2 Kings 14:28

2Ki 14:28 Now the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, and all that he did, and his might, how he warred, and how he recovered Damascus, and Hamath, [which belonged] to Judah, for Israel, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?

Ver. 28. And Hamath.] Which lay near to Damascus, and fared the worse for its neighbourhood. {Zec 9:2}

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.

2Ki_14:28

Now the rest of the acts of Jeroboam.

--

Life-Re-lived

There is a moment when a mans life is re-lived on earth. It is in that hour in which the coffin lid is shut down, just before the funeral, when earth has seen the last of him for ever. Then the whole life is, as it were, lived over again in the conversation which turns upon the memory of the departed. The history of threescore years and ten is soon recapitulated; not, of course, the innumerable incidents and acts which they contained, but the central governing principle of the whole. (F. W. Robertson.)

Record of sin

It is said that the Bank of France has an invisible studio in a gallery behind the cashiers, so that at a signal from one of them a suspected customer can instantly have his picture taken without his own knowledge. So our sins and evil deeds may be registered against us, and we ourselves altogether unconscious of the fact.

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2Ki 14:28. And how he recovered Damascus and Hamath — These were cities of Syria, but were taken from the Syrians by David and Solomon, and probably by them incorporated with, and added to, the possessions of their own tribe, to which, from that time, they belonged: but afterward they were retaken by the Syrians, and were now recovered by this Jeroboam.

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

Which was also called Antioch of Syria, or Riblah.

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

Verse 28. How he warred, and - recovered Damascus] We learn from 1Ch 18:3-11, that David had conquered all Syria, and put garrisons in Damascus and other places, and laid all the Syrians under tribute; but this yoke they had not only shaken off, but they had conquered a considerable portion of the Israelitish territory, and added it to Syria. These latter Jeroboam now recovered; and thus the places which anciently belonged to Judah by David's conquests, and were repossessed by Syria, he now conquered, and added to Israel.

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

(28) How he recovered Damascus, and Hamath.—Jeroboam II. was probably contemporary with Rammân-nirâri, king of Assyria (B.C. 812-783). This king has recorded his exaction of tribute from Tyre and Sidon, “the land of Omri” (i.e., Israel), Edom, and Philistia; and a siege of Damascus, followed by the submission of Mari’, its king, and the spoiling of his palace. The prostration of his enemy thus accounts for the permanent success of Jeroboam, who was himself a vassal of Assyria.

He recovered.—This verb was rendered “lie restored” in 2Ki_14:25, and that is the meaning here.

Damascus and Hamath.—Not the entire states so named, which were powerful independent communities, but portions of their territory, which had belonged to Israel in the days of Solomon. (See Note on 2Ch_8:3-4.)

Which belonged to Judah.—This is really an epithet restrictive of the phrase, “Damascus and Hamath,” the sense being, “Judœan Damascus and Hamath.” (Comp, the Note on 2Ki_15:1.)

For Israel.—Heb., in Israel. The sense is obscure; but the particle “in” appears to refer to the re-incorporation of the Damascene and Hamathite districts with Israel. Ewald would cancel “which belonged to Judah,” and read “to Israel” (so the Syriac and Arabic. But the LXX., Vulg., and Targum support the existing text.) Others explain: He restored Damascus and Hamath to Judah (i.e., to the theocratic people) through Israel (i.e., the northern kingdom, to which the recovered districts were actually annexed). No explanation, however, is really satisfactory. It may be that by an oversight the Judæan editor wrote” to Judah, “instead of” to Israel and that some scribe added a marginal note “in Israel,” which afterwards crept into the text. It is curious to find certain districts of Hamath leagued with Azariah, king of Judah, against Tiglath Pileser. (See Note on 2Ki_15:1.)

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

28. how he recovered Damascus] We are told (2Sa_8:6) that garrisons were placed in Damascus by David, and that the Syrians became servants to David. Having been once in the possession of the Israelites, the reconquest by Jeroboam II. may be spoken of as a recovery. A sort of occupation of Damascus was also granted by Ben-hadad to Ahab (1Ki_20:34), when the Israelite king was permitted to make streets for himself in the Syrian city.

and Hamath, which belonged [R.V. had belonged] to Judah] We find (2Sa_8:9-11) that Toi the king of Hamath was one of David’s tributaries, and from 1Ki_4:21-24 it is clear that in Solomon’s days Hamath was part of his possessions. In 2Ch_8:4 we learn that Solomon built ‘store cities’ in Hamath. The revolt of the ten tribes gave Hamath a chance of freedom again, of which the people probably availed themselves, and remained independent till the conquest by Jeroboam here spoken of. This event brought the city into the hand of Israel.

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.

He recovered Damascus - Jeroboam probably gained certain advantages over Benhadad, which induced the latter to make his submission and consent to such terms as those extorted by Ahab 1Ki 20:34.

Hamath was probably among the actual conquests of Jeroboam. It was brought so low in his reign, as to have become almost a by-word for calamity (compare Amo 6:2).

Which belonged to Judah, for Israel - i. e. these cities were recovered to Judah, i. e. to the people of God generally, through or by means of being added to Israel, i. e. to the northern kingdom.

A few further facts in the history of Jeroboam II are recorded by the prophet Amos (compare Amo 7:10, etc.).

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

To Juda, or "of Juda;" Judæ; (Haydock) as those strong cities had been conquered by David. The Syriac and Arabic omit this word entirely, and suppose, with many others, that Jeroboam kept possession of these cities. (Calmet) (Tirinus) --- In Israel, or "to Israel," over which he reigned. (Haydock)

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).

