadad at liberty (Kg1 20:35.). But there is no foundation for this, and it is mere conjecture. At any rate, Ahab had already come to know Micah as a prophet of evil, and, as is evident from Kg1 22:26, had had him imprisoned on account of an unwelcome prophecy. Ahab's dislike to this prophet had its root in the belief, which was connected with heathen notions of prophecy and conjuring, that the prophets stood in such a relation to the Deity that the latter necessarily fulfilled their will; a belief which had arisen from the fact that the predictions of true prophets always came to pass (see at Num 22:6 and Num 22:17).

Kg1 22:9

By Jehoshaphat's desire, Ahab nevertheless sent a chamberlain (סריס; see at Sa1 8:15 and Gen 37:36) to fetch Micah (מהרה, bring quickly).

Kg1 22:10-12

In the meantime the prophets of the calves continued to prophesy success before the two kings, who sat upon thrones "clothed in robes," i.e., in royal attire, upon a floor in front of the gate of Samaria. גּרן, a threshing-floor, i.e., a levelled place in the open air. In order to give greater effect to their announcement, one of them, named Zedekiyah the son of Cnaanah, made himself iron horns, probably iron spikes held upon the head (Thenius), and said, "With these wilt thou thrust down Aram even to destruction." This symbolical action was an embodiment of the figure used by Moses in the blessing of Joseph (Deu 33:17): "Buffalo horns are his (Joseph's) horns, with them he thrusts down nations" (vid., Hengstenberg, Beitrr. ii. p. 131), and was intended to transfer to Ahab in the case before them that splendid promise which applied to the tribe of Ephraim. But the pseudo-prophet overlooked the fact that the fulfilment of the whole of the blessing of Moses was dependent upon fidelity to the Lord. All the rest of the prophets adopted the same tone, saying, "Go to Ramoth, and prosper," i.e., and thou wilt prosper. (On this use of two imperatives see Ges. 130, 2).

Kg1 22:13-14

The messenger who fetched Micah tried on the way to persuade him to prophesy success to the king as the other prophets had done; but Micah replied with a solemn oath, that he would only speak what Jehovah said to him.

Kg1 22:15-17

Micah's prophecy concerning the war, and his testimony against the lying prophets. - Kg1 22:15, Kg1 22:16. When Micah had come into the presence of the king, he replied to his question, "Shall we go against Ramoth?" etc., in just the same words as the pseudo-prophets, to show the king how he would speak if he were merely guided by personal considerations, as the others were. From the verbal agreement in his reply, and probably also from the tone in which he spoke, Ahab perceived that his words were ironical, and adjured him to speak only truth in the name of Jehovah. Micah then told him what he had seen in the spirit (Kg1 22:17): "I saw all Israel scatter itself upon the mountains, as sheep that have no shepherd;" and then added the word of the Lord: "These have no master; let them return every one to his house in peace." That is to say, Ahab would fall in the war against Ramoth in Gilead, and his army scatter itself without a leader upon the mountains of Gilead, and then every one would return home, without being pursued and slain by the enemy. Whilst Zedekiyah attempted to give greater emphasis to his prophecy by symbolically transferring to Ahab's enterprise the success predicted by Moses, Micah, on the other hand, showed to the king out of the law that would really take place in the intended war, namely, that very state of things which Moses before his departure sought to avert from Israel, by the prayer that the Lord would set a man over the congregation to lead them out and in, that the congregation might not become as sheep that have no shepherd (Num 27:16-17).

Kg1 22:18

But although Ahab had asked for a true word of the Lord, yet he endeavoured to attribute the unfavourable prophecy to Micah's persona enmity, saying to Jehoshaphat, "Did I not tell thee that he prophesies nothing good concerning me, but only evil (misfortune)?"

Kg1 22:19-25

Micah was not led astray, however, by this, but disclosed to him by a further revelation the hidden ground of the false prophecy of his 400 prophets. וגו שׁמע לכן, "therefore, sc. because thou thinkest so, hear the word of Jehovah: I saw the Lord sit upon His throne, and all the army of heaven stand around him (עליו עמד as in Gen 18:8, etc.) on His right hand and on His left. And the Lord said, Who will persuade Ahab to go up and fall at Ramoth in Gilead? and one spake so, the other so; and the spirit came forth (from the ranks of the rest), stood before Jehovah, and said, I will persuade him...I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And He (Jehovah) said, Persuade, and thou wilt also be able; go forth and do so. And now Jehovah has put a lying spirit into the mouth of all his prophets; but Jehovah (Himself) has spoken evil (through me) concerning thee." The vision described by Micah was not merely a subjective drapery introduced by the prophet, but a simple communication of the real inward vision by which the fact had been revealed to him, that the prophecy of those 400 prophets was inspired by a lying spirit. The spirit (הרוּח) which inspired these prophets as a lying spirit is neither Satan, nor any evil spirit whatever, but, as the definite article and the whole of the context show, the personified spirit of prophecy, which is only so far a πνεῦμα ἀκάθαρτον τῆς πλάνης (Zac 13:2; Jo1 4:6) and under the influence of Satan as it works as שׁקר רוּח in accordance with the will of God. For even the predictions of the false prophets, as we may see from the passage before us, and also from Zac 13:2 and the scriptural teaching in other passages concerning the spiritual principle of evil, were not mere inventions of human reason and fancy; but the false prophets as well as the true were governed by a supernatural spiritual principle, and, according to divine appointment, were under the influence of the evil spirit in the service of falsehood, just as the true prophets were moved by the Holy Spirit in the service of the Lord. The manner in which the supernatural influence of the lying spirit upon the false prophets is brought out in Micah's vision is, that the spirit of prophecy (רוח הנבואה) offers itself to deceive Ahab as שׁקר רוּח in the false prophets. Jehovah sends this spirit, inasmuch as the deception of Ahab has been inflicted upon him as a judgment of God for his unbelief. But there is no statement here to the effect that this lying spirit proceeded from Satan, because the object of the prophet was simply to bring out the working of God in the deception practised upon Ahab by his prophets. - The words of Jehovah, "Persuade Ahab, thou wilt be able," and "Jehovah has put a lying spirit," etc., are not to be understood as merely expressing the permission of God, as the fathers and the earlier theologians suppose. According to the Scriptures, God does work evil, but without therefore willing it and bringing forth sin. The prophet's view is founded upon this thought: Jehovah has ordained that Ahab, being led astray by a prediction of his prophets inspired by the spirit of lies, shall enter upon the war, that he may find therein the punishment of his ungodliness. As he would not listen to the word of the Lord in the mouth of His true servants, God had given him up (παρέδωκεν, Rom 1:24, Rom 1:26, Rom 1:28) in his unbelief to the working of the spirits of lying. But that this did not destroy the freedom of the human will is evident from the expression תּפתּה, "thou canst persuade him," and still more clearly from תּוּכל גּם, "thou wilt also be able," since they both presuppose the possibility of resistance to temptation on the part of man.

Zedekiah was so enraged at this unveiling of the spirit of lying by which the pseudo-prophets were impelled, that he smote Micah upon the cheek, and said (Kg1 22:24): "Where did the Spirit of Jehovah depart from me, to speak to thee?" To אי־זה the Chronicles add as an explanation, הדּרך: "by what way had he gone from me?" (cf. Kg2 3:8, and Ewald, 326, a.) Zedekiah was conscious that he had not invented his prophecy himself, and therefore it was that he rose up with such audacity against Micah; but he only proved that it was not the Spirit of God which inspired him. If he had been inspired by the Spirit of the Lord, he would not have thought it necessary to try and give effect to his words by rude force, but he would have left the defence of his cause quietly to the Lord, as Micah did, who calmly replied to the zealot thus (Kg1 22:25): "Thou wilt see it (that the Spirit of Jehovah had departed from thee) on the day when thou shalt go from chamber to chamber to hide thyself" (החבה for החבא, see Ges. 75, Anm. 21). This was probably fulfilled at the close of the war, when Jezebel or the friends of Ahab made the pseudo-prophets suffer for the calamitous result; although there is nothing said about this in our history, which confines itself to the main facts.

Kg1 22:26-27

But Ahab had Micah taken back to Amon the commander of the city, and to Joash the king's son, with the command to put him in prison and to feed him with bread and water of affliction, till he came safe back (בּשׁלום) from the war. From the expression השׁיבהוּ, "lead him back," it evidently follows that Micah had been fetched from the commander of the city, who had no doubt kept him in custody, as the city-prison was probably in his house. The opposite cannot be inferred from the words "put him into the prison;" for this command, when taken in connection with what follows, simply enjoins a more severe imprisonment.

Kg1 22:28

In his consciousness of the divine truth of his announcement, Micah left the king with these words: "If thou come back safe, Jehovah has not spoken by me. Hear it, all ye nations." עמּים does not mean people, for it is only in the antique language of the Pentateuch that the word has this meaning, but nations; and Micah thereby invokes not only the persons present as witnesses of the truth of his words, but the nations generally, Israel and the surrounding nations, who were to discern the truth of his word from the events which would follow (see at Mic 1:2).

Kg1 22:29-40

The issue of the war, and death of Ahab. - Kg1 22:29. Ahab, disregarding Micah's prophecy, went on with the expedition, and was even joined by Jehoshaphat, of whom we should have thought that, after what had occurred, he at any rate would have drawn back. He was probably deterred by false shame, however, from retracting the unconditional promise of help which he had given to Ahab, merely in consequence of a prophetic utterance, which Ahab had brought against his own person from Micah's subjective dislike. But Jehoshaphat narrowly escaped paying the penalty for it with his life (v. 32), and on his fortunate return to Jerusalem had to listen to a severe reproof from the prophet Jehu in consequence (Ch2 19:2).

Kg1 22:30-31

And even Ahab could not throw off a certain fear of the fulfilment of Micah's prophecy. He therefore resolved to go to the battle in disguise, that he might not be recognised by the enemy. ובא התהפּשׂ ("disguise myself and go into the battle," i.e., I will go into the battle in disguise): an infin. absol., - a broken but strong form of expression, which is frequently used for the imperative, but very rarely for the first person of the voluntative (cf. Ewald, 328, c.), and which is probably employed here to express the anxiety that impelled Ahab to take so much trouble to ensure his own safety. (Luther has missed the meaning in his version; in the Chronicles, on the contrary, it is correctly given.) לבשׁ ואתּה, "but do thou put on thy clothes." These words are not to be taken as a command, but simply in this sense: "thou mayest (canst) put on thy (royal) dress, since there is no necessity for thee to take any such precautions as I have to take." There is no ground for detecting any cunning, vafrities, on the part of Ahab in these words, as some of the older commentators have done, as though he wished thereby to divert the predicted evil from himself to Jehoshaphat. but we may see very clearly that Ahab had good reason to be anxious about his life, from the command of the Syrian king to the captains of his war-chariots (Kg1 22:31) to fight chiefly against the king of Israel. We cannot infer from this, however, that Ahab was aware of the command. The measure adopted by him may be sufficiently accounted for from his fear of the fulfilment of Micah's evil prophecy, to which there may possibly have been added some personal offence that had been given on his part to the Syrian king in connection with the negotiations concerning the surrender of Ramoth, which had no doubt preceded the war. The thirty-two commanders of the war-chariots and cavalry are, no doubt, the commanders who had taken the place of the thirty-two kings (Kg1 21:24). "Fight not against small and great, but against the king of Israel only," i.e., endeavour above all others to fight against the king of Israel and to slay him.

Kg1 22:32-33

And when the leaders of the war-chariots saw Jehoshaphat in the battle in his royal clothes, they took him for the king of Israel (Ahab), and pressed upon him. Then Jehoshaphat cried out; and from this they perceived that he was not the king of Israel, and turned away from him. וגו אך אמרוּ והמּה, "and they thought, it is only (i.e., no other than) the king of Israel." עליו יסרוּ, "they bent upon him." Instead of this we have in the Chronicles עליו יסבּוּ, "they surrounded him," and Thenius proposes to alter our text to this; but there is no necessity for doing so, as סוּר also occurs in a similar sense and connection in Kg1 20:39. How far Jehoshaphat was saved by his crying out, is not precisely stated. He probably cried out to his followers to come to his aid, from which the Syrians discovered that he was not the king of Israel, whom they were in search of. The chronicler adds (Kg1 2:18, Kg1 2:31): "and the Lord helped him and turned them off from him;" thus believingly tracing the rescue of the king to its higher causality, though without our having any right to infer from this that Jehoshaphat cried aloud to God for help, which is not implied in the words of the Chronicles.

Kg1 22:34

But notwithstanding the precaution he had taken, Ahab did not escape the judgment of God. "A man drew his bow in his simplicity" (לתמּו as in Sa2 15:11), i.e., without trying to hit any particular man, "and shot the king of Israel between the skirts and the coat of mail." דּבקים are "joints by which the iron thorax was attached to the hanging skirt, which covered the abdomen" (Cler.). The true coat of mail covered only the breast, to somewhere about the last rib; and below this it had an appendage (skirts) consisting of moveable joints. Between this appendage and the true coat of mail there was a groove through which the arrow passed, and, entering the abdomen, inflicted upon the king a mortal would; so that he said to his charioteer: ידיך הפך, verte manus tuas, i.e., turn round (cf. Kg2 9:23). The Chethb ידיך (plural) is the only correct reading, since the driver held the reins in both his hands. החליתי כּי: for I am wounded.

Kg1 22:35

"And the conflict ascended," i.e., became more violent. The use of the verb עלה in this sense may be accounted for on the supposition that it is founded upon the figure of a rising stream, which becomes more and more impetuous the higher it rises (vid., Isa 8:7). "And the king was stationed (i.e., remained or kept himself in an upright posture) upon the chariot before the Syrians," that he might not dishearten his soldiers, "and died in the evening, and poured the blood of the wounds in the middle hollow (חיק) of the chariot."

Kg1 22:36-37

Towards sunset the cry went through the army (המּחנה, the army drawn up in battle array), "Every one into his city and into his land!" - In Kg1 22:37 the historian shows how the word of the Lord was fulfilled in the case of Ahab. "Thus the king died and came to Samaria:" equivalent to, thus the king reached Samaria dead; and he was buried there.

Kg1 22:38

When they washed the chariot at the pool of Samaria, the dogs licked his blood, while the harlots were bathing (in the pool). והזּנות רחצוּ is a circumstantial clause, and רחץ means to bathe, as in Exo 2:5. This explanation, which is sustained by the grammar and is the only tenable one, disposes of the several arbitrary interpretations of these words, together with the emendations of the text of which Thenius is so fond. In this way was the word of the Lord through Elijah (Kg1 21:19) and the unknown prophet (Kg1 20:42) fulfilled; also the prediction of Micah (Kg1 22:17). Ahab had paid the penalty with his own life for sparing the life of Benhadad (Kg1 20:42), and his blood was licked up by the dogs (Kg1 21:19). The fact that the dogs licked up the blood and the harlots were bathing in the pool, when the chariot that was stained with the blood of Ahab was being washed, is mentioned as a sign of the ignominious contempt which was heaped upon him at his death.

Kg1 22:39-40

Close of Ahab's history. We have no further account of his buildings. "The ivory palace," i.e., the palace inlaid with ivory, he had probably built in his capital Samaria (cf. Amo 3:15).

Keil & Delitzsch — Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1861–1891) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API. (Old Testament only.)

C.—Ahab’s expedition against the Syrians, undertaken with Jehoshaphat, and his death

1Ki_22:1-40 (2Ch_18:1-34)

1And they continued three years without war between Syria and Israel. 2And it came to pass in the third year, that Jehoshaphat the king of Jndah came down to the king of Israel. 3And the king of Israel said unto his servants, Know ye that Ramoth in Gilead is ours, and we be still, and take it not out of the hand of the king of Syria? 4And he said unto Jehoshaphat, Wilt thou go with me to battle to Ramoth-gilead? And Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel, I am as thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses.

5And Jehoshaphat said unto the king of Israel, Inquire, I pray thee, at the word of the Lord [Jehovah] to-day. 6Then the king of Israel gathered the prophets together, about four hundred1 men, and said unto them, Shall I go against Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall I forbear? And they said, Go up; for the Lord shall deliver2 it into the hand of the king. 7And Jehoshaphat said, Is there not here a prophet of the Lord [Jehovah] besides,3 that we might inquire of him? 8And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, There is yet one man, Micaiah the son of Imlah, by whom we may inquire of the Lord [Jehovah]: but I hate him; for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil. And Jehoshaphat said, Let not the king say so. 9Then the king of Israel called an officer,4 and said, Hasten hither Micaiah the son of Imlah. 10And the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah sat each on his throne, having put on their robes, in a void place in the entrance of the gate of Samaria; and all the prophets prophesied before them. 11And Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah made him horns of iron: and he said, Thus saith the Lord [Jehovah], With these shalt thou push the Syrians, until thou have consumed them. 12And all the prophets prophesied so, saying, Go up to Ramoth-gilead, and prosper: for the Lord [Jehovah] shall deliver5 it into the king’s hand.

13And the messenger that was gone to call Micaiah spake unto him, saying, Behold now, the words of the prophets declare good unto the king with one mouth: let thy word,6 I pray thee, be like the word of one of them, and speak that which is good. 14And Micaiah said, As the Lord [Jehovah] liveth, what the Lord [Jehovah] saith unto me, that will I speak. 15So he came to the king. And the king said unto him, Micaiah, shall we go against Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall we forbear? And he answered him, Go, and prosper: for the Lord [Jehovah] shall deliver it into the hand of the king. 16And the king said unto him, How many times shall I adjure thee that thou tell me nothing but that which is true in the name of the Lord [Jehovah]? 17And he said, I saw all Israel scattered upon the hills, as sheep that have not a shepherd: and the Lord [Jehovah] said, These have no master; let them return every man to his house in peace. 18And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, Did I not tell thee that he would prophesy no good concerning me, but evil? 19And he said, Hear thou therefore7 the word of the Lord [Jehovah]: I saw the Lord [Jehovah]8 sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him9 on his right hand and on his left. 20And the Lord [Jehovah] said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner. 21And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the Lord 22[Jehovah], and said, I will persuade him. And the Lord [Jehovah] said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so. 23Now therefore, behold, the Lord [Jehovah] hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord [Jehovah] hath spoken evil concerning thee. 24But Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah went near, and smote Micaiah on the cheek, and said, Which way went the Spirit of the Lord [Jehovah] from me to speak unto thee? 25And Micaiah said, Behold, thou shalt see in that day, when thou shalt go into an inner chamber to hide thyself. 26And the king of Israel said, Take Micaiah, and carry him back unto Amon the governor10 of the city, and to Joash the king’s son; 27and say, Thus saith the king, Put this fellow in the prison, and feed him with bread of affliction and with water of affliction, until I come in peace. 28And Micaiah said, If thou return at all in peace, the Lord [Jehovah] hath not spoken by me.11 And he said, Hearken, o people, every one of you.

