Introduction
Amaziah succeeds his father Joash, and begins his reign well, Ch2 25:1, Ch2 25:2. He slays his father's murderers but spares their children, Ch2 25:3, Ch2 25:4. He reviews and remodels the army, Ch2 25:5; and hires a hundred thousand soldiers out of Israel, whom, on the expostulation of a prophet, he sends home again, without bringing them into active service; at which they are greatly offended, Ch2 25:6-10. He attacks the Syrians, kills ten thousand, and takes ten thousand prisoners, whom he precipitates from the top of a rock, so that they are dashed to pieces, Ch2 25:11, Ch2 25:12. The Israelitish soldiers, sent back, ravage several of the cities of Judah, Ch2 25:13. Amaziah becomes an idolater, Ch2 25:14. Is reproved by a prophet, whom he threatens, and obliges to desist, Ch2 25:15, Ch2 25:16. He challenges Joash, king of Israel, Ch2 25:17; who reproves him by a parable, Ch2 25:18, Ch2 25:19. Not desisting, the armies meet, the Jews are overthrown, and Amaziah taken prisoner by Joash, who ravages the temple, and takes away all the treasures of the king, Ch2 25:20-24. The reign of Amaziah: a conspiracy is formed against him; he flees to Lachish, whither he is pursued and slain; is brought to Jerusalem, and buried with his fathers, Ch2 25:25-28.
Přeložit pomocí Googlu
Introduction
The statements as to Uzziah's attainment of dominion, the building of the seaport town Elath on the Red Sea, the length and character of his reign (Ch2 26:1-4), agree entirely with Kg2 14:21-22, and Kg2 15:2-3; see the commentary on these passages. Uzziah (עזּיּהוּ) is called in Ch1 3:12 and in 2 Kings (generally) Azariah (עזריה); cf. on the use of the two names, the commentary on Kg2 14:21. - In Ch2 26:5, instead of the standing formula, "only the high places were not removed," etc.) Kings), Uzziah's attitude towards the Lord is more exactly defined thus: "He was seeking God in the days of Zechariah, who instructed him in the fear of God; and in the days when he sought Jahve, God gave him success." In לדרשׁ ויהי the infinitive with ל is subordinated to היה, to express the duration of his seeking, for which the participle is elsewhere used. Nothing further is known of the Zechariah here mentioned: the commentators hold him to have been an important prophet; for had he been a priest, or the high priest, probably הכּהן would have been used. The reading האלהים בּראות (Keth.) is surprising. ה המּבין ב can only denote, who had insight into (or understanding for the) seeing of God; cf. Dan 1:17. But Kimchi's idea, which other old commentators share, that this is a periphrasis to denote the prophetic endowment or activity of the man, is opposed by this, that "the seeing of God" which was granted to the elders of Israel at the making of the covenant, Exo 24:10, cannot be regarded as a thing within the sphere of human action or practice, while the prophetic beholding in vision is essentially different from the seeing of God, and is, moreover, never so called. בראות would therefore seem to be an orthographical error for ביראת, some MSS having ביראות or ביראת (cf. de Rossi, variae lectt.); and the lxx, Syr., Targ., Arab., Raschi, Kimchi, and others giving the reading בּיראת ה המּבין, who was a teacher (instructor) in the fear of God, in favour of which also Vitringa, proll. in Jes. p. 4, has decided.
Přeložit pomocí Googlu