II Kings 9



                                    The Anointing of Jehu (vs. 1-10)


Elisha is still the primary figure in the historical drama; but at this point his personality

merges in the general account of the kingdom of Israel, which it is one of the objects

of the writer to trace from beginning to end. Elisha here performs his last public act,

being commissioned, and carrying out his commission, to transfer the kingdom of

Israel from the unworthy dynasty of Omri, which on account of its persistent idolatry

has fallen under Divine condemnation, to a new dynasty, that of Jehu, which

will, at any rate, check the worst excesses of the prevalent idolatrous system, and

maintain the Jehovah-worship as the religion of the state. The position recalls that of

Saul and David at the original institution of the monarchy, but has many special points

which differentiate it from that conjuncture. The circumstances called on Jehu for

prompt action; there was no such immediate call upon David. Jehu’s public

proclamation as king laid him open to a charge of high treason; David’s secret

anointing placed him in no such danger.


1  And Elisha the prophet called one of the children of the prophets,” -  

i.e. one of the students in one of the prophetical schools which he superintended.

There is no indication that the individual chosen for the mission stood to Elisha in

any peculiar relation – “and said unto him, Gird up thy loins, and take this

box of oil” -  rather, this flask of oil. Oil and ointments were commonly kept in

open-mouthed jars, vases, or bottles, made of stone, glass, or alabaster, as

appears from the remains found in Egypt and Assyria. Many of the bottles are

earlier than the time of Elisha -  “in thine hand, and go to Ramoth-Gilead:” –

Ramoth-Gilead lay across the Jordan, in the proper territory of Gad. It had been

seized and occupied by the Syrians in the reign of Ahab; and the possession had

been maintained till recently. Joram, however, had recovered it (Josephus, ‘Ant.

Jud.,’ 9:6. § 1) and had left a strong garrison in the place when he retired to Jezreel.


2  And when thou comest thither, look out there Jehu the son of

Jehoshaphat the son of Nimshi,” -  Jehu had been in a high position under

Ahab (v. 25), and had been pointed out to Elijah, by Divine revelation, as the future

King of Israel (I Kings 19:16).  Meantime Jehu served as a soldier under Ahazia

and Jehoram, Ahab’s sons, and attained such distinction that he became one of the

captains of the host (v. 5).  Elijah had been bidden to anoint him king, but apparently

had neglected to do so, or rather had devolved the task upon his successor.  Jehu

was commonly known as “the son of Nimshi, either because, his father having

died young, he was brought up by his grandfather, or perhaps simply because

Nimshi was a person of more importance than Jehoshaphat. (As it was with the

two Jehorams, this can be confusing.  This Jehoshophat was not the king of

Judah and son of Asa [I Kings 15:24; ch. 22; and II Chronicles 17 and 18] – but

was the son of Nimshi [vs. 2,14; II Chronicles 22:7] – CY – 2011) -   “and go in”

 - i.e., seek his presence, go into his quarters, wherever they may be, have direct

speech with him – “and make him arise up from among his brethren (compare

vs. 5 and 6). Jehu’s “brethren” are his brother-officers, among whom Elisha

knows that he will be found sitting – “and carry him to an inner chamber;” –

Persuade him, i.e., to quit the place where thou wilt find him sitting with the other

generals, and to go with thee into a private apartment for secret conference.

Secrecy was of extreme importance, lest Joram should get knowledge of what

was happening, and prepare himself for resistance. Had he not been taken by

surprise, the result might have been a long and bloody civil war.


3  Then take — rather, and take — the box of oil — rather, the

flask of oil — and pour it on his head,” -  Compare the consecration of

Aaron to the high-priestly office (Leviticus 8:12), and of Saul (I Samuel 10:1)

and David (Ibid. 16:12) to the kingly office. The oil used was the holy anointing

oil of the sanctuary (Exodus 30:25) – “and say, Thus saith the Lord, I have

anointed thee king over Israel.”  This is an abbreviated form of the actual

message, which is given in its entirety in vs. 7-10. The writer of Kings avoids all

needless repetitions. “Then open the door — the conference was to be with

closed doors, that no one might either hear or see what took place — and flee,

and tarry not.”  The Divine message delivered, all would have been done that

needed to be done. There would be nothing to wait for. So the young man was

to depart with the same haste with which he had come.  4  So the young man,

even the young man the prophet went to Ramoth-Gilead.”


