The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 295

l! Bo.m. ii. 82). This denunciation did not highway, ver. 25], and the ass stood [Heb. necessarily imply a violent death (as Keil, standing] by it, the lion also stood [stand- al.) or even a speedy death, but it prepared ing] by the carcase. [These particulars a.re the man of God for some untimely end.] mentioned to show that his death was no Ver. 23.-And it ea.me to pasa, a.fter he accident, or cha.nee, but a visitation of God. had eaten bread, and after he had drunk, There a.re probably but few persons who that he saddled [i.e., the prophet of Bethel; have not felt that this summary punish- the " me.n of God " would seem to have come ment was marked by extreme severity; the on foot. See below] for h1m the ass, to wit, more so, e.s the prophet was cruelly de- for the prophet whom he had brought back. ceived, and that by a brother prophet, who This tmnslation is inadmissible. For not claimed to have received a subsequent reve- only is the term " prophet " throughout lation, and whom, consequently, it appeared this narrative restricted to the prophet of to be a duty to obey. And when it is ob Bethel (the prophet of Judah being always served tho.t the really guilty person, the spoken of as "the man of God,") but the prophet of Bethel, so far as appears, escaped expression here used 'i1 •~ ~•~iiJ is also all punishment, and by his lie secUl'ed for twice used (vers. 20, 26) of the so.me prophet.himself respect for his remains, we seem to He is characterized there, that is to say, as have a case of positive hardship and in- "the prophet which brought him back;" it justice. As I have discussed the question is hardly likely, therefore, that the same at some length elsewhere (Homil. Quart., words o.re here to be interpreted, " the vol. iv. pp. 214-221), it must suffice to prophet whom he brought back." The say here that the difficulty is at once re- moved if we remember that although tbe mistake has arisen from the proximity of i? Jewish dispensation was one of temporal (" for him ") to ~ 1=l,~~ ("to" or "for the recompenses, yet all tbe same there is a judgment hereafter. No doubt tbe mo.n of prophet"). But the i? is here indicative of God we.a punished for his disobedience, for possession (the dative of the possessor), as inexcusable disobedience it was. It is quite in 1 So.m. xiv. 16, "the watchmen to," i.e., true that he was solemnly assured tba.t o.n of, " Saul," and ib. xvi. 18, "a son to e.ngel had appeared to revoke his com- Jesse" (cf. Gen. xiv. 18 Heb.; 1 Kings v. mission, but for this he had only tbe word 29 Heb. ; Ruth ii. 3 Heb.) We must therefore of a stranger, of one, too, with whom he render "He (the old prophet, but this is had been co=anded "not even to eo.t." not absolutely certain ; the "man of God" He had " the word of the Lord; " that is to may be understood) saddled for him (the so.y, the voice of God, borne in upon his man of God) the ass of the prophet whioh soul, forbidding his return, and the word of brought him bnck. " The man of God had an irreligious stranger, who gave no "sign been delayed by his return to Bethel, and the so.me clay '' in proof of his mission, the prophet, out of pity, lends or gives authorizing it. There can be no doubt him his ass. Not merely, it is probable, which he ought to ho.ve followed, the more for the sake of speeding him on his way, so as the co=nnd he ho.d himself received but that he might ho.ve some living thing was eo remarkably explicit and decisive with him on a journey which he had so (ver. 9) : so decisive tbat '\'l"e co.n hardly muoh co.use to dread. suppose he would have deviated from it, Ver. 24.-And when he was gone [Heb. had not the pains of hunger o.nd thirst and he went], a lion (Lions were evi- pleaded powerfnlly in favour of the pre- dently numerous in Palestine in former tended revelation of the Bethelite prophet. days, though they are now extinct. This Indeed, it is hardly too much to say that he is proved by the no.mes of places, such eagerly welcomed this cause for returning. e.s Laish, Lebanth, &o., e.nd by the con- It is impossible, therefore, to acquit him of stant reference to them in Scripture. They disobedience. Nor is it difficult to see that bo.d their lairs in the forests, one of which the consequences of this disobedience were existed neo.r Bethel (2 Kings ii. 24), o.nd serious. It was not ns if he had disregarded especio.lly in the thickets of tho Jordan a mere positive obligation, the only objeci valley (Jer. xlix. 19; Zech. xi. 3)] met of which wo.s to test his obedience (Rawlin- [Heb. found. The primary meaning of son); he hnd acted in a wo.y cnlculo.ted to ~~O is, no doubt, "found accidentally," destroy the moral effect of his mission. He "~;me upon" (E~pEV, invenit), but it is had been employed not only to testify often used of finding after a search (1 So.m. publicly o.gninst tbe co.If-worship, but o.lso ix. 4, &c.), and it should be remembered to lay the city and the new sanctuary of tho.tthis is the word used in vers.14, 28] h1m Jeroboam under an interdict, o.nd by his by [in, o.s below] the way, and slew h1m: return that interdict lost much of its force. and h1I carcase was oaat In the way [road, • His eo.ting and drinking, small matters i.u  Tl:IE FIRST BOOK OF KIN GS. [cs:. :tnr. 11-'flll,