29So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah went up to Ramoth-gilead. 30And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, I will disguise myself, and enter into the battle; but put thou on thy robes. And the king of Israel disguised himself, and went into the battle. 31But the king of Syria commanded his thirty and two captains that had rule over his chariots, saying, Fight neither with small nor great, save only with the king of Israel. 32And it came to pass, when the captains of the chariots saw Jehoshaphat, that they said, Surely it is the king of Israel. And they turned aside to fight against him: and Jehoshaphat cried out. 33And it came to pass, when the captains of the chariots perceived that it 34was not the king of Israel, that they turned back from pursuing him. And a certain man drew a bow at a venture, and smote the king of Israel between the joints of the harness: wherefore he said unto the driver of his chariot, Turn thine hand,12 and carry me out of the host; for I am wounded. 35And the battle increased13 that day: and the king was stayed up in his chariot against the Syrians, and died at even: and the blood ran out of the wound into the midst of the chariot. 36And there went a proclamation throughout the host about the going down of the sun, saying, Every man to his city, and every man to his own country. 37So the king died, and was brought to Samaria; and they buried the king in 38Samaria. And one washed the chariot in the pool of Samaria; and the dogs licked up his blood; and they washed his armor [and the harlots washed14]; according unto the word of the Lord [Jehovah] which he spake. 39Now the rest of the acts of Ahab, and all that he did, and the ivory house which he made, and all the cities that he built, are they not written in the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel? 40So Ahab slept with his fathers; and Ahaziah his son reigned in his stead.

Exegetical and Critical

1Ki_22:1. And they continued, &c., i. e. Syria and Israel. The three years are those which had elapsed since the war mentioned in chap. 20, that is, since the release of Ben-hadad. In this interval fell the murder of Naboth. The 22d chap. is a continuation of the 20th, and is derived from the same original document. Chap. 21 is from some other authority, but appears here in its proper chronological position. The ground of Jehosha-phat’s visit to Ahab, according to the parallel account in Chronicles, was the marriage relationship which had been formed between them, viz., Ahab’s daughter, Athaliah, had become the wife of Jehoshaphat’s son, Jehoram. Chronicles also states that Ahab slaughtered a large number of sheep and oxen for Jehoshaphat and his numerous escort, i. e., he entertained them generously. Ahab profited by this opportunity, so soon as he had made sure of the support of his generals who had come to the entertainment, to persuade Jehoshaphat into making an expedition against the Syrians in alliance with him.—On Ramoth (1Ki_22:3) see notes on 1Ki_4:13. Ben-hadad, contrary to his promise (1Ki_20:34), had not given up this stronghold, from which, as a base, he could easily make incursions into Israel, and Ahab became more and more uneasy as years passed by, and the promised surrender was not consummated. His words (1Ki_22:3) mean: This important city belongs to Israel as of right, and besides that Ben-hadad has solemnly promised to give it up; yet he has not done this, but, on the contrary, menaces us on that side, while “we rest satisfied with this state of things, instead of taking what is ours by a double right” (Thenius).

1Ki_22:4. And he said unto Jehoshaphat. Instead of וַיֹּאמֶר we find in Chronicles וַיסִיתֵהוּ, the same expression which is used in 1Ki_21:25 in regard to Jezebel and her influence on Ahab; he seduced him (cf. Jer_38:22; Deu_13:7). This shows that Jehoshaphat ought not to have agreed to the proposition. However, he did not enter into the plan “after dinner,” thoughtlessly (Richter), but because he wished to confirm the good understanding which had just been established between Judah and Israel, and because he also saw danger to himself in Ramoth, so long as it was in the hands of the Syrians. The horses are especially mentioned, because they formed the essential part of the military power.(Psa_33:16-17; Pro_21:31).

1Ki_22:5. And Jehoshaphat said unto the king of Israel,. &c. Jehoshaphat had some scruples. He wished first to be certain that the undertaking was conformed to the will of Jehovah, a thing in regard to which no anxiety had entered Ahab’s mind. He ought to have considered this before giving his consent (1Ki_22:4). The prophets whom Ahab summoned were not, as some of the old expositors inferred from the number four hundred, the Astarte-prophets who had not been upon Carmel (1Ki_18:19; 1Ki_18:22), for their chief, Zedekiah, affirmed that he had the spirit of Jehovah (1Ki_22:24), and all the others unite in this assertion (1Ki_22:12). Nevertheless, they wore not “certainly genuine Jehovah-prophets” (Clericus), nor “pretended” Jehovah-prophets (Schulz), nor prophet-disciples (Thenius), for the definite article does not refer to such as these, but to a definite class, different from these, the prophets of Ahab. Hence Junius and Tremellius translate correctly according to the sense: Ahab congregavit prophetas suos. So Micaiah designates them in 1Ki_22:22-23, when he calls them “thy” or “his” prophets. Moreover, how could Ahab ever have brought himself to tolerate four hundred prophets, adherents of Elijah, in his immediate circle, when he had not been converted to Jehovah? No one will assert that they belonged to the number of those who wore the well-known penitential robe of the prophets, and went about in goat-skins or in hair-cloth (Zec_13:4; Heb_11:37). It remains that we can think of them only as adherents of Jeroboam’s Jehovah-worship, that is, of the calf-worship. Hence Jehoshaphat did not recognize them as genuine Jehovah prophets. Although they all agree, yet he asks for another, a true worshipper of Jehovah; and Ahab calls for such a one, though with inward dissatisfaction. Since in 1Ki_18:19; 1Ki_18:22; 1Ki_18:25; 1Ki_18:40, the priests of Baal and Astarte are always called נְבִיאִים, the conjecture is suggested that these persons were priests of the calf-worship, who at the same time filled, like the Baal and Astarte priests, the functions of prophets. (See notes on 1Ki_18:19.)

1Ki_22:8. And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, &c. Micaiah is called once only, in the parallel passage (2Ch_18:14), Micha, and is certainly not, as Josephus and the rabbis assert, the man who is mentioned in 1Ki_20:35 as a prophet-disciple. Ahab could not at the moment give the name of any other whom he could summon at short notice. It was very natural that he should not mention Elijah, even aside from the fact that he did not know where he was. Micaiah was in Samaria, and even, as it appears, on account of some previous prophecy which was unfavorable and displeasing to Ahab, in confinement; hence he could be at once brought forward—To the words, but evil, the chronicler adds: “all his days,” i. e., so long as he has filled the office of a prophet. Von Gerlach aptly remarks: We find in Ahab the same heathen conception of the relation between the prophet and Jehovah, as we find in the case of Balak (Num_23:11). He ascribes to the seer some power over his God, and therefore makes him responsible for his unfavorable oracles. Agamemnon says to Calchas (Iliad i. 106), “Seer of evil ! how hast thou never foretold to me good! Thou prophesiest to me with pleasure only evil in thy trance, and hast never declared to me a favorable oracle.” Jehoshaphat’s answer: “Let not the king say so! refers to Ahab’s words: I hate him; I will not now listen to him. Jehoshaphat’s words, therefore, have not this sense: vaticinabitur prospere (Vatablus, Keil), but they are a reply to his remark, and contain such an encouragement as this: Let him come, though;—and this Ahab then does.

1Ki_22:10. Sat each on his throne, &c. 1Ki_22:10-12 carry out into detail that which had been hinted at briefly in 1Ki_22:6. We must, therefore, think here of the same assemblage as there. It is now only described more fully in what a solemn manner this assemblage was held (see Bertheau on 2Ch_18:9). That מְלֻבָּשִׁים בְּגָדִים means “in their official (royal) robes” is clear from Lev_21:10, where it is said of the high-priest: לבשׁ את־הבגדים, i. e., “clad in the official (priestly) garments.” יוֹשְׁבִים is repeated before בְּגֹרֶן in the parallel passage 2Ch_18:9. It can, therefore, only mean: in areaגֹּרֶן means a “smooth open place” (Gesenius); hence a threshing-floor, which is such a smooth open place. However, “threshing-floor” is not the sole meaning, as Thenius asserts. He reads בְּרֻדִּים for בְּגֹרֶן (since the word for threshing-floor makes no sense) and joins it with בגדים, “particolored, that is, probably, vestes distinctœ, acu pictœ;” but this conjecture is as unnecessary as it is violent. Ewald also joins the word with בגדים, and says that it can from the connection (?), have here only the meaning, armor, war-dress, but there is no evidence to support this, for the ἔνοπλοι of the Sept. is not a translation of בגרן but of the words discussed above מל׳׳ בג׳׳.

1Ki_22:11. And Zedekiah, the son, &c. Zedekiah, following the method of the true prophets, performs a symbolical action before the declaration of his oracle (see on 1Ki_11:29). He intended thereby to show himself a prophet of the northern kingdom. He put on horns of iron, which would not break, for Deu_33:17 says of Ephraim: “His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns; with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth.” By a physical reference to this prophecy he intended to represent his present declaration as certain. However, he forgot that “the entire fulfilment of Moses’ blessing depended on the fidelity with which Israel adhered to the commandments, and to the Lord. But Ahab, least of all, had been careful to be thus faithful” (Keil). Of the two imperatives עֲלֶה וְהַצֵלַה, the first is a command and the second an encouragement, as in Gen_42:18; Pro_20:13; Psa_37:27; Job_22:21; Isa_36:16 (Gesen. Grammar § 127).

1Ki_22:15. So he came to the king. “Ahab meant by his question to Micaiah to represent himself to Jehoshaphat as never having attempted to exert any influence upon the declarations of the prophet” (Thenius). He took up the attitude to Micaiah “of holding himself ready for any answer, and of demanding only to know the divine will, although ho had really made up his mind, and would be pleased only with one answer” (Jo. Lange). Hence we may understand the prophet’s answer, which is not irony (Keil), nor “spoken with ironical gestures and a sarcastic tone” (Richter),but certainly a reproof for the hypocritical question. The sense is: How camest thou to the idea of consulting me, whom thou dost not trust? Thy prophets have answered thee as thou desirest. Do, then, what they have approved. Try it. March out. Their oracles have far more weight with thee than mine. “Since Micaiah, who, in 1Ki_22:14, had distinctly declared that he would not speak simply according to the king’s pleasure, nevertheless repeats almost exactly the words of the king’s prophets, he must have spoken in a tone which made it clear to Ahab that what he said was not in earnest” (Bertheau). Therefore Ahab adjured him to speak only the word of Jehovah, but did not promise to follow the counsel which ho should give him in the name of Jehovah. He was not in earnest to learn the truth, but only to convince Jehoshaphat that what he had said (1Ki_22:8) about this prophet was true and just, and that no authority ought to be ascribed to him. Micaiah now refuses no longer, but makes known the vision which he has had (1Ki_22:17). The meaning of this vision was clear. Ahab understood it. The king would fall, and Israel would be scattered without being pursued. Each one would take his own way home, and so the war would end. Perhaps Num_27:17 floated before the prophet’s mind, as Deu_33:17 was in the mind of Zedekiah in 1Ki_22:11. Luther erroneously took the words of Jehovah לֹא־אֲדֹנִים לָאֵלָּה as a question. The sense is: Since these have no longer any master, let each return. Ahab now assures Jehoshaphat (1Ki_22:18; cf. 1Ki_21:20), in order that he may not be influenced by this oracle, that it springs from the malice which he had before declared this prophet to entertain. Then, in order to refute this imputation, Micaiah (ver.19) states, by describing another vision, the reason why the four hundred prophets had prophesied falsely and deceitfully.

1Ki_22:19. Hear thou therefore the word of the Lord.לָכֵן has here its regular signification: for this reason. (Keil: “Because thou thinkest [my declaration the result of mere malice], therefore”.) It is not, “according to the Sept., οὐχ οὕτως, equivalent to לֹא כֵן: veruntamen” (Thenius). The speech in 1Ki_22:19-23 is indeed addressed to the king in the first instance, but evidently all around heard it and were intended to hear it. In Chronicles we find for שִׁמְעוּ ,פְמַע, as in 1Ki_22:28. .—I saw the Lord sitting on His throne. What Micaiah describes in 1Ki_22:19-22 is not a mere parable invented by him, but a prophetic vision which he saw, and which, as the Berleburger Bibel says, represents God and His government and providence in an appropriate symbolical manner. Peter Martyr says: Omnia hœc dicunturἁνθρωποπαθῶς. The separate expressions are not, therefore, to be strained or interpreted in a “gross and materialistic manner” (Richter).—And all the host of heaven, &c. The old expositors, Peter Martyr, Jo. Lange, Starke and others suppose that the prophet described God seated on the throne of heaven and surrounded by the heavenly hosts, in contrast with the two kings sitting on their thrones surrounded by the band of false prophets. It appears, however, that this cannot be correct, for if it were correct, then Micaiah must have had his vision after he came to stand before the kings and to see how they were arrayed, but the revelation, doubtless, came to him some time before this. He rather saw God as the ruler of all in heaven or earth, and as the judge in the full glory of His majesty, entirely independently of the two kings. The host of heaven are not, of course, here the stars, as in Deu_4:19, but all the higher heavenly powers who serve as His organs in the administration of the universe (Heb_1:14; 2Sa_24:16; 2Ki_19:35). Some of the older expositors incorrectly say that those on the right were the good, and those on the left the bad. The latter are nowhere included in the “host of heaven.” All surround Him and wait for His commands.—The question in 1Ki_22:20 : Who shall persuade [delude] Ahab? shows that the fall of Ahab, who had heaped sin upon sin, was determined in the counsels of God (cf. Isa_6:8). The only question which still remained open was as to the way in which his fall should be brought about. “Who is able to delude Ahab, so that he may march against Ramoth to his own destruction?” (Bertheau). And one said on this manner and another said on that manner. Peter Martyr says on these words: Innuit varios providentiœ Dei modos, quibus decreta sua ad exitum perducit. The dramatic-figurative form of representation corresponds fully to the character of the vision, in which inner and spiritual processes are regarded as real phenomena, nay even as persons.

1Ki_22:21. And there came forth a spirit.—הָרוּחַ, i. e., not a spirit (Luther, and E. V., following the Sept.), but the spirit, a definite one, and it can be, according to the entire connection, none other than the spirit of prophecy (Thenius; Keil), the power which, going forth from God, and taking possession of a man, makes him a prophet (1Sa_10:6; 1Sa_10:10; 1Sa_19:20; 1Sa_19:23). The נָבִיא is the אִיש הָרוּחַ (Hos_9:7). This spirit offered itself to fulfil the divine decree. It is a feature in the dramatic-figurative form of representation, that as all the powers of God are represented as persons, so also this power is personified. It steps forth from the ranks of the divine powers and declares its readiness to fulfil the divine will: “I (אֲנִי with emphasis) will persuade him” The question in 1Ki_22:22, Wherewith? adds to the liveliness of the delineation. The meaning of the answer: “I will go forth and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets” is this: The prophets of Ahab shall prophesy to him what he desires to hear, and thus delude him until he shall bring about his own ruin through his own plans. As this view was already decided on in the divine counsels, the Lord answers to the spirit: Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also. Go forth and do so. Because Ahab, who had abandoned God and hardened his heart, desired to use prophecy for his own purposes, it is determined that he shall be led to his ruin by prophecy. As God often used the heathen nations as the rod of his wrath for the chastisement of Israel (Isa_10:5), so now he uses Ahab’s false prophets to bring upon Ahab the judgment which Elijah had foretold against him. We have to compare the passage Isa_6:8-9, where the prophet, who has just been cleansed from sin and consecrated to the prophetic office, answers to the Lord’s question: “Who shall I send,”—“Send me,” and then the command is given to him: “Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert and be healed.” From this we see that the רוּחַ שֶׁקֶר (1Ki_22:22) is not, as most of the old expositors declared, Satan, who does not belong to the “heavenly host” (1Ki_22:19), and is, moreover, nowhere called simply הָרוּחַ (1Ki_22:21). Keil indeed admits that “neither Satan nor any other evil spirit is meant,” but he adds that the spirit of prophecy, in so far as it is, by God’s will, a רוּחֹ השׁקר “stands under the influence of Satan.” But the vision has nothing at all to do with Satan. The circumstances are entirely different from those in Job_1:6, which are often compared. It expresses an act in God’s government and judicial administration, in which Satan is neither directly nor indirectly involved. In 1Ki_22:23 Micaiah states the result of what precedes: Now see; the prophets have prophesied to thee pleasant things, but they are deluded and they delude thee. If therefore I have prophesied otherwise, it is not, as thou hast said (1Ki_22:18), out of hate towards thee, but the Lord has thus spoken to me, and has thus determined in regard to thee.

1Ki_22:24. Zedekiah.… went near. This leader of the other party felt himself especially insulted, as he had confirmed his prophecy by a symbolical act (1Ki_22:11). The blow on the cheek was intended as an insult (Job_16:10; Lam_3:30). We may see from this how Zedekiah stood in Ahab’s favor, and how unesteemed Micaiah was. Chronicles supplies הַדֶּרֶךְ which is wanting with אֵי־זֶה (1Ki_13:12; 2Ki_3:8; Job_38:24). The sense is: How dost thou dare to say that the spirit of prophecy has turned aside from me and gone only to thee? Zedekiah had not, therefore, knowingly prophesied falsely, but his insolence was far from being a proof that he had the spirit of the Lord. On חֶדֶר בְּחֶדֶר see notes on 1Ki_20:30. The story of Zedekiah’s end is wanting both in Kings and Chronicles, but this does not prove that the original document contained much more than now appears in our books (Thenius, Ewald). As Ahab fell, and Zedekiah’s definite prediction was startlingly falsified, we may be sure that he did not fail to be persecuted.

1Ki_22:26. And the king of Israel said: Take Micaiah, &c. Josephus narrates that Ahab was disturbed by Micaiah’s speech, but when he saw that Zedekiah’s hand did not wither as Jeroboam’s did (1Ki_13:4), and that Micaiah inflicted no punishment, that he took courage and went on to the war. This is an empty rabbinical tradition. Zedekiah’s insolence was influential in encouraging Ahab in the determination which he had formed. The latter caused Micaiah to be taken back to Amon the governor of the city, not to his own house (Thenius). He had probably been previously in arrest under this man’s charge, but now he was to be put in prison on the bread and water “of affliction.” Joash, son of the king, was not, probably, a son of Ahab, but a prince of the blood, who, together with the commandant of the city, had charge of the prisoners. If he had been, as Thenius supposes, a young prince who had been intrusted to Amon for his military education (2Ki_10:1), one does not see why he should be mentioned here. In the last words of 1Ki_22:28 Micaiah calls “all people” to be witnesses of his declaration, i. e., not “all the world,” or “people generally” (Keil), but all the people who, besides the two kings and the four hundred prophets, were collected on this solemn occasion. The prophet Micah begins his prophecy (1Ki_1:2) with the words שִׁמְעוּ עַמִּים כֻּלָם, but we may not infer from this, as Bleek does, that the author confused Micaiah with the much younger prophet Micah, nor, as Hitzig does, that the words in this passage are borrowed from that place. It would be more natural to suppose that Micah borrowed the words from the original document of this author. However, the exclamation is so general that it might occur in the independent works of different prophets. It is remarkable that the pious king Jehoshaphat does not interfere to prevent the maltreatment of Micaiah; and that, in spite of the opposition of that prophet, he goes on the expedition. Peter Martyr says: Affinitas cum impiis contracta sanctitatem plurimum imminuit. It appears that he was not willing to take back the promise which he had given (1Ki_22:4) on account of a prophet whom Ahab declared to be his personal opponent.