5  And when he came, behold, the captains of the host were sitting” -

either “sitting in council,” or, at any rate, collected together in one place, not

engaged in any active work, but seated — “and he said, I have an errand

literally, a word to thee, O captain.”  Probably he knew Jehu by sight,

and looked at him as he spoke; but, as he addressed no one by name, there

might be a doubt who was intended. Jehu, therefore, causes the doubt to be

resolved by his question. “And Jehu said, Unto which of all us? And he said”

i.e., the young man the prophet answered – “to thee, O captain.”  Jehu was

thus singled out as the object of the message — the person to whom alone it was

addressed, and whose special attention was, consequently, required to it.


6  And he (Jehu) arose, and went into the house;” -  Jehu left his

seat, rose up, and led the way, from the court, where he had probably been

sitting with the other generals, into the house which adjoined the court.  The

messenger followed; and the two were together, alone – “and he — i.e. the

messengerpoured the oil on his head — as directed (v. 3) —and said unto

him, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel,” -  literally, Thus saith Jehovah, God

of Israel. Jehovah’s name is emphatically put forward, “I have anointed thee

king over the people of the Lord, even over Israel.”-  literally, over the people

of Jehovah, over Israel. Practically, the people is, in the main, “the people of Baal”

(ch. 10:19-21), but theoretically and by covenant  it is “the people of Jehovah”

His “peculiar people” (Deuteronomy 14:2), chosen by Him out of all the nations

of the earth to be His own.


7  And thou shalt smite the house of Ahab thy master,” - This is

plainly a command, not a prophecy. Jehu is expressly ordered by God to

smite,” i.e. destroy utterly, the whole house of Ahab. This command he

carried out (vs. 24, 33; ch. 10:1-11); and his obedience to it obtained for him

the temporal reward that his children to the fourth generation should sit on the

throne of Israel (Ibid. v. 30). Yet still his conduct in destroying the house of

Ahab is spoken of by the Prophet Hosea as a sin, and God declares, by

Hosea’s mouth, that He will “avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the house

of Jehu” (Hosea 1:4). It is naturally asked — “How could Jehu’s shedding this

blood, at God’s command and in fulfillment of His will, be a sin?” And it is rightly

answered, “Because, if we do what is the will of God for any end of our own,

for anything except God, we do in fact our own will, not God’s. It was not lawful

for Jehu to depose and slay the king his master, except at the express command of

God, who, as the supreme King, sets up and puts down earthly rulers as he wills.

(Consider Romans 13:1-5 – CY – 2011) - For any other end, and done otherwise

than at God’s express command, such an act is sin. Jehu was rewarded for the

measure in which he fulfilled God’s commands, as Ahab, ‘who had sold himself

to  work wickedness,’  had yet a temporal reward for humbling himself publicly,

when rebuked by God for his sin, and so honoring God, amid an apostate

people (I Kings 21:27-29). But Jehu, by cleaving, against the will of God, to

Jeroboam’s sin (ch. 10:29, 31), which served his own political ends, showed that,

in the slaughter of his master, he acted, not as he pretended, out of zeal for the

will of God (Ibid. v.16), but served his own will and his own ambition only.

By his disobedience to the one command of God, he showed that he would have

equally disobeyed the other, had it been contrary to his own will or interest. He

had no principle of obedience. And so the blood which was shed according to

the righteous judgment of God, became sin to him that shed it in order to fulfill,

not the will of God, but his own - “that I may avenge the blood of my servants

the prophets,” -  Compare I Kings 18:4 and 19:14. Elijah believed all the prophets

of Jehovah, except himself, to have been either slain or banished under Ahab, as

we see from  Ibid. ch. 18:22 and 19:10,14 -  “and the blood of all the servants

of the Lord,” -  There had evidently been a general persecution of the followers of

Jehovah, and not merely a persecution of the prophets. It was only after a

number of martyrdoms that the followers of Jehovah in Israel were reduced

(Ibid. 19:18) to the scanty number of “seven thousand.”  - “at the hand

of Jezebel.”  Jezebel was at the bottom of all the persecutions. Sometimes

she took matters into her own hands, gave her own orders, and saw them

carried out (Ibid. 18:13; 21:8-14). At other times she was content to

stir her husband up” (Ibid.  21:25) and incite him to evil courses.


8  For the whole house of Ahab shall perish: and I will cut off from Ahab

him that pisseth against the wall, and him that is shut up and left in Israel:”

This phrase is confined to the period from David to Jehu, and generally, understood

to mean “every male.” (It is also found in I Samuel 25:22; chps. 16:11; 21:21) –

But it is noteworthy, as Gesenius has remarked, that this is not a habit of Eastern

men. Every traveler in Egypt will confirm the remark of Herodotus (ch. 2:35) on

this subject, and the same applies to Palestine; i.e., the men sit down for this

purpose, covered with their garments (Judges 3:24; I Samuel 24:3).  Gesenius

is probably right when he interprets it of boys. Thus understood, it lends additional

meaning to the passages where it occurs. It expresses extermination, root and

branch, man and boy. While the exact force of the phrases used is doubtful, the

general intention to embrace in the sentence all Ahab’s posterity cannot be doubted.


