 |
|
     |
|
|
|
The Glory of Kings: A Festschrift for James B. Jordan
Fyodor Dostoevsky
(Christian Encounters Series)
Athanasius
(Foundations of Theological Exegesis and Christian Spirituality)
The Four: A Survey of the Gospels
Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom
From Behind the Veil: The Epistles of John
Deep Exegesis:The Mystery of Reading Scripture
1 & 2 Kings
Brazos Theological Commentary
The Promise Of His Appearing: An Exposition Of Second Peter
A Great Mystery: Fourteen Wedding Sermons
Deep Comedy: Trinity, Tragedy, And Hope In Western Literature
Miniatures & Morals: The Christian Novels of Jane Austen
The Priesthood of the Plebs: A Theology of Baptism
A Son To Me: An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel
From Silence to Song: The Davidic Liturgical Revolution
Ascent to Love: A Guide to Dante's Divine Comedy
Blessed Are the Hungry: Meditations on the Lord's Supper
A House For My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament
Heroes of the City of Man: A Christian Guide to Select Ancient Literature
Brightest Heaven of Invention: A Christian Guide To Six Shakespeare Plays
Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life
The Kingdom and the Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church
Yahweh describes only a handful of people as “My servant” – Abraham, Moses, and David. In 1-2 Kings, the title is almost exclusively reserved for David, and in almost every case the title is used in places where the Lord is reminding a king that His care for Israel is because of David (1 Kings 11:13, 32, 34, 36) or negatively comparing a king to the faithful David (1 Kings 11:38; 14:8). Once, toward the end of Kings, MOses is named as “My servant” (2 Kings 21:8).
Jeremiah continues this usage (Jeremiah 33:21, 22, 26). It’s remarkable, then, when Jeremiah later gives this title to Nebuchadnezzar (Jeremiah 25:9; 27:6). Nebuchadnezzar is, in effect, given a Davidic role.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Friday, October 14, 2011 at 6:56 am
The chronology of the later kings of Israel is confusing. Hoshea, the last king of Israel, seized power from Pekah, who had reigned fro 20 years (2 Kings 15:17). That was in the third (perhaps fourth) year of Ahaz of Judah, since Ahaz began to reign in Pekah’s seventeenth year (16:1). Yet, Hoshea is said to have seized power in the twelfth year of Ahaz (17:1). Add to that the discrepancy between 15:30 and 15:33: The first claims that Hoshea seized power in the “twentieth” year of Jotham, but a few verses later we learn that Jotham reigned for only sixteen years.
To make it clear: Hoshea’s seizure took place in the third/fourth year of Ahaz, which was also the twelfth year of Ahaz, which was also the twentieth year of Jotham, who reigned for sixteen years. Clear now?
There is perhaps a thematic point here: The times are out of joint, Israel’s clocks are stopping, and as they wind down they go haywire. It wouldn’t be the only place in Scripture where chronology was used to make a thematic point. But that still leaves us with harmonization issues: What actually happened? Even on critical grounds, it hardly does to attribute these discrepancies to redactional problems. It would take a redactor of colossal inattention not to notice that he gave two lengths for Jotham’s reign within the space of three verses. So, what did happen?
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, December 23, 2010 at 7:29 am
Why did Yahweh send Israel to exile? Appealing to 2 Kings 25 and Ezekiel 17, Jon Levenson suggests that “Subjugation to the Babylonian emperor was indeed punitive, but the purpose of the punishment was to train the vassal in the ways of covenant fidelity. . . . We see here a chastened royal theology” in which Davidic kingship does not involve Davidic superiority but rather “continued vassalage to the Babylonian overlord.” Given Israel’s history, “the best hope of the exiles is that the king of Babylon will confirm the kingship of the Davidic claimant, who will then serve his liege in fidelity.”
Ultimately, “the Babylonian emperor’s treatment of one Davidid would appear to be an adumbration of YHWH’s exaltation of the destined Davidic scion” so that the idea is that “a covenant oath sword to a Babylonian emperor is sacred to YHWH and that the resultant conferral of kingship is symbolic or prototypical of a messianic fulfillment.”