1Ki_22:30. And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat. The Vulgate and Luther mistakenly take the infinitives הִתְחַפֵּשׁ וָבֹא (disguise and come) as imperatives addressed to Jehoshaphat. וְאַתָּה, which immediately follows by way of contrast, shows that this is wrong. The infinitive absolute is the plainest and simplest form of the voluntative for exclamations, and is used when the speaker is excited and filled with the idea (Ewald, § 328). It is to he remembered, in connection with Ahab’s attempt to disguise himself, that the ordinary custom was for the king to lead the army into battle in full royal costume (2Sa_1:10). Hence he was conspicuous not only to his own army, but also to that of the enemy, who then directed their attack upon him. The words of Micaiah, especially these: “These have no master,” had caused Ahab great secret anxiety. Moreover, he might well suppose that the Syrians would be more eager to attack him than Jehoshaphat. Though he knew nothing of Ben-hadad’s command (1Ki_22:21), yet he desired to frustrate the prophet’s prediction. The sense of his words to Jehoshaphat is, therefore, this: I have every reason to make myself unrecognizable in this war, but thou, against whom the Syrians have no especial hate, mayst go forward in thy royal apparel.—When thus taken, Ahab’s words contain a sort of justification and excuse of his purpose. Jehoshaphat, therefore, agreed to it without objection. There is no ground for the idea that Ahab had planned cunningly that Jehoshaphat might be killed, in order that he might inherit Judah (Schulz, Maurer, and others). Ahab was anxious to save his own life, not to secure Jehoshaphat’s death.

1Ki_22:31. But the king of Syria, &c. Perhaps he had learned that the expedition had originated with Ahab, who had proposed it to his generals, persuaded Jehoshaphat, and pushed forward the plan perseveringly. He hoped that Ahab’s end would be the end of the war. Hence the command which he gave to the thirty-two chariot-captains, who are also mentioned in 1Ki_20:24. They were the leaders, they made known the command to their men. Neither with small nor great,i. e., do not spend time in conflict with any one else, but all press forward against the king of Israel. אַךְ in 1Ki_22:32 does not mean certainly (De Wette, Bunsen), but only. They need not be in doubt, since he alone wore royal dress. Instead of וַיָּסֻרוּ the chronicler has וַיָּסֹבּוּ, and the Sept. has, in both places. ἐκύκλωσαν. Bertheau and Thenius regard the latter as the correct reading. But the Syrians certainly had not yet surrounded him; they were pressing forward towards him, but turned aside when they saw that they were mistaken in the person (1Ki_22:33). The Vulg. has: impetu facto pugnabant contra eum. סוּר means, to turn from the way and go towards something. When they saw the king, they turned towards him. Jehoshaphat cried out, and, as they recognized him, it seems that he must have called out his own name, not, however, in order to make himself known to them, but in order to call his own people to his aid. It may be, also, that his people called to him and uttered his name. In Chronicles it is added: “And the Lord helped him; and God moved them to depart from him.” This can hardly have been borrowed from the original document. The cry was understood [by later readers] as a cry to God (Vulg., clamavit ad Dominum), and the rescue as a divine interposition. If this pair of sentences had been in the original, it is inexplicable how they should have been omitted in the text before us.

1Ki_22:34. And a certain man drew a bow, &c. לְתֻמּוֹ does not mean “at a venture” (Luther, E. V.), nor in incertum (Vulg.), but, as 2Sa_15:11 shows, “without knowing why he aimed particularly at that individual whom he had in his eye” (Thenius). According to Josephus this man’s name was Aman; according to Jarchi it was Naaman. In the text, however, emphasis is laid on the fact that it was an unknown man. Gesenius and De Wette translate הַדְּבָקִים by joints or grooves, but what joints can be referred to? The stem דָבַק means only to hang on or depend from. דֶבֶק, therefore, means that which depends or hangs down, but not a Joint, nor yet the soft parts or flanks (Ewald). Luther, correctly: Zwischen den Panzer und Hengel [between the corselet and the tunic]. The corselet covered the body down as far as below the ribs. The lower part of the body was protected by a hanging skirt of parallel plates (hence the plural דְבָקִים). The arrow penetrated between this skirt and the corselet, where the connection was not close or perfect, and penetrated the “lower abdomen” (Thenius). This wound was of course, a very severe one, if not a fatal one. We may perceive how far such weapons penetrated, by the instance, for example, of the arrow with which Jehu shot king Jehoram, which entered his body between the arms from behind, and came out obliquely through the heart in front (2Ki_9:24; Lament. 1Ki_3:13; Job_16:13). Hereupon Ahab commanded his charioteer to turn and drive out of the midst of the contending armies, for I am wounded,i. e., I am no longer fit to fight, and must retire from the conflict. Evidently הָחֳלֵיתִי means, in this connection, I am wounded (cf. 1Sa_31:3); Sept., τετραυμάτισμαι; Vulg. graviter vulneratus sum). Thenius, translates, “I am not well,” and observes: “He desired to be quickly rid of the arrow, and not to let any one know that he was wounded.” Similarly Bertheau: “For I am unwell. The charioteer cannot have observed that Ahab had been wounded by an arrow.” But a fatal wound in the abdomen, from which blood flowed into the chariot, cannot have passed unobserved, and it is impossible that Ahab should have removed the arrow himself; at least such action is not mentioned in the text. It is certain that he felt so unwell that he asked to be removed from the conflict, and it is difficult to understand how Thenius can say, on the words Against the Syrians (1Ki_22:35), that “he kept his face towards them and did not retire from the place of battle.” Ewald’s assertion that he “had to be carried from the field,” contradicts the words of the text; also there is nothing in the text of Ewald’s further statement, that “when his wound had been bound up Ahab returned into the battle, and fell bravely fighting to the last.” Only so much is certain, that he was removed from the battle in his chariot, but not that he returned to it, as has been erroneously inferred from 1Ki_22:35.

1Ki_22:35. And the battle increased,i. e., the battle became more violent. The figure is taken. from a swelling river (Isa_8:7). Thenius explains the following words, הָיָה מָעֳמָד: “He was standing upright, i. e., through his own strength. He forced himself in order that he might support the courage of his followers.” But he had given orders (1Ki_22:34) that his charioteer should remove him as incapacitated for further fighting, and it does not show in the text that he caused his wound to be bound up and then returned into the fight; this must be invented and added arbitrarily. The sentence: the battle increased, is a subordinate clause to explain how it came about that Ahab remained standing in the chariot and died at evening. The Calwer Bibel states the connection of thought very correctly as follows: “Ahab’s charioteer could not escape from the crush of the battle because the fight became more and more violent, and Ahab was obliged to remain standing on the chariot on which he was until towards evening. His wound could not, therefore, be bound up, and he bled to death. When finally, at sunset, the Israelites turned away from the field of battle, it was too late to save the king.” נֹכַח אֲרָם does not mean “presenting front to the Syrians” (Thenius), but in the face of the Syrians (coram, Jdg_18:6; Jer_17:16; Eze_14:3; Eze_14:7; Pro_5:21). The Syrians, however, did not recognize him, because he was disguised. It is once more stated that the blood ran out of the wound into the midst of the chariot, on account of the incident to be narrated in 1Ki_22:38. In Chronicles these words are wanting, as also the following verses 36–38. The story ends there with the words: “and about the time of the sun going down he died,” because it is not the history of Ahab which is there the prominent interest, but that of Jehoshaphat.

1Ki_22:38. And one washed the chariot in the pool of Samaria. As in the case of other cities (2Sa_2:13; 2Sa_4:12; Song Son_7:4), so also at Samaria, there was a pool near the city which served for purposes of washing and bathing. The dogs licked up the water which was mixed with the blood washed from the chariot. The words וְהַוֹּנוֹת רָחָצוּ cannot be translated as in the Syriac and Chaldaic versions, arma laverunt, or, as in the Vulg., habenas laverunt, in the first place because it is contrary to the usage of the language to make זֹנוֹת the object, and in the second place, because this word occurs in the Old Testament only in the signification harlots. Maurer and Von Gerlach supply, as object of רָחָצוּ, the chariot, but then this clause would only repeat the previous one: “they washed the chariot.” Bunsen supplies arbitrarily: the corpse. רחץ means here, as in Exo_2:5; Ruth 3:31, to bathe. Harlots are also elsewhere mentioned together with dogs, though, it is true, in the figurative use (Deu_23:19; Rev_22:15), because both were regarded as impure and contemptible. Theodoret remarks that the harlots bathed in the evening, according to custom. They did not intend to wash in the blood, but the water was mixed with it. Probably the women were the temple-prostitutes, so that the blood of Ahab was not only licked up by dogs, but also came in contact with persons who were impure, and prostituted in the service of Baal and Astarte; a double mark of the shameful ruin which had been foretold for him. Peter Martyr: Sordes suas miscebant cum sanguine Ahabi, quœ fuit maxima ignominia. Thenius’ proceeding is very arbitrary when he declares that 1Ki_22:38 is an addition of the redactor, who desired to bring the event into full accord with the, prophecy in 1Ki_21:19. We have no further information in regard to Ahab’s buildings mentioned in 1Ki_22:39. The ivory house was a house which was richly decorated within with ivory. Cf. Amo_3:15; Psa_45:8; Son_7:5; Homer’s Odys. 4:72.

Historical and Ethical

1. Jehoshaphat’s journey to Samaria is an important incident in the development of the history of the two kingdoms, for this reason: Ever since the division of the kingdom (seventy years) the two parts had been hostile to each other, but Jehoshaphat’s visit was meant to confirm a peace between them, which had already been brought about by the intermarriage of the prince of Judah and the princess of Israel. A period of peace now began. This new state of things was brought about by Jehoshaphat and not by Ahab, as we see clearly from the account in Chronicles, where also we may learn what considerations induced the pious king of Judah to seek friendship and alliance with Ahab. He had raised the comparatively weak kingdom of Judah to a pitch of prosperity, both internal and external, such as it had not enjoyed since the time of Solomon. Especially against the neighboring nations he had been so successful that all brought him tribute, and no one any longer dared to oppose him (2Ch_17:10). Since now he had attained to great wealth and renown (2Ch_18:1), the wish must naturally arise in his heart, to put an end to the long hostility of the two brother-kingdoms, of which, probably, each was weary. This could not be accomplished by force, for experience had proved that neither kingdom could subjugate the other. Jehoshaphat therefore attempted the peaceful means of a family alliance, and Ahab met him willingly, since he could expect from such an alliance nothing but advantage. It appears, however, that Jehoshaphat aimed at something more than a mere friendly relation between the two kingdoms. When we reflect that he, the faithful adherent of Jehovah, made an alliance between his son and heir and the daughter of the fanatical idolater, Jezebel; that he then went himself in great state to Samaria; that he entered into a military expedition with Ahab in spite of the warning of a prophet of Jehovah; that he afterwards entered into an alliance with Ahab’s successor in spite of the warning of the prophet Jehu not to enter into fellowship with apostates (2Ch_19:1); then we cannot understand all this save on the supposition that he aimed to unite once more the two kingdoms under Judah’s supremacy. However glorious the aim was, it could never be attained in the way upon which he had entered. The real cause of the division of the kingdom was Israel’s revolt from the chief command of the covenant with Jehovah. This cause could not be removed by external means such as Jehoshaphat sought to use. The friendship which he sought to establish by intermarriage and by political measures, ignoring the true ground of division, and even setting it aside by denying some features of the theocratic constitution, was a friendship which had no root, and enjoyed no divine blessing, out of which rather mischief arose for Judah. For, far from tending to root up Jeroboam’s cultus in Israel, this intermarriage helped to transplant it to Judah, and brought that kingdom to the brink of ruin. After seventy or eighty years, in the time of Amaziah, the hostility between the two kingdoms broke out afresh, and was never entirely allayed again until the Assyrians took Israel into captivity.

2. King Ahab appears here in the last act of his career, just as we have seen him always hitherto, devoid of religious or moral character. His penitence, which seemed so earnest, and which certainly falls in the period immediately preceding the renewed war with the Syrians (1Ki_21:27), had, as we see from the story before us, borne no fruit. His attitude toward Jehovah and His covenant remained the same. There is not a sign of any change of heart. He is now enraged against Ben-hadad, whom, after the battle of Aphek, he called his “brother,” and suffered to depart out of weakness and vanity. He summons his chief soldiers to a war against Ben-hadad, and calls for Jehoshaphat’s aid also, in order to make sure of destroying him. He had either forgotten the words of the prophet (1Ki_20:42), or else he cared nothing about them. To “be still” (1Ki_22:3) did not suit him. As Jehoshaphat desired, before engaging on the expedition, to hear an oracle of Jehovah in regard to it, Ahab summoned only those in regard to whose declarations he could be sure that they would accord with his own wishes, and when Micaiah, being called at the express wish of Jehoshaphat, gives another prophetic declaration, Ahab explains this as the expression of personal malice, as he had once done in regard to Elijah’s declarations (chap 1Ki_21:20). He allows Zedekiah to insult and abuse Micaiah, and even orders the latter into close confinement. But then again he becomes alarmed at the prophet’s words, though before he was passionate and excited. He cannot overcome the impression he has received, and so, contrary to military custom and order, he does not go into the battle like Jehoshaphat, clad in royal robes, but disguised. This precaution, which testified to anything but heroism (Eisenlohr says justly: “He hoped in this way to escape danger”), did not, however, avail. He was shot without being recognized. His command to be removed from the strife, that his wound might be cared for, could not be executed. He bled to death on his chariot. Some moderns have represented his end as heroic, starting from the erroneous exegesis that he caused his wounds to be bound up and returned to the fight (see Exeg. on 1Ki_22:34-35). “He had his wound bound up, returned to the battle, and held himself erect in his chariot, though his blood flowed down on its floor until the evening” (Duncker, Gesch. des Alterthums I. s. 1Kings 212:—following Ewald). Thenius even says: “If Ahab held himself erect through the whole day with the purpose already mentioned (to encourage his men), then he possessed, aside from the qualities manifested in 1Ki_20:7; 1Ki_20:14; 1Ki_20:32; 1Ki_20:34, a character whose general features were grand.” This view is certainly mistaken, since we may be sure that the author did not intend to glorify Ahab in this account of his death. It is so far from his intention to say anything in his honor, that he even expressly narrates how Ahab after his death met with involuntary disgrace (1Ki_22:38). In mentioning the end of Asa, Baasha, and Omri their “heroism” (גְּבוּרָה) is mentioned, but when Ahab’s death and burial are mentioned, there is no reference to his valor. Moreover, it is impossible to speak of this king as having “a character whose general features were grand,” seeing that he was ruled by his wicked wife, that he went to bed and would see no one, and neither eat nor drink, because he could not at once obtain a garden which he wanted, and that he did not recover his spirits until he had obtained the garden by a judicial murder.

3. The congregation of not less than four hundred prophets, who claimed to be prophets of Jehovah, but were not such, is a phenomenon which has no parallel either in the earlier or later history of Israel, and which, for various reasons, deserves attention. In the first place, it appears from this that, although the Baal-cultus had been formally introduced, it had not entirely superseded the Jehovah-cultus; on the contrary, that it existed by the side of that (perhaps as a consequence of Elijah’s work), and that, as we may infer from the number of the prophets who were assembled, a great portion of the people must still have been well disposed towards the national cultus. Secondly, it appears that there was in Israel, besides the class of prophets of whom Elijah and Elisha and their pupils were the leaders (2Ki_2:3; 2Ki_2:5; 2Ki_2:7; 2Ki_2:16; 2Ki_6:1), also another class of prophets, who did not oppose the cultus of Jeroboam or the idolatrous dynasty, but rather joined hands with these, and sought a compromise with them. This latter class was no doubt, for the most part, identical with the priests of Jeroboam’s cultus, and formed the official privileged class of prophets. The union of the priestly and the prophetic offices occurred in the Baal-religion (chap. 18). No ancient people considered any cultus complete without a class of men through whom the god might be questioned. This class was naturally identified, in the first place, with the priesthood, through whom all dealings with the gods must be brought about. The calf-worship of Jeroboam must, therefore, have prophets in order to be a complete religious system, and its priests became its born prophets. Since, however, this cultus, with its priesthood, was not a legitimate outgrowth of the national constitution and the divine covenant, but a creation of political policy (1Ki_12:31-32; 1Ki_13:33), the prophecy also, which was connected with it, did not stand upon the covenant with Jehovah, and the spirit which animated this prophecy could not be the “spirit of Jehovah.” It was a lying spirit, since the whole existence of this class of persons was rooted in apostasy and in revolt from the theocratic constitution. These “prophets of Samaria” (Jer_23:13; Eze_13:1) were false prophets. They were not “servants of Jehovah” or “men of God,” but creatures of Jeroboam’s royal power, court prophets, who stood ready for the service of the king. This is the character in which they here appear. Ahab knew that they would prophesy “good” concerning him; hence he called them and would not listen to Micaiah. It is not necessary to consider them conscious and intentional deceivers, but, though they may have believed in their own oracles, yet they were deceitful prophets, since the “spirit of Jehovah” was not in them.

4. The prophet Micaiah, of whom we know nothing more than is to be learned from this chapter, unites, in contrast with the prophets of Ahab, all the chief features of a genuine Jehovah-prophet in a manner in which they are not to be found in a single appearance of any other prophet. We are first struck by the fulfilment of his prediction. He announces, on the authority of a vision, the fall of Ahab as a thing settled in the counsels of God, and does this in such a clear and definite way that Ahab and all the others who were present at once understood what was predicted, and there was no place for a “dim misgiving of the defeat which was to be suffered” (Ewald). According to human foresight, a great defeat was the less to be expected on this occasion, since Ahab’s army was considerably strengthened by the addition of Jehoshaphat’s, and the only thing sought was the capture of one city. Hence the four hundred prophets unanimously promised victory. The passage is certainly historical: according to Thenius, the vision of Micaiah “is to be regarded as a proof of the historical truth of the passage on account of its peculiarity and originality;” we have here, therefore, a definite prediction, which can have proceeded only from divine revelation, from which Micaiah expressly asserts that he received it. Then with this gift of prediction Micaiah unites also the heroic courage which marked all the true prophets. He steps forth in the face of the king and his four hundred prophets, as once Elijah stepped forth in the face of the same king and the four hundred and fifty priests of Baal on Mount Carmel. Though he came from captivity, and had now an opportunity to receive the royal favor, and although the attendant begged him, as he came, to “prophesy good,” yet he speaks only what God has revealed to him, and fears neither the wrath of the king, nor the outcry and rage of the four hundred. He recognizes no fear of men and no desire to please men. The word of his God is more to him than all else, and with that he stands firm, no matter what may threaten him. To this heroic courage he adds, finally, the patient endurance of insult and abuse which he is called to endure for the sake of truth. He does not repay Zedekiah in kind, but refers him to the experience which awaits him. When the enraged king orders him into close confinement on the “bread of affliction,” he does not murmur, but calls on all present to remember his prediction, and submits to his lot, leaving judgment to Him who judges righteously. So this servant of God appears as a forerunner of Him in whose mouth no deceit was found, who, when he was reviled, reviled not again, and did not threaten when he suffered (1Pe_2:22 sq.), as if the great example had already appeared before him, and he had only followed in His footsteps.