Damascus and Hamath were cities of Syria, but were taken from the Syrians by David and Solomon, 2Sa 8:6; 2Ch 8:3, and probably by them incorporated with and added to the possessions of their own tribe, to which from that time they belonged; but afterwards they were retaken by the Syrians, and were now recovered by this Jeroboam.

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

28. He recovered Damascus — David smote the Syrians of Damascus and made them tributary; (2Sa_8:6;) but in Solomon’s day Rezon established himself in Damascus and acted the part of an adversary to Israel, (1Ki_11:23,) after which time Damascus was not recovered for Israel until the time of this Jeroboam. He brought the kingdom of Damascus, which had so long distressed both Judah and Israel, into subjection, and made it tributary to himself. Afterwards we find Syria and Israel in league against Judah. 2Ki_15:37; 2Ki_16:5.

Hamath, which belonged to Judah — That is, it belonged to the united kingdom under David and Solomon when the seat of empire was in Judah and Jerusalem. David’s conquests, according to 1Ch_18:3, extended to Hamath, and Solomon completed the conquest of this district and built store cities there. 2Ch_8:3-4. But soon afterwards it seems to have recovered its independence. Hamath was one of the oldest cities of Palestine, and is often mentioned in connexion with its northern border. See on Jos_13:5.

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

Now the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, and all that he did, and his might, how he warred, and how he recovered Damascus and Hamath. It has been suggested that these words mean no more than that Jeroboam took territory from Damascus and Hamath from Damascus the trans-Jordanic territory which Hazael had conquered from Jehu; (2Ki_10:33) from Hamath some small portion of the Coele-Syrian valley, about the head-streams of the Orontes and Litany (so Keil and Bahr). But there does not seem to be any sufficient reason for giving the words used this narrow signification. Damascus was conquered and annexed by David, (2Sa_8:6) and held for a time even by Solomon, (1Ki_11:24) of whose kingdom Hamath also seems to have formed part (1Ki_4:21-24 2Ch_8:4 2Ch_9:26) The word "recovered" is, therefore, a suitable one. The prophecy of Amos, no doubt, represents Damascus as independent; (Amo_1:3, Amo_1:4) but this may have been written before Jeroboam conquered it. Hamath"s subjection seems to be implied in Amo_6:2, Amo_6:14. We may, therefore, well understand, with Ewald ("History of Israel," vol. 4. p. 124) and Dr. Pusey ("Minor Prophets," pp, 157, 209), that Jeroboam. "subdued Damascus and even Hamath," and added them to his kingdom. How long the subjection continued is a different question. Probably, in the troubles that followed the death of Zachariah, (2Ki_15:10-14) the yoke was thrown off. In the Assyrian Inscriptions, Damascus appears under its own king about B.C. 786 (G. Smith, "Eponym Canon," p. 115), and it was certainly independent in B.C. 743. At the latter date Hamath also appears as the capital of an independent kingdom (ibid., pp. 118, 120) under its own monarch. Which belonged to Judah. Keil and Bahr render, "Hamath of Judah," regarding hdWhyli as a genitive. Ewald proposes to read hbwOxl tmj "Hamath of Zobah", (comp. 2Ch_8:3) or else to cut out hdwjyl altogether. The passage is one of great difficulty. For Israel. It is questionable whether this meaning can be obtained from the present text, which is laercyib. Bahr thinks that it can; but Ewald regards the change into laercyil as one "of necessity." Might we not avoid all these alterations by translating simply he recovered Damascus and Hamath to Judah through Israel"? Attaching them to Israel was a sort of recovering of them to Judah, to which (i.e. the Judah of David and Solomon) they had once belonged. Are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?

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

Of the rest of the history of Jeroboam we have nothing more than an intimation that he brought back Damascus and Hamath of Judah to Israel, i.e., subjugated it again to the kingdom of Israel. ליהוּדה is a periphrastic form for the genitive, as proper names do not admit of any form of the construct state, and in this case the simple genitive would not have answered so well to the fact. For the meaning is: "whatever in the two kingdoms of Damascus and Hamath had formerly belonged to Judah in the times of David and Solomon." By Damascus and Hamath we are not to understand the cities, but the kingdoms; for not only did the city of Hamath never belong to the kingdom of Israel, but it was situated outside the boundaries laid down by Moses for Israel (see at Num 34:8). It cannot, therefore, have been re-conquered (השׁיב) by Jeroboam. It was different with the city of Damascus, which David had conquered and even Solomon had not permanently lost (see at Kg1 11:24). Consequently in the case of Damascus the capital is included in the kingdom.

Kg2 14:29

As Jeroboam reigned forty-one years, his death occurred in the twenty-seventh year of Uzziah. If, then, his son did not begin to reign till the thirty-eight year of Uzziah, as is stated in Kg2 15:8, he cannot have come to the throne immediately after his father's death (see at Kg2 15:8).

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.)

are they not written in the book of the events of the kings of Israel?

This question is used to remind the reader that the acts of Jehoahaz are recorded in another book. See how this phrase is translated in 2 Kings 1:18. AT: "they are written in the book of the events of the kings of Israel." (See: Rhetorical Question)

Jeroboam slept with his ancestors, with the kings of Israel

This is a polite way to say that he died and was buried. AT: "Jeroboam died, and was buried where the other kings of Israel were buried" (See: Euphemism)

translationWords

Damascus

Hamath

Zechariah (OT)

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