9  And I will make the house of Ahab like the house of Jeroboam the son

of Nebat,” -  Jeroboam’s house had been “cut off,” smitten, destroyed, till not

one of his posterity was left, about seventy years previously (I Kings 15:29), by

Baasha, “because of his sins which he sinned, and which he made Israel sin,

 by his provocation wherewith he provoked the Lord God of Israel to anger”

(Ibid. v. 30). The far greater sin of Ahab could not be visited with less severity -

and like the house of Baasha the son of Ahijah.”  As the whole house of

Jeroboam had been cut off for its idolatries, so the house of Baasha, which

succeeded to the throne, was removed even more speedily, Baasha himself and

all his posterity being swept from the earth by Zimri, who “smote him and killed

him,” and succeeded him (Ibid. ch.16:11). The house of Ahab had had

a double warning of the fate in reserve for those who deserted the religion

of Jehovah, but had disregarded both warnings alike, and had provoked God yet

more than their predecessors, by introducing a novel and degraded form of

idolatrous worship.


10   “And the dogs shall eat Jezebel in the portion of Jezreel,” - This had been

previously prophesied by Elijah (I Kings 21:23; ch. 9:26-27). To an Israelite, and

even to a Phoenician, it was an awful threat; for both nations alike buried their dead

carefully in deep-dug graves or rocky receptacles, and both regarded the desecration

of a corpse as a grievous calamity. The dog was to the Hebrews, and to the Orientals

generally, an unclean animal, and to be devoured by dogs would have been viewed

as a fate which, for a queen, was almost inconceivable – “and there shall be none

to bury her.”  Jezebel had no one sufficiently interested in her fate to watch over her

remains. Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah, had kept watch over the bodies of the seven

sons of Saul, and suffered neither the birds of the air to rest on them by day, nor the

beasts of the field by night (II Samuel 21:10).  But “Jezebel had none to bury her.”

When she was ejected from the palace window (v. 33) and fell to the ground, and

was trodden under foot by Jehu’s chariot-horses, no one came forth from the

palace to give the bruised and wounded corpse such tendance as was possible.

There was entire neglect of the body for (probably) some hours; and, during these,

the catastrophe occurred which Divine foresight had prophesied, but which

human malice had not intended (see vs. 34-37). “And he opened the door,

and fled.”  The young man the prophet obeyed to the letter the injunctions which

Elisha had given him (v. 3). The moment that he had executed his errand, he fled.




            Conspiracy of Jehu against Jehoram (vs. 11-22)


11  Then Jehu came forth to the servants of his lord:” - After the young

man, the prophet had made his precipitate retreat, Jehu, too, quitted the inner

chamber, and “came forth” — returned to the place where he had been sitting

with “the servants of his lord” — the other captains of the host (v. 5) — and

rejoined their company – “and one said unto him, Is all well?”  One of the

other captains of the host took the word and asked, in the ordinary phraseology

of the time, “Is it peace?” (compare vs. 17-19, 22) — or, in other words, “Is all

right?” “Is all well?” The sudden appearance and disappearance of the messenger

had evidently created an impression that all was not well. “Wherefore came this

mad fellow to thee?”  He did not suppose the man to be actually mad. He calls

him “this wild fellow” — “this scatterbrain,” on account of the haste and

strangeness of his conduct; but he quite expects to hear that there was “method in

the madness,” and that the communication had some serious import.  “And he

i.e. Jehu — said unto them, Ye know the man, and his communication.”

 Jehu suspected that the whole scene had been arranged beforehand; that Elisha

and the young prophet and the captains of the host were in league, and had

concerted a way of offering him the throne. He may have had reason to regard

the captains as disaffected towards Jehoram, though this does not appear at all

distinctly in the very brief narrative.


12  And they said, It is false;” - There was no rudeness in the reply.

It merely denied that Jehu’s supposition was correct. There had been no

collusion between the spiritual and temporal authorities. The captains had

no knowledge of the young prophet’s errand – “tell us now.”  “Tell us,” i.e.,

what the young prophet said, since we are completely in the dark upon the

subject.” – “And he said, Thus and thus spake he to me, saying, Thus

saith the Lord, I have anointed thee king over Israel.” Jehu declared to

them without any reserve all that the young prophet had said to him. He

accepted their declaration that they were not in league with him, and then

gave them an exact account of all that had occurred. He left it for them to

determine what, under the circumstances, they would do.