5. The vision of the prophet Micaiah (1Ki_22:19-22) is original and peculiar. It has no parallel in the Old Testament. In meaning it corresponds most nearly to Isa_19:14 sq. It is very important for the elucidation of the idea of God as contained in the Old Testament. In so far as it proceeds upon the supposition that the deceitful prophecy of the four hundred prophets had its source in God, it seems to stand upon a religious idea which is not reconcilable with the holiness of God. In order to escape the offence which is involved in this view, the action of God has been described as a mere “permission.” Theodoret, for instance, whom nearly all the ancient expositors follow, says of this vision: προσωποποιΐα τις, διδάσκουδσ τὴν θείαν συγ χώρησιν. But this is clearly a case in which Jehovah himself appears ordering and regulating independently and spontaneously, not merely permissively. We must bear in mind that the vision represents an executive or judicial act of God. As judge, God stands to evil not in the attitude of permission, but in one of punishment. Since evil does not come from God, but from man, who rebels against God, chooses evil, and opposes it to God, so punishment comes upon man through evil. God proves His holiness most of all by this, that He punishes evil by evil, and destroys it by itself. It is an essential feature in the divine government of the world that the evil which springs up in the world is made an instrument in the hand of the Holy One for neutralizing and destroying itself, and that it becomes a means of ruin to him who chooses it, and brings it into being. The idea of holiness as applied to God excludes all idea of His indifference as between good and evil, and therefore forbids us to think of Him as “permitting” evil. The theory of permission does not therefore reconcile this incident with God’s holiness, but rather is directly inconsistent with God’s holiness. Hence it has been abandoned in modern theology (cf. Rothe, Ethik, II. s. 204–210). It is also entirely foreign to Holy Scripture (cf. Hengstenberg, Beiträge, III. s. 462 sq.). The notion that God punishes evil by evil, which forms the basis of Micaiah’s vision, runs through all the Scriptures, and is not at all, as Thenius says, “an outgrowth of the opinions of the time.” Thenius is even inclined to regard its close conformity to the prevalent notions of the time as “an especial proof of the historical character of the passage.” But this general notion is found in the writings of the greatest prophet of the Old Testament (Isa_19:14), and in those of the greatest Apostle of the New Testament (2Th_2:11; Rom_1:24-28; Rom_9:17). The saying, frivolous in itself, Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur, may be applied to Ahab, at least in this sense: He who seeks and chooses falsehood will be ruined by falsehood, against his choice (Psa_18:27).

6 Ahab’s end was truly tragical. It was brought about, not by a blind fate, but by a God who is just in all His ways, and holy in all His works (Psa_145:17), whose judgments are unsearchable, and His ways past finding out (Rom_11:33). The conflict which Ahab had sought, and which no warning could induce him to abandon, became his punishment. He fell in battle with that very enemy who had once been delivered into his hands, and whom he had released, out of vanity and weakness, to the harm of Israel, and so he made good just the words of the prophet in 1Ki_20:42. He thought that a disguise would render him secure from the Syrian leaders who sought to find him out, and he did indeed escape them; but an unknown man, who did not know him, and had no intention against him, shot him, while Jehoshaphat, though undisguised, escaped unharmed. The arrow which struck him was not warded off by his corselet, but just struck the narrow opening between the corselet and the skirt, where it could penetrate and inflict a fatal wound. Every one, therefore, who does not regard all incidents as accidents, must recognize the hand which guided this shaft. The words of the Psalmist held true: “If he will not turn, he will whet his sword, he hath bent his bow, and made it ready. He hath also prepared for him the instruments of death; he ordaineth his arrows against the persecutors” (Psa_7:12-13). Finally, Ahab did not die at once, but at evening, in consequence of the loss of blood. His blood flowed down in the chariot, which was so besmeared by it that it had to be washed. It was washed at the pool before the city, where dogs drank and harlots bathed. So it came to pass, although he was buried with all honor, that he was marked in his death as one condemned by God, and Elijah’s word (1Ki_21:19) was fulfilled.

Homiletical and Practical

1Ki_22:1-38. Ahab’s last undertaking, (a) What led him to it (1Ki_22:1-4); (b) the question which he put to the prophets in regard to it (1Ki_22:6-28); (c) how it resulted (1Ki_22:29-38)

1Ki_22:1-4. The coalition of the two kings, (a) It is proposed by Ahab. (He aims to bring about the war under an apparently just pretext, whereas he was himself to blame for the loss of Ramoth, because he let Benhadad go. So, often, strife is stirred up under the pretext of a just occasion, when the real cause is an evil and godless feeling. Instead of using the time, of peace for peaceful industry the restless man begs for Jehoshaphat’s help in a new war. He was willing to borrow Jehoshaphat’s aid for such an undertaking, but did not care to borrow anything of his piety. [He cunningly proposed the war to recover Ramoth at a time when Jehoshaphat was on a visit to him, and was most anxious to please him.]) (b) Jehoshaphat agrees to it (without due consideration. He was bribed by Ahab’s friendly reception and hospitality. He thus brought himself into great danger, 1Ki_22:32. We must not enter into alliances with men like Ahab, who are given over to do evil. Still less ought we to form relationships with them, for we are thus liable to be led into ways which are displeasing to God and lead to ruin. 2Ch_19:2. We ought to be at peace with all men, but to enter into alliances and relationships only with those who stand on the same ground with us as regards the highest interests)

1Ki_22:1. Starke: God gives time and place for repentance even to the greatest sinners. If they will not repent he will whet his sword (Psa_7:12-13)

1Ki_22:3. Würt. Summ.: It is a misfortune when great men have a fondness for war. They are not satisfied when they must be still, but seek war without necessity and imperil their country.—Pfaff’sche Bibel: Do ye not know that heaven is ours, yet we be still! So should those cry out to their hearers who are charged with the cure of souls, and should encourage them to take the kingdom of heaven by force (Mat_11:12).

1Ki_22:5. Würt. Summ.: We should undertake nothing without God’s approval, for how can a thing prosper in which God does not help? Hence we ought to seek counsel of God in his word and in prayer, and, when the word of God does not counsel us to proceed with the undertaking we should give it up, satisfied that it would not succeed. It is well to ask God’s will, but do it always before, not after thou hast asked or promised.—J. Lange: It often happens thus, a man determines on something displeasing to God, following his own notion, and then convinces himself that it is according to God’s will. Question the word of God! the best counsellor (a) for all who seek truth and are tossed about by doubts, 2Pe_1:19; Psa_19:8 sq.; (b) for all who seek consolation and peace for the soul, Psa_119:82; Psa_119:92; Psa_119:105; Jer_15:16.

1Ki_22:6-12. The congregation of prophets, (a) The question which Ahab submitted to them. (He did not ask in the simple desire to learn the truth and submit to it, but to obtain divine approval before the world for that which he had already determined on. If any one prophesies to him in any other manner he becomes angry with him. The world demands prophets, but calls only those “good preachers” whose words please its ears, 2Ti_4:3, and whose words are not a hammer to break the rock, but a cradle-song to lure to sleep in the midst of vain folly.) (b) The answer which the assembled prophets gave to Ahab. (The answer did not proceed from the spirit of truth any more than the question, for these prophets did not stand on the ground of the divine word. He who has abandoned God’s word may speak as finely as he will; he is a false prophet. [This holds true as well of the dogmatist as of the rationalist] Ahab’s prophets say to him: Go and prosper! He goes and falls into hell. So also now the false prophets promise salvation to all who walk in the broad way, Eze_13:18. Therefore, “Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits,” &c, 1Jn_4:1)

1Ki_22:7-8. In many a city and country where there are preachers enough, one is still obliged to ask, as Jehoshaphat did: “Is there not here a prophet of the Lord besides?” Is there not one who proclaims the word of God simply and purely, without fear or favor of men, and who can say what Paul says: Gal_1:10? There was indeed one other prophet of the Lord in Samaria, but he was in prison, and the king was hostile to him. Starke: Pious people esteem a single genuine prophet or preacher more than four hundred false ones.—Let not the king say so. When a servant of God touches thy conscience, say not: I will go to that church no more; I do not like that preacher—Starke: A Christian should not keep silence when the godless speak sinfully, but interrupt and rebuke them. The Lord did so on the cross (Luk_23:39)

1Ki_22:10-12. Pfaff. Bibel: There is nothing which is more sinful and worthy of punishment than to flatter the great, who need to hear the truth. This is more sinful, however, in the clergy than in others.—Berleb. Bibel: Who is not disgusted by those who fashion their words by popular favor? Yet he who would go on smoothly and easily and prosperously must do this. Then he will not meet with opposition, nor lose his place at Jezebel’s table (1Ki_18:19), nor his other emoluments. All the four hundred agreed unanimously, and yet their prophecy was false. In matters of divine truth it matters not how many agree. Here voices ought to be weighed, not counted. The number of the unbelieving or the superstitious was always greater than that of the believers, for men agree in error or falsehood much more easily than in truth. Be not deceived, though thousands may think and say the same thing, and though the greatest and most learned may be amongst them, but cling thou to the word of Him who has said: “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away.”—Starke: Unanimity of opinion, even in the largest congregations of theologians, is not always a proof of truth, for a great company may err.

1Ki_22:12-28. Würt. Summ.: Here we see the marks of the true and false prophets. The false teachers say what is popular, so as to enjoy rewards; they rely upon their number; they say that they have God’s word, though they have it not and claim to be in all things equal to the true teachers; they dispute more with blows and screams than with proofs from the word of God; they are held in high esteem. On the contrary, true teachers do not speak to please anybody, but they preach fearlessly the truth of God’s word, letting it strike whom it will, refusing to be turned aside, and submitting to persecution. Micaiah, the type of a true prophet (see Histor. § 4).

Vers, 13 and 14 Micaiah on his way to the king, (a) How he was tempted. (The witnesses to the truth often have to withstand the strongest temptations from those who appear to be their sincere friends. They are begged for their own sakes, and for the sake of those who depend on them, not to oppose the great and mighty, and not to declare other teachers false prophets. They are told that their declarations will do no good, but will only excite enmity against them, and deprive them of bread and of respect. Cf. Mar_8:32 sq.) (b) How he repels the temptation. (Neither allurements nor threats can turn aside a faithful servant of God from the word of the Lord. That is the rock on which he takes his stand, the sword and shield with which he fights. What he has already suffered has not made him submissive; what yet a waits him cannot turn him aside. All other considerations must yield to the duty of saying what the Lord gives him to say. Act_4:20.)

1Ki_22:13. Hall: Those who offer earthly good as an inducement think that every one worships their idol

1Ki_22:14. Starke: We ought to be firm against allurements and not let ourselves be drawn from the truth by favor or disfavor. What the Lord saith unto me that will I speak ought to be the vow of every preacher when he enters on his office, (a) What pertains to the fulfilment of this vow? (Knowledge of the truth, power from above, prayer for the gifts of the spirit. 2Ti_4:2 sq.) (b) What is promised to one who makes, such a vow? (Jer_1:8 sq.; Luk_12:12; Mat_10:10; Dan_12:3; 2Ti_4:8; 1Pe_5:4.) 1Ki_22:15-16. Berleb. Bibel: This is a wonderful thing. People demand certain ones to speak the truth, to them, yet when the truth is spoken they are displeased by it. How many demand the truth, yet are angry when they hear it—Cramer: The godless often ask about the truth, not in order to make themselves better, but in order to spend their malice on the pious (Mat_2:3 sq.; Mat_26:63).—Hypocritical questions deserve no earnest answer, but only such a one as may put the questioner to shame—Starke: It is not wrong to sometimes answer the fool according to his folly, but with wit, in order to make him better (Pro_26:5)

1Ki_22:17-27. Micaiah’s prediction, (a) Its contents, in their reference to the king (1Ki_22:17), and to the four hundred prophets (1Ki_22:19-23). (b) Its reception by the prophets (1Ki_22:24) and by the king (1Ki_22:26-28)

1Ki_22:17. Kings should be the shepherds of the people. Israel had in Ahab a master, but not a shepherd. He led the people not in the right path, but astray (Jer_2:13). It is the greatest misfortune for a people when it has no leader who is a true shepherd

1Ki_22:18. Cramer: The godless murmur against preachers, saying that they can do nothing but scold, but they do not murmur against their own sins (Lam_3:39).

1Ki_22:19-23. The truths which are presented to us by the prophet’s vision, (a) The Lord in heaven stands above all earthly thrones. He appoints and deposes kings, and has power over all kingdoms (Dan_2:21; Dan_4:14; 1Sa_2:7). Therefore let all the earth fear him, &c. (Psa_33:8). (b) The Lord is pure to the pure, and perverse to the perverse. He gives over the perverse and hard-hearted to the judgment of obstinate error; he sends mighty errors to inthrall those who resist the truth (Joh_12:40; 2Th_2:11; Exo_14:4; Exo_14:8). Therefore “harden not your hearts,” &c. (Heb_3:8)

1Ki_22:21. Pfaff: It is a great judgment of God upon a country when he allows false prophets to lead it astray, and to put on the mask of true prophets. It is, however, a judgment which the world does not recognize as such.

1Ki_22:22. Kyburz: He who seduces others is himself seduced as a just punishment. Ahab led the people from God to Baal, therefore he is here led by a false oracle to march out upon his own scaffold. That, however, is the mightiest seduction which is brought about through those who ordinarily stand highest in authority,—the prophets.

1Ki_22:24-28. Micaiah’s suffering for the truth, (a) He is publicly insulted by Zedekiah the chief of the prophets (Mat_5:11). (b) He is throw into prison by the godless king Ahab (1Pe_2:19). (c) He is left unprotected by the pious king Jehoshaphat (Mat_26:56).

1Ki_22:24. Kyburz: When the disputants cannot oppose anything to the truth, they turn to blows instead of arguments, or the controversy ends in scolding, and calumny, and blasphemy. Those are the weapons which are forged in hell against the truth Let every one who intends to speak and write the naked truth make up his mind that he will be attacked by these if he disregards the favor of men. This salt [the truth] has lost nothing of its savor; it bites to-day as it did 3,000 years ago.—Berleb. Bibel: A false light makes men self-willed; they become like those who stand in a mist. Each one sees an open light space about himself, but seems to see that every other is enveloped in mist.—Hall: None boast more of having the spirit of God than those who have it not at all. Vessels which are full give only a light sound or none at all. In vituperation and abuse clerical disputants, to whom it is least becoming, are unfortunately often most vigorous. By their sensitive vanity, which can endure no contradiction, their envy, their arrogance, and their anger, they show plainly that they have not the spirit of God, which does not dwell in an arrogant and quarrelsome and self-willed heart, but in a humble one, and its fruits are love, joy, peace, long-suffering, &c. (Gal_5:22). “The Lord resisteth the proud.” 1Ki_22:25. Cramer: Those who are boldest in prosperity generally become the most timid when their affairs begin to decline (Jdg_9:38).

1Ki_22:26-28. Ahab’s conduct towards the witness of the Truth, (a) It was tyrannical. (There is no greater, tyranny than to suppress by force the divine word and the truth.) (b) It was foolish. (We cannot accomplish anything against the truth, 2Co_13:8. We can put the advocates of it in prison, but not the truth. It cannot be bound in chains, nor starved. It escapes and spreads, and only gains in glory by our attempts to oppress it.)

1Ki_22:28. Starke: Threats of death or of imprisonment may not frighten a true servant of God from confessing the truth (Act_5:25-29).—He who makes a good confession can without fear call all the world to witness it (Mat_10:14). Such a confession always leaves a sting behind, which one can never again get rid of (1Ki_22:30).

1Ki_22:29-38. The war with the Syrians, (a) A war which was undertaken without, nay, even against, God’s will, and therefore with no good conscience, (b) An unfortunate war, which resulted in danger to Jehoshaphat, death to Ahab, and rout to the army.—The two kings before, in, and after the battle.

1Ki_22:29. So. We should expect: “So” the two kings abandoned the war. However they went, one out of self-will, the other out of weakness.—Calw. Bib.: Men do far too readily what they want to do, although it is contrary to God’s will, putting aside God’s word, or the warnings of others, or the voice of conscience. The event is never good. How often men ask for advice, yet follow their own will only. Kyburz: Jehoshaphat’s example ought to make us shy of the society of the wicked. The sun of grace in his heart became gradually dimmed. At first he had courage to remonstrate with Ahab, but gradually he comes to silence and indifference, even while Micaiah is abused and remanded to prison. In the end this evil companionship would have cost him his life, if God had not wonderfully interposed.

1Ki_22:30. Unbelief, in Ahab, joined hands with superstition. The king despises and rejects the word of God which is announced to him, and yet he is frightened, and seeks to escape the threatened dangers by disguising himself. This stratagem was intended to prove the prophet false. Neither cunning nor might avails against God’s will. Thou mayest disguise thyself as thou wilt, God will find thee when and where no man recognizes thee (Psa_139:7-12). Multi ad fatum venere suum, dum fata timent.

1Ki_22:32. Cramer: God sometimes lets his children come into distress and danger when they have formed companionship with the wicked, but he saves them again through His goodness and might, that they may be the more careful another time. Into what distress and danger one is thrown by a careless promise (1Ki_22:4), an ill-timed concession, and the false shame of taking back one’s promise!

1Ki_22:34-35. If not a sparrow falls, nor a hair, without His will, how much less can an arrow or a ball strike thee unless His hand guides it.—Berleb. Bib. The less of the human there is in those things which we commonly call accidents, the more there is of the divine. The weal or woe of whole nations often depends on those things which are called accidents.

1Ki_22:36. Whatever any men, though they were kings, have brought together and set up, without God’s approval, that is certain to fall to pieces and perish again.

1Ki_22:37-38. Ahab’s end (see Histor. § 6). (a) It was sudden (1Sa_20:3; Luk_12:20. From sudden death, good Lord, deliver us). (b) It was unrepentant (without conviction of sin, or repentance for it, or longing for grace and pardon). (c) It was shameful. (He was indeed buried with honor, like the rich man, Luke 16, but the dogs lick his blood, and his memory does not remain in honor, Psa_73:19. Therefore, Psa_90:12; Psa_39:5.)—Starke: As he lived, so he died; as he died, so he was judged. The death of Ahab is a testimony to Rom_11:33; Gal_6:7; Isa_40:8.

1Ki_22:39-40. What is the profit of leaving behind a great and grand house, if one has not set one’s house in order (Isa_38:1; 1Jn_2:17)?

