2 Kings 14:5

2Ki 14:5 And it came to pass, as soon as the kingdom was confirmed in his hand, that he slew his servants which had slain the king his father.

Ver. 5. As soon as the kingdom was confirmed in his hand] He politically dissembled his displeasure till he found his time. Qui nescit dissimulate, nescit regnare, saith Louis XI of France to his son. It is a weakness in a prince always to carry his love and hatred in his forehead.

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 14:5. As soon as the kingdom was confirmed, he slew his servants, &c. — It is implied in this, that his father’s murderers continued to be men of weight and interest at court, even after they had perpetrated that crime; for Amaziah retained them in his service for some time, nor durst venture to execute justice upon them till he was well settled in his authority. Probably the act they had done was in some sort approved by the generality of the people, to whom Joash had made himself hateful by his apostacy to idolatry, and his ingratitude to the house of Jehoiada.

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

14:5-6 When Amaziah . . . executed his father’s assassins, he followed the standards of the law concerning “Parents . . . crimes” (Deut 24:16; see also 2 Chr 25:4) and did not put their children to death.

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

as soon as the kingdom was confirmed in his hand--It was an act of justice no less than of filial piety to avenge the murder of his father. But it is evident that the two assassins must have possessed considerable weight and influence, as the king was obliged to retain them in his service, and durst not, for fear of their friends and supporters, institute proceedings against them until his power had been fully consolidated.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 5. As soon as the kingdom was confirmed in his hand] No doubt those wicked men, Jozachar and Jehozabad, who murdered his father, had considerable power and influence; and therefore he found it dangerous to bring them to justice, till he was assured of the loyalty of his other officers: when this was clear, he called them to account, and put them to death.

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

(5) As soon as the kingdom was confirmed—i.e., as soon as he was firmly established on the throne; as soon as he felt his power secure. (Comp. 1Ki_2:46.)

Slew . . .—slain.—Literally, smote . . . smitten.

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

5. as soon as the kingdom was confirmed [R.V. established] in his hand] The change is in conformity with 2 Chronicles. It is worth notice that the conspirators made no attempt, as it seems, to divert the succession from the house of David, though they might have expected that the son would take revenge on his father’s murderers.

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 slew of Edom in the valley of Salt ten thousand,.... Of which valley; see Gill on Sa2 8:13, the Edomites having revolted from Judah in the days of Joram, Kg2 8:20. Amaziah undertook to reduce them with an army of 300,000 choice men; and, besides these, hired also of Israel 100,000 valiant men, for one hundred talents of silver; but at the instance of a prophet of the Lord he dismissed the latter, and went against Edom only with his men, and slew of the Edomites 10,000, besides other 10,000 he took alive, and cast headlong from a rock, which came into his hands, see Ch2 25:5,

and took Selah by war; which signifies a rock, the same with Petra, the metropolis of Arabia Petraea, the country of the Edomites. The city itself was not a rock, nor built on one, but was situated in a plain, surrounded with rocks and mountains, as Strabo (z) and Pliny (a) relate, from whence it seems to have its name; and by the Syrians called Recem, where Rocan a king of Midian reigned (b), called in the Greek version of Num 31:8, Recon; though Vitringa (c) is of opinion, that not Petra, the metropolis of Edom, is meant, but Maalehakrabbim, Jos 15:3, which lay on the south border of Judea, near the salt sea:

and called the name of it Joktheel; which signifies "the obedience of God"; in memory of his obedience to the prophet of the Lord, in consequence of which he obtained this victory: and the name continued unto this day: the time of the writing this book.

(z) Geograph. l. 16. p. 536. (a) Nat. Hist. l. 6. c. 28. (b) Hieron. de loc. Heb. fol. 93. M. & 94. A. Vid. Joseph. Antiqu. l. 4. c. 7. sect. 1. (c) Comment. in Jesaiam, c. 16. 1.

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

The phrase, “confirmed in his hand” 2Ki 15:19, usually expresses the authorisation of a new reign by an imperial superior (see 2Ki 15:19 note); but here it describes the result when the troubles consequent upon the murder of Joash had passed away. The new king’s authority was generally recognized by his subjects.

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

Whereby it is implied that his father’s murderers had powerful friends and abettors, and that their fact was in some sort approved by the generality of the people, to whom Joash had made himself hateful by his apostacy to idolatry, and by his ingratitude to the house of Jehoiada.

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

5. Slew his servants — Jozachar and Jehozabad. See 2Ki_12:21. Amaziah was wise to wait till the kingdom was confirmed in his hand, and he had all its forces at control. Rawlinson conjectures that the kingdoms of Israel and Judah were, after the days of Jehu, dependencies of the king of Assyria, and when one after another of the Israelitish or Jewish kings came to the throne, he formally applied to the Assyrian monarch to be confirmed in his kingdom. This he infers from an Assyrian obelisk which represents Jehu as bringing tribute to the king of Assyria. See note on 2Ki_10:32.

