2 Cronache 21:19 Commento

Never surely did any kingdom change its king so much for the worse as Judah did, when Jehoram, one of the vilest, succeeded Jehoshaphat, one of the best. Thus were they punished for not making a better use of Jehoshaphat's good government, and their disaffectedness (or coldness at least) to his reformation, Ch2 20:33. Those that knew not now to value a good king are justly plagued with a bad one. Here is, I. Jehoram's elevation to the throne (Ch2 21:1-3). II. The wicked course he took to establish himself in it, by the murder of his brethren (Ch2 21:4). III. The idolatries and other wickedness he was guilty of (Ch2 21:5, Ch2 21:6, Ch2 21:11). IV. The prophecy of Elijah against him (Ch2 21:12-15). V. The judgments of God upon him, in the revolt of his subjects from him (Ch2 21:8-10) and the success of his enemies against him (Ch2 21:16, Ch2 21:17). VI. His miserable sickness and inglorious exit (Ch2 21:18-20). VII. The preservation of the house of David notwithstanding (Ch2 21:7).

INTRODUCTION TO 2 CHRONICLES 21 This chapter relates Jehoram's succession to the throne of Judah, and the murders and idolatries committed by him, Ch2 21:1, the revolt of the Edomites from him, and some of his own people, Ch2 21:8, a writing of Elijah to him, threatening a great plague to him and his family, Ch2 21:12, the raising up of several enemies against him, Ch2 21:16, his sickness, death, and burial, Ch2 21:18.

Jehoram succeeds his father Jehoshaphat; and commences his reign with the murder of his brethren, and of several of the princes of Israel, Ch2 21:1-5. He walks in the way of Ahab, whose bad daughter, Athaliah, he had married, Ch2 21:6. God remembers his covenant with David, and does not destroy the nation, Ch2 21:7. The Edomites revolt, Ch2 21:8-10. Jehoram restores the high places in the mountains of Judah, and greatly corrupts the morals of the people, Ch2 21:11. A letter comes to him from Elijah, Ch2 21:12-15. The Philistines and Arabians come up against him, pillage his house, and take away his wives, with all his sons except Jehoahaz, Ch2 21:16, Ch2 21:17. He is smitten with an incurable disease in his bowels; of which, in two years, he dies miserably, after a profligate reign of eight years, Ch2 21:18-20.

After the end of two years, his bowels fell out - The Targum seems to intimate that he had a constipation and inflammation in his bowels; and that at last his bowels gushed out. No burning - "His people made no burning of aromatic woods for him, as they had done for his forefathers." - Targum. See on Ch2 16:14 (note).

JEHORAM SUCCEEDS JEHOSHAPHAT. (Ch2 21:1-4) Jehoshaphat slept with his fathers . . . Jehoram . . . reigned--The late king left seven sons; two of them are in our version named Azariah; but in the Hebrew they appear considerably different, the one being spelt "Azariah," and the other "Azariahu." Though Jehoshaphat had made his family arrangements with prudent precaution, and while he divided the functions of royalty in his lifetime (compare Kg2 8:16), as well as fixed the succession to the throne in his oldest son, he appointed each of the others to the government of a fenced city, thus providing them with an honorable independence. But this good intentions were frustrated; for no sooner did Jehoram find himself in the sole possession of sovereign power than, from jealousy, or on account of their connections, he murdered all his brothers, together with some leading influential persons who, he suspected, were attached to their interest, or would avenge their deaths. Similar tragedies have been sadly frequent in Eastern courts, where the heir of the crown looks upon his brothers as his most formidable enemies, and is therefore tempted to secure his power by their death.

And it came to pass in days after days (i.e., when a number of days had passed), and that at the time (וּכעת( emit eh) of the expiration of the end in two days, then his bowels went out during his sickness, and he died in sore pains (תּחלאים, phenomena of disease, i.e., pains). The words שׁנים לימים הקּץ צאת וּכעת are generally translated as if שׁנים לימים were a mere periphrasis of the stat. constr. Vatabl. and Cler., for example, translate: et secundum tempus egrediendi finis annorum duorum, i.e., postquam advenit finis a. d., or cum exacti essent duo anni; similarly Berth.: "at the time of the approach of the end of two times." But against this we have not only the circumstance that no satisfactory reason for the use of this periphrasis for the genitive can be perceived, and that no analogies can be found for the expression שׁנים לימים הקּץ, the end of two years, instead of שׁנים היּמים קץ; but also the more decisive linguistic reason that הקּץ צאת cannot denote the approach of the end, but only the expiry, the running out of the end; and finally, that the supposition that ימים here and in Ch2 21:15 denotes a year is without foundation. Schmidt and Rabm. have already given a better explanation: quumque esset tempus, quo exiit finis s. quum exiret ac compleretur terminus ille, in epistola Eliae Ch2 21:15 praefixus; but in this case also we should expect היּמים קץ, since שׁנים לימים should point back to ימים על ימים, and contain a more exact definition of the terms employed in Ch2 21:15, which are not definite enough. We therefore take הקּץ צאת by itself, and translate: At the time of the end, i.e., when the end, sc. of life or of the disease, had come about two days, i.e., about two days before the issue of the end of the disease, then the bowels went out of the body-they flowed out from the body as devoured by the disease. חליו עם, in, during the sickness, consequently before the decease (cf. for עם in this signification, Psa 72:5, Dan. 3:33). Trusen (Sitten, Gebr. und Krankh. der alten Hebrer, S. 212f.) holds this disease to have been a violent dysentery (diarrhoea), "being an inflammation of the nervous tissue (Nervenhaut) of the whole great intestine, which causes the overlying mucous membrane to decay and peel off, which then falls out often in tube-shape, so that the intestines appear to fall from the body." His people did not make a burning for him like the burning of his fathers, cf. Ch2 16:14; that is, denied him the honours usual at burial, because of their discontent with his evil reign.