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, November 13, 2010 at 11:09 am
Nebuchadnezzar “broke” (shavar) the bronze furnishings of the temple and carried the bronze away to Babylon.
“Breaking” is just what Israel was supposed to do to the idols of the land (shavar is used in Exodus 23:24; 24:13; Deuteronomy 7:5). It is what faithful kings did to the idols that popped up around the land (2 Kings 18:4; 23:14).
Solomon’s temple had become a den of brigands, no better than the Baal temple. Like a new Joshua and a Babylonian Josiah, Nebuchadnezzar “broke” it in pieces.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, November 10, 2010 at 1:51 pm
The list of (mostly) bronze items taken from the temple into Babylonian exile in 2 Kings 25:13-17 is intricately put together. It begins and ends with references to pillars (vv. 13a, 17), and then mentions the bronze sea and the water stands (vv. 13, 16; the order is reversed the second time – stands and sea in v. 13, sea and stands in v. 16). Between are two lists in vv 14-15. The whole has an overall chiastic shape:
A. Pillars in the house, v 13a
B. Stands and sea in the house, v 13b
C. Bronze vessels, v 14
C’. Silver and gold vessels, v 15
B’. Pillars, sea, stands for the house, v 16
A’. Pillars, v 17
There are a couple of significant lists of seven.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, November 10, 2010 at 1:40 pm
Latvus, in the aforementioned article, interestingly notes the parallel between Gedaliah’s instructions to the people to submit to and not fear Babylon, so that “it shall be well with you” and the Deuteronomic exhortation to obey Yahweh so that it will be well (Deuteronomy 4:40; 5:16, 26; 6:3, 18; 12:25, 28; 22:7). The point is “Contrary to the main line of deuteronomistic history, in this passage it is the foreign nation, not Yahweh, which should be served.” This is evidence of the writer’s “subordinated attitude” toward empire.
Well, no. Yahweh has given dominion to Nebuchadnezzar. Therefore submission to him is submission to Yahweh. That’s the logic of Jeremiah 29, which Gedaliah quite correctly repeats.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 at 1:52 pm
In an article on 2 Kings 24-25 in The Postcolonial Biblical Reader
Latvus sounds peeved at the omission, but a closer look suggests something else is happening.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 at 12:57 pm
Between Genesis 10-11 and 2 Kings, “Babel” (or “Babylon”) is never mentioned. It comes up again in the description of the fall of the Northern Kingdom in 2 Kings 17: The King of Assyria brings men from Babel and sows them into the Northern kingdom.
The word “Babel” appears and immediately there is another scattering, another confusion of tongues. This one, though, occurs in the land of Israel. As Deuteronomy 28 and Isaiah threatened, people speaking unknown tongues surround the Israelites.
And this is also what happens in Acts. The church, the true but inverted “Babel,” gets injected into the heart of Israel.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, April 27, 2010 at 7:45 am
When Sheba visits Solomon, she brings spices. 1 Kings 10 uses the word besem four times (vv. 2, 10 [2x], 25), suggesting that the spices come from the four points of the compass. Spices are exotic in Israel, a sign of the Gentiles flowing to the mountain of God.
What were the spices used for? Kings doesn’t tell us, but from the information in Exodus and Chronicles, spices were used for temple service – added to the anointing oil for priests, mixed with frankincense in the aromatic incense. That is, the treasures of the nations are brought to the house of Yahweh and offered up in worship to Him. Or, the spices of the nations are brought to Jerusalem and used to anoint the High Priest as a priest not only to Israel but to the nations.
There is a circular movement here: Nations bring spices, which make Israel a perfumed bride, which in turn draws the nations.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 at 5:05 am
The word “spices” is used in only two contexts in 1-2 Kings, first when Sheba visits Solomon bearing spices, as well as all sorts of other treasures (1 Kings 10:2, 10, 25), and second when Hezekiah receives a visit from the Babylonians (2 Kings 20:13).