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

And it came to pass, as soon as the kingdom was confirmed in his hand. Joash had been murdered in Jerusalem by conspirators. (2Ki_12:20) A time of trouble had, no doubt, supervened. The conspirators would not wish to see Amaziah placed upon the throne, and may have opposed and delayed his appointment. But their efforts proved fruitless. After a time, the young king was confirmed (literally, "strengthened"), i.e. settled and established in his kingdom, all opposition being overcome or dying away. This seems to be what the writer means. He cannot intend a confirmation by a foreign suzerain, which the phrase used might import, (2Ki_15:19) when he has given no hint of any subjection of the kingdom to any foreign power, or indeed of any serious attack on its independence. That he slew his servants. Jozachar and Jehozabad were "servants" of Joash, apparently domestic servants employed in his palace, and are therefore reckoned "servants" also of his successor. Which had slain the king his father. In the "house of Millo," where he lay sick. They "slew him on his bed". (see 2Ch_24:25)

Vers. 5, 6. A father"s sins not to be visited by the civil magistrate on his children.

Human legislators have differed greatly in their judgments upon this point. In the East, and in early times, the idea was generally accepted that the guilt of the father attached to all his descendants, and was justly visited on them. "Lege cantum erat," says Q. Curtius ("Vit. Alex.," 6:11), "ut propinqui eorum, qui regi insidiati essent, cum ipsis necarentur." The family was regarded as the unit of society, and the crime of one member tainted the whole of it. What the Egyptian practice was is uncertain; but we find the Israelites, shortly after the Exodus, putting to death the whole family of Achan on account of their father"s sin, (Jos_7:24, Jos_7:25) and the usage seems to have continued long afterwards. (2Ki_9:26) The Greeks and Romans adopted a different line of action. Recognizing the separateness of the individual, they never executed a family en masse, but only the guilty member or members of it. Yet, in secondary punishments, the contrary idea to some extent prevailed. At Athens, when the sentence on a man was degradation from his rights of citizenship (ajtimia), the penalty was shared by his children. A similar disability attached to the children of those who were executed. So, even by our own law, attainder and forfeiture, which mainly affect the children, are attached to the crime of treason, and the property of felons escheats to the Crown. It is very remarkable that the Law of Moses should have anticipated the ultimate judgment of the human conscience upon the point, and have laid down so clearly and strongly the humane principle that the criminal alone should be punished for his own crime. To us at the present day the principle may appear axiomatic; but at the time when Moses enunciated it, the contrary idea was prevalent; and it is doubtful whether the broad assertion, "Every man shall be put to death for his own sins," had ever been heard previously. Even now, though in the letter the principle is universally accepted, infractions of its spirit are common enough

I BY NATIONS. Nations infringe it when they cashier a royal family for the fault, or even the crime, of the reigning sovereign. In a hereditary monarchy the son has a right to succeed, though his father may by unconstitutional acts have justly forfeited the crown. Still more unjust is the perpetual exile of all those whose ancestors have ever reigned over a country. Such persons are punished, not so much for the sins as for the merits the wisdom, prowess, high renown of their forefathers, since it is for their merits, ordinarily, that persons are first placed upon thrones. Confiscation of the property of exiled princes is still more indefensible, since it is at once unjust and mean. It may be added that forfeiture and attainder, as they exist in our own law, seem to be contrary to the spirit of the rule, which is that no one should be punished for anything but his own acts.

II BY INDIVIDUALS. Individuals infringe this rule when they maintain a family feud, transferring to the children of those by whom they consider themselves to have been injured the animosity which they have long entertained towards their parents. Or when they treat a man with coldness or incivility because his father has done something disgraceful. Or, generally, when they attach blame or discredit to any one, not for anything that he has done, but for something that somebody connected with him has done. Strict justice requires that each man should "bear his own burden," and stand or fall by his own acts. If we allow anything but his own acts to affect our estimate of a man still more, if we allow it to affect our demeanor towards him we act unjustly, we infringe the principle of the law, "Every man shall be put to death i.e. shall suffer for his own sin.

Vers. 5, 6. Personal responsibility.

Amaziah visits with just execution the servants who had conspired against his father Joash. But he did not put to death the children of the murderers. He acted on the principle laid down by God through Moses, (Deu_24:16) that "the fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children for the fathers; every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

I EVERY ONE OF US IS RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS OWN LIFE. "For we must all appear before the judgment-scat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

II EVERY ONE OF US IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RIGHT DISCHARGE OF HIS OWN DUTIES. We cannot excuse ourselves by the unfaithfulness of others. Responsibility is something which we can never transfer to any one else. Men may deny their responsibility. They may refuse to fulfill it. They may neglect it. But there it is they cannot get rid of it. Our responsibility to God for the life and opportunities which he has given is a truth we should do well to keep constantly before us. C.H.I.

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