Arabians and Philistines, chap. xxi. 17. (Haydock)
Meaning, the Philistines. Cross references: : 2 Kings 8:24
The reign of Ahaziah, Athaliah destroys the royal family.
Meaning, the Philistines. Cross references: : 2 Kings 8:24
We read, in the foregoing chapter, of the carrying away of Jehoram's sons and his wives; but here we find one of his sons and one of his wives left, his son Ahaziah and his wife Athaliah, both reserved to be the shame and plague of his family. I. Ahaziah was the shame of it as a partaker, 1. In the sin, and, 2. In the destruction, of the house of Ahab, ver 1-9. II. Athaliah was the plague of it, for she destroyed all the seed-royal, and usurped the throne, ver 10-12.
Forty-two, &c. Diverse Greek Bibles read twenty-two, agreeably to 4 Kings viii. 18., (Challoner) with the Syriac and Arabic. The Roman (Calmet) and Alexandrian Septuagint have “twenty.” (Haydock) — Ochozias was the youngest son, and his father died at forty years of age, chap. xxi. 20. (Calmet) — Others would date from the birth of Amri, (Broughton) or of Athalia. But it is most probable that we should read 22, as [in] 4 Kings. (Calmet) — The contradiction has so much perplexed the commentators, that Walton (prol. 36) puts it among the quĉdam apora; and De Dieu says, “I would rather plainly confess that this difficulty is to us inexplicable.” The error here, “is plainly owing to a mistake of one of the Hebrew numeral letters,” c, being put instead of m, which was formerly more similar than it is now. “In Origen’s Hexapla, one of the Greek copies (probably that found in Caracalla’s time) reads here cb, by rendering the number 22, eikosi kai duo, all which proofs make the mistake indubitable, and strongly recommend this method of correcting it.” (Kennicott) — Mariana, Tirinus, &c., had already suggested this plan, (Haydock) which is very plausible. (Du Hamel) — Ochozias might reign twenty years with his father, and only one alone, 4 Kings viii. 26. (Worthington)
- The counsel of the ungodly ruins many young persons when they are setting out in the world. Ahaziah gave himself up to be led by evil men. Those who advise us to do wickedly, counsel us to our destruction; while they pretend to be friends, they are our worst enemies. See and dread the mischief of bad company. If not the infection, yet let the destruction be feared, ( Revelation 18:4 ) . We have here, a wicked woman endeavouring to destroy the house of David, and a good woman preserving it. No word of God shall fall to the ground. The whole truth of the prophecies that the Messiah was to come from David, and thereby the salvation of the world, appeared to be now hung upon the brittle thread of the life of a single infant, to destroy whom was the interest of the reigning power. But God had purposed, and vain were the efforts of earth and hell.
We have here an account of the reign of Ahaziah, a short reign (of one year only), yet long enough, unless it had been better. He was called Jeho-ahaz (ch. 21 17); here he is called Ahaz-iah, which is the same name and of the same signification, only the words of which it is compounded are transposed. He is here said to be forty-two years old when he began to reign (v. 2), which could not be, for his father, his immediate predecessor, was but forty when he died, and it is said (2 Kings 8 26) that he was twenty-two years old when he began to reign. Some make this forty-two to be the age of his mother Athaliah, for in the original it is, he was the son of forty-two years, that is, the son of a mother that was of that age; and justly is her age put for his, in reproach to him, because she managed him, and did what she would—she, in effect, reigned, and he had little more than the title of king. Many good expositors are ready to allow that this, with some few more such difficulties, arise from the mistake of some transcriber, who put forty-two for twenty-two, and the copies by which the error should have been corrected might be lost. Many ancient translations read it here twenty-two. Few books are now printed without some errata, yet the authors do not therefore disown them, nor are the errors of the press imputed to the author, but the candid reader amends them by the sense, or by comparing them with some other part of the work, as we may easily do this.