Though the scenes are similar, there is a significant reversal involved. Solomon receives spices, gold, and jewels; he is the recipient of honor and treasure from the Gentiles. Hezekiah shows off his spices and treasures to the Babylonians, and the Lord threatens that soon the Babylonians would plunder those very treasures, and receive tribute from a conquered Israel.
Those two brief references to spices tell the whole story of the Davidic dynasty.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, February 9, 2010 at 6:38 am
When the “young men” of Bethel mock Elisha, he calls out two bears that kill forty-two of them (2 Kings 2:24). Later in 2 Kings, Jehu slaughters forty-two relatives of Ahaziah of Judah during his purge of the house of Ahab (2 Kings 10:14). What’s up with that?
The young men of Bethel are leaders of idolatry, as our the forty-two relatives of Ahaziah. In both cases, you have Yahweh’s avengers (cf. 1 Kings 19) destroying 42 men, so the number links the work of Elisha with the work of Jehu.
In addition, the number 42 appears elsewhere in the Bible as the number of Levitical cities in addition to cities of refuge (Numbers 35:6), so there might be a Levitical reference. The forty-two young men of Bethel are anti-Levites. Plus, the number appears as a time-period of oppression and persecution (Revelation 11:2; 13:5) – 42 months is 3 and a half years, a broken seven. The forty-two might point to the fact that the shrine at Bethel will be cut off mid-stream, as will the house of Ahab and, by implication, the kingdom of Judah. Enemies of the church don’t even last a full “week” but are cut off mid-week, on the “third day.”
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, January 14, 2009 at 9:15 am
Deuteronomy 12:18: you shall you shall eat them before the LORD your God in the place which the LORD your God will choose, you and your son and daughter, and your male and female servants, and the Levite who is within your gates; and you shall rejoice before the LORD your God in all your undertakings.
Deuteronomy 12 is one of the central liturgical passages in the Bible. In it Yahweh promises to plant Israel in the land, clear away their enemies, and then choose a place for His name. The place where Yahweh sets His name will be the place where Israel is to eat, drink, and rejoice before Him, sharing their food with servants and Levites.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Sunday, December 7, 2008 at 8:16 am
Pauline Viviano has a bit of fun at my expense over on the America website(www.americamagazine.org/blogs/client). She’s “reviewing” my commentary on 1 & 2 Kings, but instead of actually discussing my book, she mocks typological interpretation and my use of it in particular. She knew what I was up to without reading more than a few pages: “It was clear after the first few pages of this commentary that every number ’3′ in the books of Kings was going to be taken as a foreshadowing of the Resurrection; every body of water, a reference to Baptism; and every anointing, messianic.” Saves time for a reviewer to know what the book is about without having to read it.
I’d certainly be more worried by a favorable review from America, and at least I made Prof Vivano giggle. That’s what the commentary was about, of course – spreading glee and good cheer to every corner of Christendom.
A few of Viviano’s points are worth responding to.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 at 11:22 am
The Shunammite woman sets Elisha up with a small sanctuary in an upper room, complete with menorah, table, throne-chair, and bed (= altar). When the woman’s son dies, Elisha lays him on the bed/altar, and he revives. He is another Isaac, Elisha a new Abraham. Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac was followed by a promise of an abundant seed and then by the negotiations for a plot of land (Gen 22-23). Elisha raises the boy, and then goes to feed a hundred men and to restore the land to fruitfulness.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, September 19, 2006 at 7:52 am
David’s house dies and rises again several times in 1-2 Kings: After Athaliah kills the royal seed, Joash rises from the temple; after Samaria falls, the Lord saves Judah from Assyria through Hezekiah’s prayer; after Nebuchadnezzar takes Judah into exile, Jehoiachin is taken from prison and set at the king’s table.
