The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 353

ample of Jeroboam has clearly had its full ver. 16) that none of Baasha's children, if inflnence on the nation. "The Lord's he had other children, had gone to the war], anointed " is no longer had in reverence, as nor of his frl.ends. [Zimri went a step in the days of David (1 Sam. xxiv. 6, 10 ; farther than Be.asha had gone. He was not nvi. 9, 16 ; 2 Sam. i. 14), nor is it accounted content with extirpating the royal family, a sin to grasp at ~be crown. (2) Ziniri but put to death the partizans of the ho use, only does what Baasha had done before all who would be likely to sympathize with him. That prince was "hoist with his Elah or to resent his murder.] own petard." (3) Elah would seem to Ver. 12.-Thus did Zlmrl destroy all the have been a dissolute and pusillanimons house of Ba.asha. according to the word of prince. His place was clearly with his army the Lord which he spake aga.mst Ba.a.aha, by at Gibbethon (ver. 15 ; cf. Jos., viii. [Heb. in the hand of] Jehu the prophet 12. 4). And as clearly it wa.s not in the [Vers. 1, 7; of. eh. xv. 29, The analogy is house of one of his subjects, even the in- now complete], tendant of his palace. " An Oriental mone.rch . . . is precluded by etiquette Ver. 13.-For r,~ corresponds with the from accepting the hospitality of his sub- ',p of ver. 7 = propter; cl. chs. xiv. 6; ui. jects" - Rawlinson, who further remarks 22] a.11 the sins of Ba.a.sha., a.nd the sins ot that the low tastes which we he:::e find Elah E1a.h his son, by which they Binned, and by indulging" had probably been formed before which they ma.de Israel to sin, in provoking his father was exalted out of the dust." As the Lord God of Israel to anger [the for- probably they were inherited direct from mula of eh. xv. 30, &c.] with their vanltieL his father. Anyhow, they led to his destruc- [The caJ. ves, not idols, are referred to here. tion. It is clear that Elah's want of Cf. Dent. xxxii. 21 ; 1 Cor. viii. 4. The cliaracter, like Nadab's, sug,:ested the con- same idea is embodied in the word Beth- ~piracy of Zimri. (4) It is extremely prob- aven; Hosea iv. 16; v. 8.] able, though not absolutely certain, as Ver. 14.-Now the rest of the a.cts ot Bahr affirms, that Arzo. was one of the Ela.h, and all tha.t he did, a.re they not conspirators, and that the wretched prince wrttten in the book of the chronicles of had been decoyed to his house and made the kings of Israel? clru.n.k, with a view to his murder there.] Ver. 15.-In thetwentya.ndseventhyea.r Ver. 10.-.And Zimii went in [cf. Judg. iii. or Asa. king or Juda.h did Zl.mrt reign [The 20; 2 Sam. iv. 7] a.nd 6ID.Ote him and kUled same word elsewhere translated in A. V. bJin, in the twenty and seventh yea.r of began to reign. It is really an aorist = Asa king of Judah, a.nd reigned in his succeeded to the throne] seven days 1n Tir- stead. [Cf. eh. xv. 28 and 2 Kings xv. 23. It za.h. And the people were encamped is curious how it happened three times in [Heh. encamping] against Gibbethon, which the history of Israel that • • the only power- belonged to the Philistines. [It haS" at ful prince in a new dynasty was its founder, first sight a suspicious look that two kings nnd after his son and successor reigned two of Israel, within an interval of about twenty- years, the power passed into other hands " five years, should have been slain by con- (Ewe.Id).] spirators during a siege of this place. But when the narrative is examined, its proba- Tl,,e Reign of Zimri. bility a.nd consistency become at once Ver. 11.-A.nd it came to pa.sa when he apparent. Stanley assumes that the siege began to reign, a.s soon a.s he sa.te on his lasted over the whole of this period, but it throne, tha.the slew a.11 the house ofBa.a.sha. is more likely that when Baa.she. found him- [see note on eh. xv. 29. The LXX. Vat. self king, he discovered that he had domcstio omits the rest of this verse and the first matters enough upon his hands, without a clause of ver. 12]: he left him not one that foreign war, and so he raised the siege. It pisseth aga.inst a. wall [i.e., not a boy. is very probable that he feared opposition See eh. xiv. 10 note], neither of [Heb. and] such as Zimri and Omri subsequently ex- perienced. And his wars with Asa and hJs kinsfolkB [The ',~j is strictly the per- with Syria may well have prevented his son to whom (1) the right of redemption renewing the undertaking. On the accession (Levit. xxv. 26; Rath, passim) and (2) the of Elah, however, with the usual ambition duty of avenging blood (Num. xxxv. 19) and impetuosity of youth, it was decided to belonged. And this being the next-of-kin recommence the siege and to win this city (Ruth ii. 12, 13), the word ea.me to mean be.ck for Israel. Bnt the fate of Ne.dab, and near relative, kinsman, as here ; cf. Ruth ii. the consequent ill omen attaching to the 20. All the same, it discloses to llB Zimri'B place would not be forgotten, and this, a■ object, which was to destroy the avenger of well as hie voluptuous he.bits, may have Llood. And it shows (in con.neuon with deterred the faineant Elah from besieging OS, XV, 25-XVI, 28.) THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. 859