Footnotes:

[1]1Ki_22:6.—[The Alex. Sept. reduces the number to three hundred.

[2]1Ki_22:6.—[The Sept. emphasizes the assurance of the prophets: καὶ διδοὺς δώσει κύριος = the Lord will surely deliver, &c. It is noticeable that the prophets do not say יְהוָֹה, but אֲדֹנָי.

[3]1Ki_22:7.—[The Sept., by neglecting the word עוֹד (besides, yet) here and In 1Ki_22:8, makes it evident that they understood by the other prophets men who were not really prophets of the Lord. In 1Ki_22:8, however, the Alex. Sept. has ἔτι. The Vulg. also: non est hic propheta Domini quispiam. The other VV. follow the Heb. very exactly.

[4]1Ki_22:9.—[The Sept. has εὐνοῦχον ἕνα, but whether because it was known in the time of the translators that such persons were officers under Ahab, or whether simply because they were usual in the courts of their own time, does not appear.

[5]1Ki_22:12.—[The Sept. changes the last clause of 1Ki_22:12 into “Shall deliver into thy hands even the king of Syria” (Alex, omits the word Syria), as if Zedekiah would promise Ahab a repetition of his formerly neglected opportunity.

[6]1Ki_22:13.—The singular, which Chronicles, the k’ri, and many MSS. have, is to be preferred to the k’tib. [All the VV., except the Sept., which has, another construction, follow the k’ri.

[7]1Ki_22:19.—[The author (Exeg. Com.) considers the οὐχ οὕτως of the Sept. here as a mistranslation of the Heb. לָכֵן taken for לֹא כֵן, The same expression, however, is introduced by it into 1Ki_22:17, καὶ εἶπεν οὐχ οὕτως· ἑώρακα κ. τ. λ., and the full reading here is καὶ εἶπε Μιχαίας οὐχ οὕτως, οὐκ ἐγώ· ἄκουε ρῆμα κ. τ. λ.

[8]1Ki_22:19.—[Sept. = the God (Alex, the Lord God) of Israel.

[9]1Ki_22:19.—[עָלָיו the primary idea of עַל above, seems to be here purposely preserved; “the ministers standing behind or even beside, their sitting Lord are raised above him, and thus appear to the beholder as standing over him. Isa_6:2; Gen_18:8,” Keil.

[10]1Ki_22:26.—[For “Amon the governor” the Vat. Sept. has “Semer the king.”

[11]1Ki_22:28.—[The Vat. Sept. omits the latter part of 1Ki_22:28.

[12]1Ki_22:34.—[The A. V., like the Vulg., follows the singular of the k’ri in preference to the plural of the k’tib, which is adhered to by the Vat. Sept.

[13]1Ki_22:35.—[וַהַּ‍ֽעֲלֶח הַמִּלְחָמָה, lit “the battle rose,” perhaps, as Keil suggests, a figure from the rising of a river, growing more rapid as it swells. The expression of increase by words of the general sense of rising is, however, very common in many languages.

[14]1Ki_22:36.—[וְהַוֹנוֹת רָחָצוּ. The A. V. Is here certainly wrong, although following the Chald. and Syr. Not less erroneous is the Vulg. habenas laverunt. הַזֹּנוֹת must be the subject of the verb, and can only mean harlots, The Sept. has here translated rightly, but has unwarrantably inserted the same words also in the prediction (1Ki_20:42) of which this is the fulfilment. Here, as there, they associate αἱ ὕες with οἱ κύνες What these harlots washed—whether themselves, or the chariot, or clothes—has been much questioned, nor is its determination at all necessary to the translation. רָהַץ like the English wash, may be either transitive or intransitive.—F. G.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CHAPTER 22 The Death of Ahab

1. Jehoshaphat and Ahab (1Ki 22:1-12)

2. The prophet Micaiah (1Ki 22:13-28)

3. The battle and Ahab’s death (1Ki 22:29-40)

4. Jehoshaphat of Judah (1Ki 22:41-50; 2 Chron. 19-20)

5. Ahaziah, King of Israel (1Ki 22:51-53)

Three years passed without war between Syria and Israel. In the third year Jehoshaphat of Judah came down to Ahab. Jehoshaphat’s son and heir-apparent had married Athaliah the daughter of Ahab. An unholy alliance had therefore been formed between the royal families. Jehoshaphat, who knew better, was in this very unfaithful, and though the Lord did not forsake him chastisements came upon him and his house. The prophet Jehu, son of Hanani, met him after he came back from the battle of Ramoth-Gilead and said to him: “Shouldst thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD? Therefore is wrath upon thee from before the LORD” (2Ch 19:2). Ahab, under the predicted judgment of God, asked Jehoshaphat: “Wilt thou go with me to battle to Ramoth-Gilead?” And gladly the good King of Judah answers: “I am as thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses.” And Ahab in all his wicked apostasy had prophets, four hundred of them. Jehoshaphat was, no doubt, troubled in his conscience, and demanded that Ahab inquire of the LORD. The prophets he had, used no longer the name of Baal, but the name of Jehovah. And they all prophesied success. Jehoshaphat, however, was suspicious and asked for a prophet of the LORD. From this we may gather that there was something about them by which the King of Judah knew that they were not Jehovah’s prophets. Ahab then sent for Micaiah the son of Imlah. Both kings occupied thrones and were clad in their robes in the entrance of the gate of Samaria. All the false prophets prophesied and one Zedekiah made horns of iron to produce a vivid impression of the coming victory. Then Micaiah appeared. The faithful prophet tells the kings what he had seen. It is a revelation he had. Jehovah permitted a lying spirit to possess Ahab’s false prophets and they were prophesying lies. And Micaiah predicted the defeat of Israel. The words of Micaiah are of much importance. What happened in Ahab’s day, when the Lord permitted a lying spirit to deceive and lead the wicked into ruin, will happen again at the close of this present age. God will send a strong delusion that they should believe a lie (2 Thess. 2). Unclean spirits will then be on the earth, even as they begin already and by lying words, lying miracles and signs, lead the Christ-rejecting masses into judgment.

Then the battle. Ahab disguised himself and Jehoshaphat wore his robes. It was more than cowardice in Ahab; he feared the judgment which was hovering over him and tried to avert the coming fatal stroke. Jehoshaphat was almost miraculously saved, but Ahab was miraculously killed. A soldier drew a bow at venture. That arrow was guided by a higher hand. It found the disguised King of Israel. It found the small opening in the King’s harness. A little while later the dogs were licking his blood as they washed his blood stained chariot. Thus the word of the Lord was fulfilled. Jehoshaphat’s full record we shall consider in Chronicles and Azariah’s in the beginning of the second book of the Kings.

Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

ALONE AGAINST THE WORLD

1Ki_22:1-40

"I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied I have heard what the prophets said, who prophesied lies in My name."

- Jer_23:21-25

WE now come to the last scene of Ahabs troubled and eventful life. His two immense victories over the Syrians had secured for his harassed kingdom three years of peace, but at the end of that time he began to be convinced that the insecure conditions upon which he had weakly set Benhadad free would never be ratified. The town of Ramoth in Gilead, which was one of great importance as a frontier town of Israel, had, in express defiance of the covenant, been retained by the Syrians, who still refused to give it up. A favorable opportunity he thought, had now occurred to demand its cession.

This was the friendly visit of Jehoshaphat, King of Judah. It was the first time that a king of Judah had visited the capital of the kings who had revolted from the dynasty of David. It was the first acknowledged close of the old blood-feuds, and the beginning of a friendship and affinity which policy seemed to dictate. After all Ephraim and Judah were brothers, though Ephraim had vexed Judah, and Judah hated Ephraim. Jehoshaphat was rich, prosperous, successful in war. No king since Solomon had attained to anything like his greatness-the reward, it was believed, of his piety and faithfulness. Ahab, too, had proved himself a successful warrior, and the valor of Israels hosts had, with Jehovahs blessing, extricated their afflicted land from the terrible aggressions of Syria. But how could the little kingdom of Israel hope to hold out against Syria, and to keep Moab in subjection? How could the still smaller and weaker kingdom of Judah keep itself from vassalage to Egypt and from the encroachments of Philistines on the west and Moabites on the east? Could anything but ruin be imminent, if these two nations of Israel and Judah-one in land, one in blood, one in language, in tradition, and in interests-were perpetually to destroy each other with internecine strife? The kings determined to make a league with one another, and to bind it by mutual affinity. It was proposed that Athaliah, daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, should marry Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat.

The dates are uncertain, but it was probably in connection with the marriage contract that Jehoshaphat now paid a ceremonial visit to Ahab. The King of Israel received him with splendid entertainments to all the people. {2Ch_18:2} Ahab had already broached to his captains the subject of recovering Ramoth Gilead, and he now took occasion of the King of Judahs visit to invite his cooperation. What advantages and compensations he offered are not stated. It may have been enough to point out that, if Syria once succeeded in crushing Israel, the fate of Judah would not be long postponed. Jehoshaphat, who seems to have been too ready to yield to pressure, answered in a sort of set phrase: "I am as thou art; my people as thy people; my horses as thy horses." {2Ki_3:7}

But it is probable that his heart misgave him. He was a truly pious king. He had swept the Asherahs out of Judah, and endeavored to train his people in the principles of righteousness and the worship of Jehovah. In joining Ahab there must have been in his conscience some unformulated murmur of the reproof which on his return to Jerusalem was addressed to him by Jehu, the son of Hanani, "Shouldst thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? Therefore is wrath upon thee from the Lord." But at the beginning of a momentous undertaking he would not be likely to imitate the godless indifference which had led Ahab to take the most fatal steps without seeking the guidance of God. He therefore said to Ahab, "Inquire, I pray thee, of the word of the Lord today."

Ahab could not refuse, and apparently the professional prophets of the schools had been pretty well cajoled or drilled into accordance with his wishes. A great and solemn assembly was summoned. The kings had clothed themselves in their royal robes striped with laticlaves of Tyrian purple and sat on thrones in an open space before the gate of Samaria. No less than four hundred prophets of Jehovah were summoned to prophesy before them. Ahab propounded for their decision the formal and important question, "Shall I go up to Ramoth Gilead to battle, or shall I forbear?"

With one voice the prophets "philippised." They answered the king according to his idols. Had the gold of Ahab or of Jezebel been at work among them? Had they been in kings houses, and succumbed to courtly influences? Or were they carried away by the interested enthusiasm of one or two of their leaders who saw their own account in the matter? Certain it is that on this occasion they became false prophets. They used their formula "Thus saith Jehovah" without authority and promised Jehovahs aid in vain. Conspicuous in his evil ardor was one of them named Zedekiah, son of Chenaanah. To illustrate and emphasize his jubilant prophecies he had made and affixed to his head a pair of iron horns; and as though to symbolize the bull of the House of Ephraim, he said to Ahab, "Thus saith Jehovah. With these shalt thou push the Assyrians until thou have consumed them." And all the prophets prophesied so.

What could be more encouraging? Here was a patriot-king, the hero victor in great battles, bound by fresh ties of kinship and league with the pious descendant of David, meditating a just raid against a dangerous enemy to recover a frontier-fortress which was his by right; and here were four hundred prophets-not Asherah-prophets or Baal-prophets, but genuine prophets of Jehovah-unanimous, and even enthusiastic, in approving his design and promising him the victory! The Church and the world were-as they so often have been-delightfully at one.

"One with God" is the better majority. These loud-voiced majorities and unanimities are rarely to be trusted. Truth and righteousness are far more often to be found in the causes which they denounce and at which they sneer. They silence opposition, but they produce no conviction. They can torture, but they cannot refute. There is something unmistakable in the accent of sincerity, and it was lacking in the voice of these prophets on the popular side. If Ahab was deceived and even carried away by the unwonted approval of so many messengers of Jehovah, Jehoshaphat was not. These four hundred prophets who seemed superfluously sufficient to Ahab by no means satisfied the King of Judah.

"Is there not," he asked with uneasy misgiving, "one prophet of the Lord besides, that we might inquire of him?"

One prophet of the Lord besides? Were not, then, four hundred prophets of the Lord enough? They must have felt themselves cruelly slighted when they heard the pious kings inquiry, and doubtless a murmur of disapproval arose amongst them.

And the King of Israel said, "There is yet one man." Had Jehoshaphat been secretly thinking of Elijah? Where was Elijah? He was living, certainly, for he survived even into the reign (apparently) of Jehoram. But where was Elijah? If Jehoshaphat had thought of him, Ahab at any rate did not care to mention him. Perhaps he was inaccessible, in some lonely unknown retreat of Carmel or of Gilead. Since his fearful message to Ahab he had not been heard of; but why did he not appear at a national crisis so tremendous as this?

"There is yet one man," said Ahab. "Micaiah, the son of Imlah, by whom we may inquire of the Lord; but"-such was the kings most singular comment-"I hate him; for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil."

It was a weak confession that he was aware of one man who was indisputably a true prophet of Jehovah, but whom he had purposely excluded from this gathering because he knew that his was an undaunted spirit which would not consent to shout with the many in favor of the king. Indeed, it seems probable that he was, at this moment, in prison. Jewish legend says that he had been put there because he was the prophet who had reproved Ahab for his folly in suffering Benhadad to escape with the mere breath of a general promise. Till then he had been unknown. He was not like Elijah, and might safely be suppressed. And Ahab, as was universally the case in ancient days, thought that the prophet could practically prophesy as he liked, and not merely prophesy, but bring about his own vaticinations. Hence, if a prophet said anything which he disliked, he regarded him as a personal enemy, and, if he dared, he punished him-just as Agamemnon punished Calchas.

Jehoshaphat, however, was still dissatisfied; he wanted further confirmation. "Let not the king say so," he said. If he is a genuine prophet, the king should not hate him, or fancy that he prophesies evil out of malice prepense. Would it not be more satisfactory to hear what he might have to say?

However reluctantly, Ahab saw that he should have to send for Micaiah, and he dispatched a eunuch to hurry him to the scene with all speed.

The mention of a eunuch as the messenger is significant. Ahab had become the first polygamist among the kings of Israel, and a seraglio so large as could never be maintained without the presence of these degraded and odious officials who here first appear in the hardier annals of the Northern Kingdom.

This eunuch, however, seems to have had a kindly disposition. He was good-naturedly anxious that Micaiah should not get into trouble. He advised him, with prudential regard for his own interest, to swim with the stream. "See, now," he said, "all the prophets with one mouth are prophesying good to the king. Pray agree with them. Do not spoil everything."

How often has the same base advice been given! How often has it been followed! How certain is its rejection to lead to bitter animosity. One of the most difficult lessons of life is to learn to stand alone when all the prophets are prophesying falsely to please the rulers of the world. Micaiah rose superior to the eunuchs temptation. "By Jehovah," he said, "I will speak only what He bids me speak."

He stood before the kings, the eager multitude, the unanimous and passionate prophets; and there was deep silence when Ahab put to him the question to which the four hundred had already shouted an affirmative.

His answer was precisely the same as theirs: "Go up to Ramoth Gilead and prosper, for the Lord shall deliver it into the hand of the king!"

Every one must have been astonished. But Ahab detected the tone of scorn which rang through the assenting words, and angrily adjured Micaiah to give a true answer in Jehovahs name. "How many times," he cried, "shall I adjure thee that thou tell me nothing but that which is true in Jehovahs name." The "how many times" shows how faithfully Micaiah must have fulfilled his duty of speaking messages of God to his erring king.

So adjured, Micaiah could not be silent, however much the answer might cost him, or however useless it might be.

"I saw all Israel," he said, "scattered on the mountain like sheep without a shepherd. And Jehovah said, These have no master, let every man return to his house in peace."

The vision seemed to hint at the death of the king, and Ahab turned triumphantly to his ally, "Did I not tell you that he would prophesy evil?"

Micaiah justified himself by a daringly anthropomorphic apologue which startles us, but would not at all have startled those who regarded everything as coming from the immediate action of God, and who could ask, "Shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done it?" The prophets were self-deceived, but this would be expressed by saying that Jehovah deceived them. Pharaoh hardens his heart, and God is said to have done it.

He had seen Jehovah on His throne, he said, surrounded by the host of heaven, and asking who would entice Ahab to his fall at Ramoth Gilead. After various answers the spirit said, "I will go and be a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets, and will entice him." Then Jehovah sent him, so that they all spoke good to the king though Jehovah had spoken evil. God had sent to them all-king, people, prophets-strong delusion that they should believe a lie.

This stern reproof to all the prophets was more than their coryphaeus Zedekiah could endure. Having recourse to "the syllogism of violence" he strode up to Micaiah and smote the defenseless, isolated, hated man on the cheek, with the contemptuous question, "Which way went the spirit of the Lord from me, to speak unto thee?"

"Behold thou shalt know," was the answer, "on the day when thou shalt flee from chamber to chamber to hide thyself." If the hands of the prophet were bound as he came from the prison, there would have been an infinite dignity in that calm rebuke.

But as though the case was self-evident, and Micaiahs opposition to the four hundred prophets proved his guilt, Ahab sent him back to prison. "Issue orders," he said, "to Amon, governor of the city, and Joash, the kings son, to feed him scantily on bread and water till the kings return in peace."

"If thou return at all in peace," said Micaiah, "Jehovah hath not spoken by me."

It is a sign of the extreme fragmentariness of the narrative that of Micaiah and Zedekiah we hear nothing further, though the sequel respecting them must have been told in the original record. But the prophecy of Micaiah came true, and the unanimous four hundred had prophesied lies. There are times when "the Catholic Church" dwindles down to the one man and the small handful of those who speak the truth. The expedition was altogether disastrous. Ahab, perhaps knowing by spies, how bitterly the Syrians were incensed against him, told Jehoshaphat that he would disguise himself and go into the battle, but begged his ally to wear his robes as was usual with kings. Benhadad, with the implacable hatred of one who had received a benefit, was so eager to be avenged on Ahab that he had told his thirty-two captains to make his capture their special aim. Seeing a king in his robes they made a fierce onset on Jehoshaphat and surrounded his chariot. His cries for rescue showed them that he was not Ahab, and they turned away. But Ahabs disguise did not save him. A Syrian-the Jews say that it was Naaman-drew a bow with no particular aim, and the arrow smote Ahab in the place between the upper and lower armor. Feeling that the wound was deadly he ordered his charioteer to turn his hands and drive him out of the increasing roar of the melee. But he would not wholly leave the fight, and with heroic fortitude remained standing in his chariot in spite of agony. All day the blood kept flowing down into the hollow of the chariot. At evening the Syrians had to retire in defeat, but Ahab died. The news of the kings death was proclaimed at sunset by the herald, and the cry was raised which bade the host disband and return home.

They carried the kings body back to Samaria, and they buried it. They washed the bloodstained chariot in the pool outside the city, and there the dogs licked the kings blood, and the harlot-votaries of Asherah bathed in the blood-dyed waters, as Elijah had prophesied.