Each time the house of David goes through a death and resurrection, David’s house matures, and each death and resurrection takes the house of David a step further than before. Joash is the first king to give serious attention to the disrepair of the temple; after a long period where the temple is ignored, the temple becomes so important that by the time of Jeremiah Judah is idolizing the temple. Hezekiah goes further, taking down the high places, and Josiah follows his example. These two events foreshadow the maturation that takes place after the exile, when a restored Israel rebuilds the temple and never returns to high places or overt idolatry.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, July 31, 2006 at 5:12 am
2 Kings 24:4: also for the innocent blood which Manasseh shed, for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood; and Yahweh would not forgive.
Manasseh’s reign, as we saw some weeks ago, was the turning point for Judah. After Manasseh’s idolatries and violence, Yahweh determined to destroy Judah, and no amount of reformation and repentance would change His mind. Here we have that same thing stated with frightening simplicity: “Yahweh would not forgive.”
The particular sin mentioned here is the shedding of innocent blood. As Ahab killed Naboth and the prophets, Manasseh persecuted and killed the innocent, and the Lord rose up as an avenger of blood to destroy Judah. But the violence of Manasseh has a deeper root in the history of Israel.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Sunday, July 2, 2006 at 7:45 am
Zedekiah was the last Davidic king in Judah, and like many of his predecessors he “did evil in the sight of Yahweh.” We might imagine he oppressed the people, promoted idolatry, persecuted prophets, ignored God’s commandments and His prophets. We know from the book of Jeremiah Jehoiakim did all this, and Zedekiah did evil “according to all that Jehoiakim had done.”
But the portrait of Zedekiah in Jeremiah is not what we expect. Jehoiakim scornfully burns Jeremiah’s scroll (Jeremiah 36). Zedekiah doesn’t do anything so brash. Instead of a viciously wicked king, Zedekiah is a waffling king, a weak king, a king influenced in equal measure by the prophetic word and by public opinion.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Sunday, July 2, 2006 at 7:38 am
INTRODUCTION
After Josiah, Judah unravels rapidly. Josiah’s son is imprisoned by Pharaoh Neco (23:33), and before long Nebuchadnezzar and his Babylonians are invading, destroying the temple and the city (24:1). It is Good Friday for Israel.
THE TEXT
“Jehoahaz was twenty-three years old when he became king, and he reigned three months in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Hamutal the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah. And he did evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his fathers had done. Now Pharaoh Necho put him in prison at Riblah. . . .” (2 Kings 23:31-25:30).
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, June 26, 2006 at 9:09 am
In the account of Josiah’s reform in 2 Kings 23, there is frequent reference to “defiling” (vv 4, 6, 8, 10, 13, 14, 16, 20). Josiah defiles by scattering the ashes from a destroyed Asherah pole, by filling holy places with bones, by burning bones on altars. It’s not enough just to destroy the shrines and vessels of idolatrous worship. That would interrupt the worship, but it doesn’t remove the holiness and sanctity of the place or the things.
Sanctity or holiness is a condition, a status, and that can be reversed only by some act that transfers the sacred to the profane. Sacredness has to do with cleanness, but also with life. Bones, ashes, and death defile, and so to bring a definitive end to these shrines and altars Josiah not only has to destroy but to defile. Jeroboam’s altar was split in two; but because it wasn’t defiled, Jeroboam just rebuilt it and carried on. Josiah makes that impossible.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Sunday, June 25, 2006 at 9:19 am
2 Kings 23:12: The altars which Manasseh had made in the two courts of the house of Yahweh, the king broke down; and he smashed them there, and threw their dust into the brook Kidron.
Josiah was one of the great heroes of the faith, providing an example not only for leaders of the church but for every believer. All leaders of the church are to imitate his zeal in destroying anything idolatrous in the church, but every believer is responsible to do the same – making war against the flesh and the idols of his own heart. We are made of dust; we are each a land to ourselves; and God calls us to keep that land free from altars to Baal and shrines to Molech.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Sunday, June 25, 2006 at 8:39 am
Permission is given to use material on this site, provided the source is cited, blog entries are republished in full, and the author is notified in advance.