So ended the reign of a king who built cities and ivory palaces, and fought like a hero against the foes of his country, but who had never known how to rule his own house. He had winked at the atrocities committed in his name by his Tyrian queen, had connived at her idolatrous innovations, and put no obstacle in the way of her persecutions. The people who might have forgotten or condoned all else never forgot the stoning and spoliation of Naboth and his sons, and his death was regarded as a retribution on this crime.

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

22:1 three years . . . no war: During this time, the repeated westward thrusts of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III (858–824 BC) led to the Battle of Qarqar (853 BC). Shalmaneser’s records mention that he faced both Hadadezer (Ben-hadad) and Ahab at that battle. With the Assyrian king temporarily thwarted, old enmities between Aram and Israel flared up again.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Ben-Hadad the king of Syria, and Ahab made a peace which endureth three years.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

CHAPTER XXII

Jehoshaphat King of Judah, and Ahab King of Israel, unite

against the Syrians, in order to recover Ramoth-gilead, 1-4.

They inquire of false prophets, who promise them success.

Micaiah, a true prophet, foretells the disasters of the war,

5-17.

A lying spirit in the mouths of Ahab's prophets persuades Ahab

to go up against Ramoth, 18-29.

The confederate armies are routed, and the king of Israel

slain, 30-36.

Death and burial of Ahab, 37-40.

Character of Jehoshaphat, 41-47.

He makes a fleet in order to go to Ophir for gold, which is

wrecked at Ezion-geber, 48.

His death, 49.

He is succeeded by his son Jehoram, 50.

Ahaziah succeeds his father Ahab, and reigns wickedly, 51, 52.

NOTES ON CHAP. XXII

Verse 1. Three years without war] That is, from the time that Ahab made the covenant with Ben-hadad, mentioned 1Kg 20:34. And probably in that treaty it was stipulated that Ramoth-gilead should be restored to Israel; which not being done, Ahab formed a confederacy with Judah, and determined to take it by force.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(1) Three years without war.—The period is clearly reckoned from the rash peace made by Ahab with Ben-hadad in 1Ki_20:34. Evidently the king of Syria has recovered his independence, if not superiority; he has not restored Ramoth-gilead according to his promise; and his revived power is sufficient to cope with the united forces of Israel and Judah. The sagacity of the prophetic rebuke of 1Ki_20:42 has been amply justified.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And they continued three years without war between Syria and Israel. From the time that Benhadad made a covenant with Ahab; not three full years, but part of them: it was threatened by Elijah from the Lord, that Ahab's life should go for Benhadad's, because he had let him, go, Kg1 22:42, but because of his humiliation, as is thought by Ben Gersom and others, it was respited for those three years; and now an opportunity and occasion would be given for the fulfilment of what was threatened.

, but because of his humiliation, as is thought by Ben Gersom and others, it was respited for those three years; and now an opportunity and occasion would be given for the fulfilment of what was threatened.

1 Kings 22:2

kg1 22:2

kg1 22:2

kg1 22:2And it came to pass in the third year,.... Of the peace, before it was expired:

that Jehoshaphat the king of Judah came down to the king of Israel; to Ahab, from Jerusalem to Samaria, reckoned thirty two miles (m); either to make peace with him, and put an end to the wars which subsisted between Israel and Judah since the division of the kingdom, Kg1 22:44 or to contract an affinity with him, by marrying his son to a daughter of Ahab, Kg2 8:18 or rather after peace was made, and that strengthened by the marriage; and so he went merely to pay a visit, as he judged he might then with great safety; and he and all his retinue were entertained by Ahab in a very sumptuous and liberal manner, Ch2 18:1.

(m) Bunting's Travels, &c. p. 178. near 40, Rainold. Praelect. 31. col. 266.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Three years - These must be counted from the close of the second campaign of Ben-hadad 1Ki 20:34. They were not full years, as is evident from the next verse. Probably the first year is that of Ben-hadad’s dismissal after his defeat; the second is a year of actual peace; while the third is that in which Jehoshaphat paid his visit, and the Ramoth-Gilead expedition took place. The pause, here noticed, in the war between Israel and Syria was perhaps the result of a common danger. It was probably in the year following Ben-hadad’s dismissal by Ahab, that the first great Assyrian expedition took place into these parts. Shalmaneser II relates that on his first invasion of southern Syria, he was met by the combined forces of Ben-hadad, Ahab, the king of Hamath, the kings of the Hittites, and others, who gave him battle, but suffered a defeat.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Israel, from the time when Benadad and Achab had made a league, chap. xx. 34.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

They continued; the Syrians and Israelites, designed in the following words. Three years; computed from the last war and league wherewith it was concluded; because both Ahab and Benhadad were so weakened and broken by the late wars, that they needed and desired peace to recruit themselves, and repair their former losses.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Ahab and Micaiah. Ahab's Death at Ramoth-gllead. Reign of Jehoshaphat, King of Judah

1. Three years] probably calculated from the peace described in 1Ki_20:34.

2. Jehoshaphat.. came down] The earlier hostility between Judah and Israel (see 1Ki_15:16-24) had by this time given place not only to peace but to friendship, which had been cemented (as appears from 2Ki_8:18) by a marriage between Jehoshaphat's son Jehoram and Ahab's daughter Athaliah. It is possible that the change in the relations of the two countries had been brought about by success on the part of the northern kingdom, and that Judah had become a vassal of its neighbour: at any rate, both on this occasion and on a later one (2Ki_3:7.), the king of Judah is found aiding the king of Israel in a war which only promoted the interests of the latter. The cessation of hostilities between the two kingdoms was in many ways a benefit to both; but for Judah the connexion with Israel was attended by serious drawbacks, for besides having to furnish assistance in war, it became infected with the Baal worship introduced by Ahab. Jehoshaphat's alliance with Ahab is explicitly condemned in 2Ch_19:2.

3. Ramoth in Gilead] situated a little N. of the Jabbok (the modern es Salt). The city had perhaps been amongst those which had been taken from Omri by Benhadad I, king of Syria, and which his son, Benhadad II, had agreed to restore (1Ki_20:34).

5. Enquire... of the Lord] Jehoshaphat's piety led him to seek the divine guidance before starting on the proposed expedition.

To day] better, 'first of all': cp. 1Ki_1:51 Gen_25:31; (RM).

6. The prophets] These must have been prophets of the Lord (1Ki_22:5, 1Ki_22:11), so that though the worship of the Lord (Jehovah) had ceased to be predominant in Israel, it was far from being extinguished, and the prophets had probably recovered some of their influence after the repentance of Ahab recorded in 1Ki_21:27; But though the 400 were doubtless prophets of the true God, they were presumably in sympathy with the prevalent calf-worship, and escaped persecution by tolerating Baal worship.

7. A prophet of the Lord besides] i.e. is there not another prophet of the Lord beside these, one who dissociated himself from the prophets alluded to in note on 1Ki_22:6.

8. He doth not.. good] cp. on 1Ki_20:35.

10. In the entrance of the gate] the usual place for popular assemblages (cp. 2Sa_19:8) and the dispensing of justice (2Sa_15:2).

11. Made him.. iron] For symbolic acts employed by prophets see on 1Ki_11:31. Horns were natural emblems for weapons of offence (Deu_23:17).

15. Go, and prosper] Micaiah, as the king saw, was not speaking seriously, but repeated in mockery the words of the 400 prophets (1Ki_22:6), which had doubtless been reported to him (1Ki_22:13).

19. I saw the Lord] For similar prophetic visions see Isaiah 6; Ezekiel 1. The host of heaven] i.e. angelic spirits (cp. Psa_103:20-21) constituting the court of heaven in attendance upon its king.

21. There came forth a spirit] In several passages in the OT. infatuation is ascribed to the influence of an evil spirit from the Lord (see Jdg_9:23; 1Sa_16:14; 1Sa_19:9), though the personal nature of such a spirit is not generally so clearly implied as here. The lying spirit is regarded as one of God's ministers, occasioning harm, indeed, but in subordination to the divine purposes: cp. Job_1:6; 2Th_2:11. The doctrine of an evil spirit antagonistic to God is not developed in the OT.

24. From me.. to thee] Zedekiah claimed to be inspired by the Lord (1Ki_22:11), And therefore challenged micaiah to explain how he, likewise professing to speak in the name of the Lord, could utter a prophecy of such different tenor.

25. To hide thyself] when the news arrived of Israel's defeat.

26. The king's son] He was obviously placed in a position of authority. The sons of Jehoshaphat similarly had charge of 'fenced cities' (2Ch_21:3).

27. Bread of affliction] i.e. prison fare.

29. Jehoshaphat.. went up] Jehoshaphat had consented to Ahab's proposal before seeking counsel of the Lord, and in spite of Micaiah's warning found himself committed to the expedition.

30. I will disguise myself] Ahab's action implies that Micaiah's words had made some impression upon him, though not sufficient to make him desist from his purpose. Put thou on thy robes] cp. 2Sa_1:10.

31. Thirty and two captains] cp. 1Ki_20:24. The command given to them is, of course, not to be understood literally.

32. Cried out] Something in his cry, which was perhaps a prayer to the Lord (cp. 2Ch_18:31), revealed that he was not the king of Israel.

34. At a venture] Not without a definite aim, but in ignorance that his mark was the king of Israel (RM 'in his simplicity').

39. The ivory house, etc.] For the use of ivory in building see Amo_3:15; Psa_45:8. Though Ahab by his alliance with Zidon had corrupted the religion of the nation, he must have augmented its material prosperity.

41. And Jehoshaphat, etc.] This account of Jehoshaphat's reign follows on 1Ki_15:24.

45. The rest of the acts, etc.] see 2 Chronicles 17-20, which records (in addition to what is here related) the institution of a body of Levites to visit the various cities of Judah to teach the people the Law, the establishment of courts of justice both in Jerusalem and in the fenced cities, and the providential deliverance of the king and his army from a great host of Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites.

47. A deputy was king] The royal house of Edom, which had recovered power in the time of Solomon, had been overthrown, and a viceroy, appointed by the king of Judah, now ruled the country. The subjugation of the Edomites probably followed upon the disaster sustained by them and their allies as described in 2 Chronicles 20.

48. Ships of Tharshish.. Ophir] The ships that sailed to Ophir (in Arabia or E. Africa, see on 1Ki_9:28) were similar to those which traded to Tartessus or Tarsus (in the Mediterranean).

J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

THE EXPEDITION OF AHAB AND JEHOSHAPHAT AGAINST HRAMOTH-GILEAD. THE DEATH OF AHAB. THE REIGNS OF JEHOSHAPHAT AND AHAZIAH.

And they continued rather, zested. Heb. sate, dwelt. Cf.qise, Jud_1:5:17. The LXX has ejka sing. three years without war The Hebrew explains the "restedthere was not war, etc. See Ewald, 286 g. The three years (not full years, as the next verse shows) are to be counted from the second defeat of Ben-hadad; the history, that is to say, is resumed from 1Ki_20:34-43. Rawlinson conjectures that it was during this period that the Assyrian invasion, under Shalmaneser II, took place. The Black Obelisk tells us that Ahab of Jezreel joined a league of kings, of whom Ben-hadad was one, against the Assyrians, furnishing a force of 10, 000 footmen and 2000 chariots; see "Hist. Illust." pp. 113, 114. The common danger might well compel a cessation of hostilities between Syria and Israel.

Vers. 1-40.

The Death of Ahab and the Defeat of Israel.

This chapter is almost entirely occupied with an account of the death of Ahab, and of the circumstances which preceded and attended it. The earlier portion of the chapter, which contains the prophesyings of the false prophets and the vision of Micaiah, is only recorded because of its bearing on the death of the king, and the dispersion of his army.

And the prominence accorded to Ahab"s end only corresponds with the space assigned to his reign. That reign was so full of evil for Israel that it occupies a fourth part of this entire book. It was meet, therefore, that the death which avenged it should be recorded with proportionate detail. For the battle of Ramoth-Gilead was the final payment so far as this world is concerned for the sins of two and twenty years.

But it is to be observed in the first place that Ahab"s repentance, (1Ki_21:29) as the penitence begotten of fear often is, was but shortlived. Had it lasted, we had not read of this tragical death. How soon the king shook off his impressions we know not, but we do know that thanks to the natural weakness of his character, still further enfeebled by years of self indulgence and submission to a stronger will than his own; thanks to the evil genius (1Ki_21:25) ever at his side to stifle good resolves and to steel his heart against the true religion; thanks to the impious system to which he found himself committed, and the toils of which he found it impossible to break, this unhappy king steadily lapsed into his old sins. It "happened unto him according to the true proverb, "The dog is turned to his vomit again". (2Pe_2:22)

And it is also to be considered here that Israel had gone hand in hand with him in his downward course. Had the king"s career been one of steadily increasing demoralization? so had that of the people. The death of Naboth affords sufficient proof of this. The ready compliance of the elders, the alacrity with which they perpetrated that judicial murder, shows to what a moral depth the example of the court and the idolatry around them had plunged the holy nation. No; king and queen had not sinned alone, and justice required they should not suffer alone. Nations and their rulers, as we have already seen, receive a reckoning in this life; how much more the covenant people and the Lords anointed? Placed as they were under a direct law of temporal punishments and rewards, it would have been strange, indeed, if such a reign as this had gone unrecompensed. But so far from that, they have already received part reckoning for their sin. The three years drought, the famine, the terrible Syrian invasions, have avenged a part of their idolatries and immoralities; but there still remains a long score of guilt to be expiated in shame and suffering and blood.

And here it may be well to remind ourselves what were the sins which awaited a settlement under the walls of Ramoth-Gilead. They were five in number.

(1) The calf worship the hereditary sin of the northern kingdom, the sin of Jeroboam;

(2) the worship of Baal with the prostitution which accompanied it the sin primarily of Jezebel and her Phoenician following, but shared in by almost the entire nation;

(3) the determined persecution of the prophets and the virtual proscription of the ancient faith;

(4) the release of the Syrian king in disregard of God"s will the sin of Ahab and his captains; and

(5) the murder of Naboth in defiance of all law the sin of the rulers and elders. It may be thought that the two last were peculiarly Ahab"s or Jezebel"s sins, and that the people had no part in them; but this is a mistaken view. No doubt he and his infamous consort had by far the largest share in all the four, and therefore they received, as we shall see presently, by far the severer punishment. But just as the people worshipped at the shrines which the king supported, just as they practised the abominations which he had introduced, so had they approved his policy towards Benhadad see the words of 1Ki 19, "thy people for his people and the guilt of innocent blood, as we know (Num_35:33; Deu_21:7 2Sa 21) rested on the community until it had been cleansed in blood. It is clear, then, that at the time when this chapter opens, king and people, though in very different degrees, were chargeable with the sins of schism, of idolatry, of unfaithfulness to God, of murder. It is now for us to observe how these things were expiated.

Now there are two principles which underlie all God"s retributive dealings with his ancient people. First, that sin is left, or made to bring its own penalties. Per quod quis peccat per idem quoque plectitur idem. Secondly, that the penalty is ever correspondent with the sin. This latter is what we commonly call the lex talionis. We have had instances of the working of both of these laws, but especially of the latter, in the earlier portions of this history. We shall find the same laws in operation here.

For consider

I By what means Ahab was led to death and Israel to defeat.

II By what instruments these punishments were inflicted.

III In what way they were signalized as the chastisements of sin.

I In considering the INFLUENCES which moved Ahab to war, and which led to his destruction, we must assign the first place to

1. The perfidy of Ben-hadad. No doubt it rankled in Ahab"s breast that, after he had dealt so magnanimously with a prostrate foe, after he had treated an insolent invader with unexampled generosity, and after a solemn covenant had been made betwixt them, it rankled in his soul that a Syrian garrison, in spits of all embassies and remonstrances, should hold the Jewish fortress of Ramoth-Gilead and thus offer a standing menace to Israel and Judah alike. But did it never occur to him that the conduct of Ben-hadad was but the counterpart of his own? He too had forgotten his benefactor and deliverer, to whom he was bound by solemn covenant; he still maintained a garrison of idolatrous priests in the heart of Immanuel"s land. Ben-hadad"s breach of faith was no greater than his own. Probably, he never thought of this when he debated whether he should go up against

2. Ramoth-Gilead. He would remember, however, that he had only himself to blame for this act of perfidy, and he would devoutly wish he had dealt with the oppressor as he had deserved; he would perhaps think that it only served him right for his weakness and sin. We see, however, that he is paid back in his own coin, that the measure he has meted to God is measured to him again. The sin of three years before gave the first impulse to war and death.

3. The lies of the false prophets. It is hardly likely that Ahab would have engaged in this war but for the unanimous verdict of the four hundred prophets in its favour. We see in Micaiah"s vision that a "lying spirit" was the principal means employed to procure his fall (ver. 22). But what were these prophets, and how came they to prophesy thus? One thing is certain, that they were not prophets of Jehovah, and another thing is also clear, that whether they were prophets of Baal, or, as is most probable, prophets of the calves, the false system which Ahab had supported became through them a means of his destruction. The schism or the idolatry, as the case may be, is bearing its bitter fruit. He has sown to lies, he reaps to delusions. It is a conspicuous instance of the just judgment of heaven that Ahab is lured to his death by the impostors he had cherished and patronized. "He that hates truth shall be the dupe of lies." The sin of the calves too brings its own retribution.

But how was it, it is worth asking, that these four hundred sycophants came to, counsel him thus? Was it not that they took their cue from him, and prophesied what they knew would please? They saw that the king had already made up his mind for his resolution was taken before they were summoned (vers. 4, 5), and they thought it wisest to swim with the stream. It may be they were guided by other and inscrutable impulses (ver. 23), and were constrained, they knew not how, to prophesy as they did; it may be they honestly mistook the vox populi for the vox Dei, but probably the working of their minds was this: "The king wishes it. Jehoshaphat assents to it. The people are set upon it. We should be going against common sense and our own interests to resist it.

And so the king was a second time paid in his own coin. Those martial prophecies had been minted in his own brain. He wished for lies and he had them. His own passions and pride were reflected, were echoed, in the voices of his four hundred soothsayers. It is the case of which both sacred and profane history supply so many examples, Homo vult decipi et decipiatur. It is thus God deals with deceivers still. He leaves them to be deceived, to be the prey of their own disordered fancies. It is notorious how men find in the Bible what they wish to find there; how all unsuspectingly they read their own meanings into the words of Scripture; how they interpret its injunctions by the rule of their own inclinations. "He feedeth on ashes; a deceived heart hath turned him aside that he cannot deliver his soul, nor say, Is there not a lie in my right hand?". (Isa_44:20) "Ephraim is joined unto idols: let him alone". (Hos_4:17)

4. The silence of the Lord"s prophets. Why was it, we cannot help asking here, why was it that there were no true prophets present, at this crisis in the history of Israel, to step forth and warn the king against this undertaking? Why were the four hundred deceivers left to have their own way? We see here the fruit of persecution, the recompense of those fierce dragonnades which Jezebel had maintained against the prophetic order. Of the men who might have interposed to prevent this disastrous expedition, some were dead, others were banished; king and queen had wickedly silenced them. They now reap the fruit of those repressive measures. Their curses come home to roost. Elijah might have saved king and country, but he is hiding from the wrath of Jezebel, or is withdrawn by God from the arena of history. Micaiah the son of Imlah foresaw the end, but Ahab had imprisoned him, and could not brook to take his advice, and had persuaded himself that his admonitions were the outcome of personal enmity. It is true this prophet was not silent, but plainly foretold defeat and death; but Ahab was in a manner bound not to regard his warnings. He had told Jehoshaphat it would be so. It would look like cowardice to be influenced by his vaticinations. And so he is left to the prophets of his choice: no hand is raised to stop him: he goes straight into the jaws of death, the victim of his own folly and cruelty and sin.

II The INSTRUMENTS of retribution were

1. The king whom Ahab had wickedly spared. We have already seen in what the sin of sparing the tyrant Ben-hadad consisted (p. 492). It is now for us to observe that this foolish and impious deed brought its own peculiar Nemesis. It was Ben-hadad himself who said, "Fight neither with small nor great, but with the king of Israel only." Ahab"s ill-advised clemency procures his own destruction. With base natures, it only needs that we should put them under obligations which they cannot possibly discharge, in order to provoke their bitter enmity. But it is much more material to observe here that in Ben-hadad"s conduct we may see a parable of the cruel revenge which a cherished sin will often take on those who have once conquered and then trifled with it. The devil that was cast out returns bringing with him seven other devils more wicked than himself. (Mat_12:45) We are constantly as tender to the sins which tyrannized over us as was Ahab to Ben-hadad. Instead of slaying them hewing them in pieces before the Lord we leave the roots of bitterness in the heart"s soil, and they spring up and trouble us. It is like that peasant of whom we have all read, who found a viper in the field, benumbed with the winter"s cold, and put the venomous beast into his bosom to warm it back into life. The first use it made of its restored power was to wound and destroy its benefactor. How dearly have we often paid for our pleasant vices!

2. The Syrians who were once subjects of Israel. It is well to remember here that these enemies who gave Ahab his death wound at Ramoth were once under the heel of Israel. (2Sa_8:6) Now we see their relations reversed. Syria has now become the standing oppressor of the chosen people. We have already pointed out some of the steps which led to this result. The sin of Solomon (see p. 223) and the unfaithfulness of Asa alike were factors in the change. But the most influential reason was the godlessness of Ahab. But three years ago Syria lay at his mercy; its power was completely broken. But Ahab, so far from learning that the Lord was, (1Ki_20:13, 1Ki_20:28) had ignored the Lord, and acted as if his own might had gotten him the victory. How fitting that these same Syrians should be the instruments to scourge him.

3. An unknown, unconscious archer. The arrow that pierced Ahab"s corselet was shot "in simplicity," without deliberate aim, with no thought of striking the king. It was an unseen Hand that guided that chance shaft to its destination. It was truly "the arrow of the Lord"s vengeance." (Cf. 2Ki_12:17) It would be deeply instructive could we know the thoughts of that unhappy king, as with the arrow in his side, and the blood draining from his wound, and forming a sickening pool in the well of the chariot, he was stayed up those wretched weary, hours until the sunset against the Syrians. Surely he knew at last that "the Lord was God". (1Ki_18:39 1Ki_20:13, 1Ki_20:28) His cry would now be, "Thou hast found me, O my enemy." He would think, it may be, of Elijah"s and Micaiah"s prophecies; he would think of Naboth"s bleeding and mangled corpse; he would think, above all, that his sin had found him out, and that Jehovah had conquered. He had fought all his life for Baal, but it was in vain; he had been kicking against the pricks; he had been wrestling not with flesh and blood, but with an Invisible, Irresistible, Omnipotent God, and now he is thrown, east down never to rise again.

III It now only remains for us to consider the CIRCUMSTANCES of Ahab"s death. These were of so portentous and exceptional a character as to mark it

1. As a direct visitation of God. The army, that clay defeated, the contingent of Judah, the citizens of Samaria, the subjects of both kingdoms, could not think that a mere chance had happened to Ahab when they remembered

(1) That this death had been distinctly foretold. Not once or twice, but three times had a prophetic voice foreshadowed for him a sudden and shameful end. (1Ki_20:42 1Ki_21:19 1Ki_22:17, 1Ki_22:28) Moreover Micaiah, the last of these monitors, had staked his reputation as God"s prophet on the fulfilment of his prediction of disaster. And his oracle had not been spoken in secret; he had appealed to the entire assembly gathered round the two kings and the flower of Israel and Judah alike were there and even to neighbouring nations (ver. 28, Hebrews), to be witnesses of his words, and those words were fresh in their memories.

(2) How the king met his death. For it was of course known to the army that Ahab had disguised himself, whilst Jehoshaphat had put on his robes. After the sinister prophecy of Micaiah, we may be sure that the allied armies would watch, with the gravest anxiety, for the issue. They would perceive that the king himself was not without his fears; they would wonder whether his disguise would procure his escape. And when at the end of the day they learnt that Jehoshaphat who had been arrayed like a king, and who on that account had been exposed to imminent peril, had escaped unhurt, whilst their king, who had never been recognized, had been pierced by a chance arrow between the joints of his harness and mortally wounded, was there one but would see the finger of God in this death? Surely if the Psalmist"s words were then written, they would occur to their minds, "Whither shall I go from thy spirit, and whither shall I flee from thy presence?" etc., (Psa_139:9-12) or that other Psalm, "God shall shoot at them with a swift arrow; suddenly shall they be wounded", (Psa_64:7) and the result would be that all men would fear and declare the work of God (ib. ver. 9), and confess that this was His doing. The fugitives who stole away in the dark and black night to their homes, like sheep without a shepherd, would have learnt one lesson at least that clay, viz., that there was a God that judgeth in the earth.

2. As Gods appropriate recompense for the sins of that age. We have already seen how this history puts its stamp of reprobation on

(1) the calf worship, inasmuch as by the prophets of the calves the king was beguiled into this enterprize. But the sin of Jeroboam was not the special sin of Ahab"s reign. On the contrary, the calf worship was rather overshadowed and eclipsed by the frightful idolatries, which had so much greater fascination for the evil heart of unbelief. It was the characteristic of that reign that the unclean rites of Baal and Astarte, the abominations of the Amorites, were re-established in the land. We see in Ahab"s death

(2) the requital of his share in that sin. (1Ki_16:31, 1Ki_16:32) The idolatry which had desolated the church was avenged by a horde of idolaters ravaging the land and slaying the arch-idolater in battle. There is a rough lex talionis here. (Cf. Jer_5:19) If they would have idolatry they should taste the tender mercies of idolaters. On that field were the predictions of Moses, (Deu_28:25) Samuel, (1Sa_12:25) and Solomon (1Ki_8:33) fulfilled.

(3) But a recompense still more exact and conspicuous attended the impurities which Ahab had practised under the name of religion. He had filled the land with prostitutes. What a proof of the just judgment of God it was that these infamous persons added dishonour to his death! He had maintained them through life: he should be associated with them in his end. The harlots bathed in the pool that was reddened with his blood (vers. 38, Hebrews)

(4) Nor was the connexion of Ahab"s death with the sin of releasing Benhadad any less conspicuous. What meant that strange malignant command, "Fight only with the king of Israel?" Was it not that the Syrian king, on whom Ahab would not execute vengeance, had become, in the counsels of God, an instrument of vengeance, a minister to execute wrath, against the anointed of the Lord? "Thy life shall go for his life it was thus that every religious mind would interpret so singular and, considering the circumstances (chap. 20.), so otherwise inexplicable a word of command. It was as if Ben-hadad had proclaimed that his mission primarily was to settle the long arrearages of justice with that wicked Ahab.

(5) How the murder of Naboth was avenged that shameful day, it is hardly necessary to point out. There was a strict retaliation wound for wound, stripe for stripe, blood for blood, dishonour for dishonour. There were many, besides Jehu and Bidkar, who would recall the fierce threatening of the Tishbite; (1Ki_21:19) many, besides priests and prophets, would remember the axiom of their law, "blood defileth the land," etc., (Num_35:33) or would think on that day of the so-called "precept of Noah," "Whoso sheddeth man"s blood, by man shall his blood be shed". (Gen_9:6) The elders of Jezreel, yes, and Jezebel herself, understood that Naboth"s blood had cried from the ground, and that the cry had come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. It was His foot that was dipped in the blood of His enemies. (Psa_68:28)

And this ignominious death in what sharp contrast it stands with the indolent, luxurious, sensual life! "The ivory house that he made," what an irony we may see in those words! "Shalt thou reign, because thou closest thyself in cedar...

He shall be buried with the burial of an ass," etc.. (Jer_22:15, Jer_22:19) The cities he built, the victories he won, how poor and empty do these exploits seem as we stand by the pool of Samaria, and see the livid, bloodstained corpse dragged from the chariot! The Latin poet asks what all his pleasures, travels, knowledge, can avail a man who has to die after all; but the question presents itself with tenfold force when life"s fitful fever is followed by such a sleep, by such a dream, as Ahab"s. "It had been good for that man if he had not been born". (Mat_26:24)

And the death of Ahab was followed by the dispersion of his army. When the proclamation rang through the host, "Every man to his country," and when the sensed ranks precipitately broke up, and horseman and footman fled for his life, then the share of Israel in the sins of Ahab and Jezebel was in part expiated. There was not a man but knew why "the children of Israel could not stand before their enemies." "There is an accursed thing in the midst of thee, O Israel.". (Jos_7:12, Jos_7:13) Baal had troubled them, hadmade of the heights of Ramoth very valley of Achor.

HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD. Vers. 1-8.

Bad Company.

According to the order of the chapters in the LXX, which is probably the original or true order, chapter 20. should immediately precede this. Then, after the history of the war between Ahab and Ben-hadad, this chapter opens naturally: "And they continued three years without war between Syria and Israel." In the third year of this peace Jehoshaphat visited Ahab; and from this visit arose serious events, which are admonitory to us that we should avoid the company of the wicked.

I BAD COMPANY COMPROMISES CHARACTER.

1. It injures morals.

(1) The earlier career of Jehoshaphat was faultless. He is highly commended for his faithfulness to God and zeal against idolatry. (2Ch_17:1-6)

(2) His first fault was sanctioning the marriage of his son Jehoram with Athaliah the daughter of Ahab. (2Ki_8:18, 2Ki_8:26)

(3) This led the way to the further fault of that friendly visit to Ahab mentioned here, for which he was rebuked by "Jehu the son of Hanani the. (2Ch_19:2)

(4) Yet once again we find him falling into a similar snare. He agreed with Ahaziah the son of Ahab, a wicked scion of wicked house, jointly to equip a fleet at the port of Ezion-Geber, on the Bed Sea, to sail to Ophir for gold. In this also he incurred the anger of the Lord and suffered the loss of his fleet. (ver. 48; 2Ch_20:35-37) Note: A fault is like a seed, fruitful "after its kind." A fault once committed prepares the way for a repetition.

2. It damages reputation.

(1) Reputation is character as estimated by men. This estimate may or may not be just; for men may judge wrongly through ignorance of circumstances which would put a new complexion upon conduct. Therefore judgments should be charitable, and not too hastily formed.

(2) But it is a maxim among men, generally true, that "you may know a man by his friends." Friendships involve sympathies. It had been better for Jehoshaphat"s reputation had he never made affinity with the wicked house of Ahab.

(3) This principle will apply to books. Hence the kindred maxim, "You may see a man in his library." It is bad enough when the newspaper shuts up the Bible; it is worse when the Bible is neglected through preference for sensational fictitious literature.

3. It impairs influence.

(1) This follows. Character is influence. Reputation is influence. Advice will be readily received from a genuine man, which coming from an artificial character would be spurned.

(2) What a power for good or evil is moral influence! See the evil exemplified in Israel under Ahab and Jezebel. See the good in Judah under Jehoshaphat. Lessons: Let your character be true. Jealously guard your reputation. Look to these for the sake of your influence.

II BAD COMPANY COMPROMISES HAPPINESS. Because

1. Happiness is involved in character.

(1) This truth is abundantly illustrated in sacred history. Examples are furnished in the text. Secular history teaches this truth. Everyday experience evinces it.

(2) Yet is it difficult so to convince individuals of this as to lead them to abandon sin and throw their energies wholly into the blessed service of God. Happiness is proportionate to the completeness of consecration. This consecration cannot be reconciled with the friendship of the world. (Jam_4:4)

2. Goodness is grieved in it.

(1) Jehoshaphat was not long in the company of Ahab before his ear was offended by horrible words. "I hate him." Whom did Ahab hate? Micaiah, the faithful prophet of the Lord. Does not this look like a declaration of hatred against the Lord? (See Pro_14:31 Pro_17:5; Zec_2:8)

(2) Why does Ahab hate Micaiah? "For he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil." Because he does not falsify the truth of God to flatter me. Because he does not play the devil to please me, as these four hundred do! Note: Hatred to God means love to Satan.

(3) Such sentiments were distressing to the feelings of Jehoshaphat. To the revulsion of his righteous soul he gave expression (but too feeble) in the remonstrance, "Let not the king say so." The conversation of such as are in sympathy with evil will offend the good in proportion to their pureness.

3. It leads the most wary into trouble. For the persuasions of the wicked are subtle.

(1) In presence of Jehoshaphat "The king of Israel said unto his servants, Know ye that Ramoth in Gilead is ours, and we be still, and take it not out of the hand of the king of Syria?" It was a considerable city in the tribe of Gad on the other side Jordan, and one of the cities of refuge. It was one of the cities which Ben-hadad, by the letter of his covenant, was bound to restore. (see 1Ki_20:34) The cause of Israel was obviously just.

(2) Then turning to Jehoshaphat, Ahab said, "Wilt thou go with me to battle at Ramoth-Gilead?" To which, carried away with the obvious justice of the cause, Jehoshaphat responded, "I am as thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses." This was too strong a compliment to Ahab and his people, and the response was too ready. We may not champion every just cause. It may be wrong to champion a good cause in wicked company.

(3) Bethinking himself, as a godly man should do, "Jehoshaphat said unto the king of Israel, Inquire, I pray thee, at the word of the Lord." A good man seeks to take God with him, and so long as he abides in this holy company he is safe. But let him beware that he be not persuaded by the wicked to forsake it.

(4) Ahab was equal to the occasion. He had four hundred prophets ready with one mouth to pronounce for the war, and that, too, in the name of the Lord. This hireling company, however, did not satisfy Jehoshaphat, yet he fell into their snare. He should have availed himself of the opportunity to withdraw given him in the prophecy of Micaiah; but, under the spell of Ahab"s evil influence, he went to the battle and got into trouble. There is no safety in the company of the wicked.

4. It provokes judgments of God.

(1) The good partake in the plagues of their wicked associates. Jehoshaphat barely escaped, through the mercy of God, with his life; and he suffered the loss of many of his people. (see Rev_18:4) The fly that keeps aloof is not entangled in the spider"s web.

(2) The good incur Divine judgments for their own sin. The sin of friendship with the enemies of God. The sin such friendship must infallibly occasion. Such was the experience of Jehoshaphat. (see 2Ch_19:2) Such will be yours. Avoid it. J.A.M.

HOMILIES BY J. URQUHART Vers. 1-28.

Crime brings its own punishment.

I THE WICKED RUSH UPON DESTRUCTION.

1. Ahab provokes the war in which he himself will perish. The peace which had lasted so long might have continued. Every day it was prolonged was a day placed between him and death; and yet with his own hand he brings to an end the period of grace. How often are the calamities of the wicked invoked by themselves, and are the fruit of their own rashness!

2. It came as the prompting of the deepest wisdom. Jehoshaphat"s presence afforded the opportunity of forming a league to which success seemed certain. The selfish cunning of the sinful becomes a snare to them.

3. He closes his ear against Gods deterring counsel.

(1) When asked to inquire of God, he brings those only who will speak the things that accord with his own determination. The false prophets are called, but not the true.

(2) When compelled to bring Micaiah from the prison (see ver. 26, "carry him back unto Amon," etc.), he endeavours to prevent Jehoshaphat being moved by his words. Micaiah is his enemy, therefore a prophecy of good is not to be expected from him.

(3) When warned he will not be hindered, but defies God, who would save him, by insulting and persecuting His servant (ver. 27).

II THE FALSE PROPHETS.

1. They bind the cords which are leading a sinful soul to death. The word which they profess to speak for God is a word which it pleases the king to hear. It is the echo of his own desires (ver. 6). There are those who by voice and pen proclaim a new gospel It is no longer sought to lead up the world to God and thus reconcile it to Him. It is boldly declared that the reconciliation is already effected. God has come down to it. There is no anger and no threatening and no terrible shadow of judgment. There is nothing but goodness and love. They are the false prophets of today, and these do for the men of their generation what those did for Ahab.

2. Their blasphemy. When a prophet of Jehovah was asked for (ver.7), they who have hitherto spoken only of Adonai do not scruple to take the name of the Highest into their lips (vers. 11, 12). We do not escape the false prophets when we appeal from their speech concerning the God of nature to His revealed will, the word of the Lord. They meet us there. It is in vain we seek to rest upon the plainest words; they are explained away. Hell is a superstitious dream, and the cross of the disciples of Christ a mere figure of speech, with no hard, stern reality behind it.

3. They are possessed by a spirit of falsehood (vers. 21-23). Their position is more a punishment of past sin than conscious transgression. They speak with honesty of a sort, but it is out of their heart"s darkness. They were willing to be deceived, and they have been deceived. They did not wish to know God as He is, and they have been left with the god of their own imagination. In which school are we, that of the false prophets, or of the true?

4. They smite the true servants of God. Zedekiah"s blow preceded the king"s judgment. It proved nothing but his own soul"s distance from God. It was the act of a man provoked by zeal for his own honour. He who had been moved by zeal for God"s honour would have stood in silent awe of that terrible but certain judgment which the man was braving.

III THE TRUE SERVANT OF GOD.

1. In a corrupt court his is no welcome presence (ver. 8). The distance between Ahab and God was reflected in that which separated him from the speaker of God"s word. Continued faithfulness, if it may not win, must be repelled and hated. "Woe unto you when all men speak well of you; for so," etc.

2. The necessity laid on him to declare the whole counsel of God (ver. 14). He cannot turn to the right hand or the left; the world"s wealth cannot bribe him, its power and cruelty cannot terrify him. What king or people desire to hear, or courtly prophets or current creeds have said, weighs nothing with him. He cannot speak in God"s name aught save what God has said.

1. His message. He speaks first in easily discerned irony (vers. 15, 16). It was an intimation to the king that he desired to hear no prophecy that would run counter to his inclinations. Then, when he is solemnly appealed to, a picture is presented (ver. 17) of the smitten, shepherdless people, which might well have touched even Ahab"s heart. Next king and people are led up to the throne of God. The servant and his words are forgotten in

2. the revelation of his Master. Even the false prophet"s utterances are turned to account; they and the reliance which the king is placing on them are part fulfilment of the Divine vengeance. There was deeper tenderness and truer love for Ahab in that one breast than in all the four hundred.

3. The greatness of all true service for God. There is a glory about that despised, persecuted man before which that of both kings pales. It is a glory which nothing can tear from the loyal heart, and which shines the brighter amid the world"s darkening hate. It is a glory which may be our own. U.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Ahab invites Jehoshaphat to join in recovering Ramoth- gilead, ver. 1-4. His false prophets promise him success, ver. 5, 6. He sends for Micaiah, ver. 7-10. Farther promises, ver. 11, 12. Micaiah's uprightness and prediction, ver. 13-23. He is abused and imprisoned, ver. 24-28. An account of the battle, wherein Ahab is slain, ver. 29-40. The good reign of Jehoshaphat, ver. 41-50. The wicked reign of Ahaziah, ver. 51-53.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

The Campaign against the Syrians

v. 1. And they continued three years, literally, "they rested," they undertook no further campaigns, without war between Syria and Israel; so long the false friendship lasted.

v. 2. And it came to pass in the third year that Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah, came down to the king of Israel; his son having married a daughter of Ahab, he made a formal visit and was entertained most lavishly, 2Ch 18:1 if.

v. 3. And the king of Israel said unto his servants, at some time during Jehoshaphat’s visit, Know ye that Ramoth in Gilead, an important fortified city in the country east of Jordan, is ours, both by right of original possession and by covenant with Benhadad, 1Ki 20:34, and we be still, remain inactive in spite of this state of affairs, and take it not out of the hand of the king of Syria?

v. 4. And he said unto Jehoshaphat, whom he intended to gain for his side, Wilt thou go with me to battle to Ramoth-gilead? And Jehoshaphat, who should have kept out of this entangling alliance, said to the king of Israel, I am as thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses, he pledged himself and all his resources, his entire military power, to the support of Ahab’s project.

v. 5. And Jehoshaphat, remembering at least some caution in time, said unto the king of Israel, Enquire, I pray thee, at the word of the Lord today; he wanted to he sure that the undertaking was in agreement with the will of Jehovah.

v. 6. Then the king of Israel gathered the prophets together, not true prophets of Jehovah, but men who presumed upon the office for the sake of filthy gain, about four hundred men, and said unto them, Shall I go against Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall I forbear? And they, who seem to have been at the same time priests of the calf-worship introduced by Jeroboam and therefore were anxious to please the king, whose purpose was so evident, said, Go up; for the Lord shall deliver it into the hand of the king.

v. 7. And Jehoshaphat, not at all satisfied with this farce, said, Is there not here a prophet of the Lord besides, a true and genuine prophet of Jehovah, that we might enquire of him?

v. 8. And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, There is yet one man, Micaiah, the son of Imlah, he was immediately available, as some commentators think because he had delivered an unfavorable prophecy to Ahab and had thereupon been placed in prison, by whom we may enquire of the Lord; but I hate him, just as Ahab hated everything else connected with the true worship of Jehovah;for he doth not prophecy good concerning me, but evil. Ahab evidently held the heathen idea that the prophet had some influence over the God whom he served and could be held responsible with his person for an unfavorable oracle. And Jehoshaphat said, Let not the king say so; he rebuked Allah for his alleged hatred and his consequent unwillingness to listen to Micaiah.

v. 9. Then the king of Israel called an officer and said, Hasten hither Micaiah, the son of Imlah; he conceded this point for the sake of his scheme.

v. 10. And the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah, sat each on his throne, having put on their robes, clothed in all their royal finery, as was proper for such a solemn assembly, in a void place, in an open space which had been made level like a threshing-floor, in the entrance of the gate of Samaria; and all the prophets, those whom Ahab had summoned at first, prophesied before them.

v. 11. And Zedekiah, the son of Chenaanah, made him horns of iron, probably in the form of large spikes which he held against his forehead, this being a symbolical action intended to remind his audience of Deu 33:17; and he said, Thus saith the Lord, With these shalt thou push the Syrians, like a strong wild ox, until thou have consumed them.

v. 12. And all the prophets prophesied so, saying, Go up to Ramoth-gilead, and prosper, sure of the victory even in advance; for the Lord shall deliver it into the king’s hand.

v. 13. And the messenger that was gone to call Micaiah spake unto him, in an effort to influence him and to shape his prophecy, saying, Behold now, the words of the prophets declare good unto the king with one mouth, there was perfect agreement among them; let thy word, I pray thee, be like the word of one of them, and speak that which is good.

v. 14. And Micaiah said, As the Lord liveth, what the Lord saith unto me, that will I speak; as a faithful prophet of Jehovah he would not deviate so much as one inch from the path of his duty.

v. 15. So he came to the king. And the king said unto him, Micaiah, shall we go against Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall we forbear? And he answered him, Go and prosper; for the Lord shall deliver it into the hand of the king. Either the prophet’s tone of voice or his face must have shown that he was speaking in holy irony, rebuking the king for his hypocritical question, as though he had said: Why the formality? Your mind is made up. Go ahead; march out into the battle-field; for all I may say will not change your mind.

v. 16. And the king, in order to convince Jehoshaphat of a sincerity which he by no means felt, said unto him, How many times shall I adjure thee that thou tell me nothing but that which is true in the name of the Lord? It sounded like zeal for the truth, but was in reality another specimen of hypocrisy.

v. 17. And he, ready now to describe the vision which Jehovah gave him, said, I saw all Israel scattered upon the hills, as sheep that have not a shepherd; and the Lord said, These have no master; let them return every man to his house in peace. The meaning was clear. Ahab would fall in battle, his soldiers would be scattered in the hills of Gilead, they would eventually return to their homes without being pursued.

v. 18. And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, in trying to blame this unfavorable prophecy on the personal enmity of Micaiah, Did I not tell thee that he would prophesy no good concerning me, but evil?

v. 19. And he, Micaiah, said, Hear thou therefore the word of the Lord, an account of a second vision, which explained the attitude of the four hundred prophets: I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by Him on His right hand and on His left, God appearing here as the great, almighty Ruler of the world.

v. 20. And the Lord said, Who shall persuade Ahab, deceiving or seducing him, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? It is plain that the fall of Ahab was determined in the counsels of God. And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner.

v. 21. And there came forth a spirit and stood before the Lord, evidently the spirit of prophecy represented as a person, and said, I will persuade him.

v. 22. And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets, causing them to prophesy falsehoods. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him and prevail also; go forth and do so. Since Ahab had sold himself into the service of sin and hardened his heart against all permanent good influences, therefore the Lord now deliberately gave him up to the destruction which he sought.

v. 23. Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee. This explained the remarkable agreement among the false prophets of Ahab.

v. 24. But Zedekiab, the son of Chenaanah, who had heard this explanation, went near, and smote Micaiah on the cheek, and said, Which way went the Spirit of the Lord from me to speak unto thee? He challenged Micaiah for evidence, being certain that he did not invent the saying which he had so confidently spoken before the king, but overlooking, at the same time, that the application of brute force was no way of establishing his claim.

v. 25. And Micaiah, without resenting the blow inflicted by Zedekiah, said, Behold, thou shalt see In that day when thou shalt go into an inner chamber to hide thyself, running from one room to another in the excess of his terror over the fulfillment of Micaiah’s prophecy.

v. 26. And the king ot Israel said, Take Micaiah and carry him back unto Amon, the governor of the city, in whose care he had therefore been before, and to Joash, the king’s son, a prince of the blood, who, with the commandant of the city, had charge of the prisoners,

v. 27. and say, Thus saith the king, Put this fellow in the prison, and feed him with bread of affliction and with water of affliction, with rough prison fare, until I come in peace, for he boldly thought that he would be successful in his campaign.

v. 28. And Micaiah, fully conscious of his divine office, said, If thou return at all in peace, the Lord hath not spoken by me. And he said, Hearken, O people, every one of you! He called upon those present to be witnesses of his word, knowing that his prophecy would surely be fulfilled. Though the godless children of the world are full of hatred against the true servants of the Lord, the latter never hesitate in announcing God’s wrath and displeasure upon the children of unbelief, the purpose being to induce them to leave the path of unrighteousness.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Ki 22:6-8

As against Benhadad, Ahab was in the right when he sought to capture Ramoth-gilead. But he had also to reckon with God. Face to face with God, Ahab’s real position at this period of his life was that of a condemned criminal, and he therefore was not in a moral position to represent and act on behalf of the rights of Israel.

The four hundred prophets whom Ahab consulted would seem to have been prophets of Jehovah, worshipped illegally under the symbol of a calf, an order of men who had arisen in the reign of Jeroboam, who practised prophecy as a trade without any true call from God, and who at the present time were in the pay, or at least under the influence, of the court of Samaria. Ahab’s tragical fate was the immediate consequence of preferring his own will, backed up by the advice of the four hundred, to the revelations of Micaiah. His mind at this the last crisis of his sad and eventful life is seen in two respects: in his willingness to consult the prophets of the calves; in his prejudice against Micaiah. They are the two sides of a disposition towards religion which in its principle is one and the same. It is not downright, contemptuous, bitter opposition; still less is it the loyalty of faith and love. It is a willingness to welcome religion if religion will only sanction the views, projects, and passions of its patrons.

Ahab welcomed the four hundred because he knew exactly what the four hundred would say. He disobeyed a voice which he could not silence, which willingly he would not have heard. He took his own way, and his tragical end was the consequence of his doing so.

Let us learn two lessons from this story.

I. The first is a principle of Church polity: the importance of making religious teachers, if you can, independent of those whom they have to teach. The clergyman who, with a number of children depending on him, has to think from the first day of the year about the collection that will be made for him at the end of it, must be heroic if he never yields to the softening down of a truth which will be unwelcome to his paymasters or the extenuating a fault which is notoriously popular among them. It is the laity who suffer much more by a dependent clergy than the clergy themselves.

II. Notice here a lesson of religious practice. They who do not seek false teachers may yet take only so much of true teaching as falls in with their own inclinations. If God will only say what His creature approves of, His creature will be well content; but if the Gospel or the Creed, like Micaiah of old, has its warning clauses, so much the worse for Creed or Gospel when Ahab has made up his mind, come what may, to go to Ramoth-gilead. In the last contest with death, which is before every one of us, we shall know that He who spoke by Micaiah was surely right.

H. P. Liddon, Penny Pulpit, No. 598 (see also Church Sermons, vol. ii., p. 401).

References: 1Ki 22:8.—J. M. Neale, Sermons in Sackville College, vol. ii., p. 132; Homiletic Magazine, vol. vi., p. 78; C. Girdlestone, Course of Sermons for the Year, vol. ii., p. 237; Plain Sermons by Contributors to "Tracts for the Times," vol. i., p. 196; J. Keble, Sermons for the Christian Year: Sundays after Trinity, Part I., p. 428; J. E. Vaux, Sermon Notes, 2nd series, p. 24.

1Ki 22:14

God’s truth is broader than any human statement of it, or than any systems which men, in perfect honesty of heart, may build on their conceptions of it; hence the existence of godly non conformity in every age of the world. In the region of political as well as spiritual life, the great impulses which have been the commencement of a vital expansion and progress have mostly come from men outside the established order of things, from men dissatisfied with it, and who saw something more true, more fair, in their visions, which they would not resign the hope of seeing established visibly in our world.

Micaiah, son of Imlah, is a nonconformist of the grandest type. Ahab had his regular college of prophets. Zedekiah prophesied in the name of the Lord, and was familiar, at any rate, with His Spirit as the agent of inspiration. He may have believed that he and his fellows were the recognised organs of the Divine voice, and that what they uttered had the sanction of the Divine name. The pious king of Judah did not venture to question their title to the name "prophet," but he felt that they were blind guides, more perilous in that they were masked by a sacred name. Ahab recognised Micaiah, too, as a prophet. He does not recognise any formal official distinction between him and the rest. The difference was within and vital. To stand well with the "powers that be" was the glory of Zedekiah; to stand well with the heavenly powers, to hear the Lord’s "Well done," was the glory of Micaiah. A supreme loyalty to truth was the essential element of Micaiah’s position, as the nonconformist prophet in Israel; and this is the one vital element in all nonconformity which has been worth anything to, or done anything in, our world.

J. Baldwin Brown, Christian’ World Pulpit, vol. xiii., p. 406.

References: 1Ki 22:15, 1Ki 22:16.—J. G. Rogers, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiv., p. 353. 1Ki 22:20-22.—H. Melvill, 2he Golden Lectures, 1854 (Penny Pulpit, No. 2194); J. M. Neale, Sermons in Sackville College, vol. ii., p. 200.

1Ki 22:23

This chapter gives us an insight into the meaning of that most awful and terrible word "temptation." And yet it is a most comforting chapter, for it shows us how God is longsuffering and merciful even to the most hardened sinner; how to the last He puts before him good and evil, to choose between them, and warns him to the last of his path and the ruin to which it leads.

I. What warning could be more awful and yet more plain than that of the text? Ahab was told that he was listening to a lie. He had free choice to follow that lie or not, and he did follow it. After having put Micaiah into prison for speaking the truth to him, he went up to Ramoth-gilead; and yet he felt he was not safe. He went into the battle and disguised himself, hoping that by this means he should keep himself safe from evil. But God’s vengeance was not checked by his paltry cunning.

II. This chapter tells us not merely how Ahab was tempted, but it tells us how we are tempted in these very days. By every wilful sin that we commit we give room to the devil. By every wrong step that we take knowingly we give a handle to some evil spirit to lead us seven steps further wrong. And yet in every temptation God gives us a fair chance. He sends His prophets to us, as He sent Micaiah to Ahab, to tell us that the wages of sin is death, to set before us at every turn good and evil, that we may choose between them, and live and die according to our choice. The Bible is a prophet to us. Every man is a prophet to himself. The still small voice in a man’s heart is the voice of God within us; it is the Spirit of God striving with our spirits, whether we will hear or whether we will forbear, setting before us what is righteous, and noble, and pure, and Godlike, to see whether we will obey that voice, or whether we will obey our own selfish lusts, which tempt us to please ourselves.

C. Kingsley, Village Sermons, p. 59.

References: 1Ki 22:23.—T. Arnold, Sermons, vol. vi., p. 85; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. vi., p. 101.

1Ki 22:34

I. There is a singular analogy between the present state of knowledge and of piety; in this age literature and religion fare much alike. In the Dark Ages literature was the monopoly of the few; gross ignorance was the condition of the many. Now every one knows a little, few know much, and fewer still know profoundly. Is it not the same with piety? The tendency of modern times has been to diffuse among the many the piety which was once concentrated in the few. The public are religious as a public, but in individuals the salt has lost its savour. If any remedy is to be applied to this state of things, we must first set ourselves to inquire into its causes.

II. Is there any flaw in our ministry which may in some measure account for the low standard of personal religion prevalent among us? We fear there is. We believe that the Christian ministry having by God’s design and constitution two arms wherewith to do its work, one of these arms has become paralysed by inactivity. The office of the ministry as regards the word of God is twofold, to rouse consciences and to guide them, and for a long time past ministers have contented themselves with rousing, while they have scarcely done anything to guide, them. The sermon is thrown every Sunday into the midst of the people, very much as the arrow which found out King Ahab was darted into the host of Israel, to take its chance amid the thousand arrows which on that day were winging their flight to and fro. There is in our exercise of the ministry no systematic plan on which people are taught and brought on gradually towards "the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." The Apostolical Epistles are the great model of what Christian teaching in a Christian country should be. Our Lord bids His disciples "teach" first as a preliminary to baptism, teach with a view of making disciples, and subsequently to baptism "teach" the converts so made to "observe all things, whatsoever He had commanded." The object of the one was to arouse the conscience of the heathen; the object of the other was to direct the conscience of the Christian.

E. M. Goulburn, Thoughts on Personal Religion, p. 1.

Reference: G. Moberly, Sermons in Winchester College, 2nd series, p. 63.

1Ki 22:37-39

I. Such glimpses of Ahab’s life as we have in ver. 39 reveal him to us in a very different character from that which appears on the face of the Bible history. He would seem to have been one who encouraged arts and industry, one who did a great deal for the temporal improvement of his people, and one concerning whom a flattering historian might have said many things which would tend to raise our thoughts of him as a useful king. We have here an awful commentary on such godless lives as his. His ivory palace and the cities which he built have passed away, together with that book of chronicles which contained their history; but what has remained, and will remain for evermore, is the fearful testimony that neither before nor since was there ever any king in Israel like Ahab, who gave himself up so completely and unreservedly to work evil in the sight of the Lord. We see here a commentary upon this truth, that the question of lasting importance to each man is this: whether he has set himself with all his heart to serve the Lord, or whether he has determined to be rebellious; and that lasting praise belongs, not to him who builds cities and ivory palaces, but to him who fears the Lord and walks in His ways.

II. Let us lay this well to heart, that we too may possibly be walking in a vain show; we may possibly be judging ourselves, and may be judged by others, differently from the judgment of God. "The fashion of the world passeth away"—its cities and its ivory houses—"but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever."

Bishop Harvey Goodwin, Parish Sermons, 2nd series, p. 33.

1Ki 22:48

I. Notice first the disaster to Jehoshaphat’s shipping. The eastern arm of the Red Sea, the Gulf of Akabah, is much deeper than the western; indeed, it is a narrow, deep ravine, with steep and rocky sides, the valley of which it forms part stretching far away to the north, till where it holds in its trough the waters of the Dead Sea. Down through the mountain gorge swept the mad hurricane with resistless might, shattering the ships of Jehoshaphat to pieces, and leaving the grey morning to look upon only pitiful wreckage all along the shore.

II. Notice the cause of this disaster. It was a judgment from Heaven. The grand mistake and sin of Jehoshaphat lay in associating himself with the enemies of God. This was the signal error of his life. If he had been an openly wicked man or a mere man of the world, probably this great shipping disaster would not have occurred, but God would not allow one of His own servants to prosper in such an undertaking.

III. The lesson which the disaster teaches is this: Do not choose your associates amongst those who fear not the Lord. It is always safest to keep under Christian influences. A man is rarely better than the company he keeps. Jehoshaphat may hope to bring Ahaziah up to his own level; but Ahaziah is much more likely to bring Jehoshaphat down. The lesson of the text bears also, and with peculiar point, upon all business alliances. You will do well even to sacrifice a measure of financial interest and worldly prospect rather than be associated in business with a man who is out of all sympathy with you in religion.

J. Thain Davidson, Forewarned—Forearmed, p. 191.

References: 1Ki 22:48.—Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 13; T. Coster, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xvii., p. 28. 1Ki 22—R. S. Candlish, Scripture Characters, p. 28; Parker, vol. viii., p. 59.

The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Three years

"3 years" (See: Numbers)

it came about that

This phrase is used here to mark the beginning of a new part of the story. If your language has a way for doing this, you could consider using it here.

translationWords

Aram

kingdom of Israel

Jehoshaphat

king

kingdom of Judah

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.