13 “Then they hasted, and took every man his garment, and put it under

him on the top of the stairs,” -  Kings were honored by the spreading of

garments in their way, that their feet might not touch the dusty ground (Matthew

20:8). The captains of the host, without hesitation, acclaimed Jehu king on the

strength of the prophetical announcement, made his cause their own, and joined

in his rebellion. It is reasonably conjectured that a deep dissatisfaction with Joram

must have prevailed in the army, though whether the dissatisfaction arose from

the idolatry of the house of Ahab, or from Joram’s withdrawal from the war, may

be doubted, Jehu, on the ether hand, was evidently highly esteemed. The captains

threw themselves with ardor into his cause, and extemporized a sort of

enthronement. As often in an Oriental house, an external staircase led from the

court to the upper story or to the roof. This they carpeted with their begeds,

or outer cloaks, and, seating him on the top stair, saluted him as actual king.

Apparently, the topmost stair is meant -  and blew with trumpets,” - This

was a recognized part of the ceremonial of a coronation (see II Samuel 15:10;

I Kings 1:39; ch. 11:14) – “saying, Jehu is king.”


14  So Jehu the son of Jehoshaphat the son of Nimshi conspired against

Joram.”  It is not meant that there was a secret conspiracy previous to the

prophet’s coming, but that, by the open acts which followed on his coming, Jehu

and the captains were guilty of a “conspiracy.” (Now Joram had kept Ra-moth-

Gilead,” - rather, now Joram was keeping Ramoth-Gilead. Joram, in his

capacity of chief ruler, was keeping, i.e. defending, Ramoth-Gilead against the

Syrians with the bulk of his forces – “he and all Israel, because of Hazael

King of Syria.” Hazael wished to win the city back, and would have done

so, had it not been stoutly defended. The writer speaks of Joram as the defender,

though he was absent, because the defense was made under his orders. Then, to

prevent misunderstanding, he repeats what he had already said in ch. 8:29 with

respect to Joram’s wounds, and his retirement to Jezreel to be healed of them.

15  But King Joram was returned to be healed in Jezreel of the wounds

which the Syrians had given him, when he fought with Hazael King of

Syria.)  And Jehu said, If it be your minds,  -  As soon as he is proclaimed

king, Jehu addresses himself to the captains, and proposes a policy. He does not

venture to assume a tone of authority, or of imperative command, since he is still

but a pretender, and not “established in the kingdom.” “If it be your minds,” he

says; i.e. “If you agree with me, and have nothing to urge against my proposal.

then let none go forth nor escape out of the city”   literally, let no

escaper go forth from the city — equivalent to let no one quit the city —

to go to tell it in Jezreel.”  This is the important point. Secrecy was absolutely

essential. If the revolt had got wind — and a single messenger might have carried

the news — the whole attempt might have failed, or only have succeeded after a

long and bloody civil war. All Jehu’s efforts were bent on keeping his revolt secret

until he himself announced it to the astonished king (v. 22).


16  So Jehu rode in a chariot, and went to Jezreel; for Joram lay there.”

We must understand that the captains came into Jehu’s views, acknowledged the

necessity of secrecy, and took precautions against the departure of any one,

openly or secretly, from the city. Jehu, with a moderate troop or company

(h[,p]vi), sets out, perhaps on the very day of his enthronement, and hastens

with all speed to Jezreel, bent on arriving there before any suspicion has arisen

of revolt or rebellion. His great object was to surprise Joram, and to kill or

capture him before he could take any steps to organize a defense. Probably

the force which accompanied him was wholly a chariot force. “And Ahaziah

King of Judah was come down to see Joram.”  Ahaziah, it must be

remembered, was Joram’s nephew, as well as his ally in the war against Syria.

It was natural that he should visit his uncle when he was wounded, even if the

wounds were not very serious.


17  And there stood a watchman on the tower in Jezreel,” - The

watchtower on the southeast, towards Ramoth-Gilead, is intended. There were

probably others in other directions; but the writer is not concerned with them. Each

watchtower had its one watchman, who gave warning if anything unusual caught his

attention“and he spied the company of Jehu as he came. Shiphah is

generally “abundance,” “multitude” (Isaiah 60:6), but seems here to designate a

band ‘ or “company” of moderate size. It is a somewhat rare word -  and said,

I see a company.”  The watchman gave notice to those whose business it was to

inform the king, that a band or company of men was approaching the city.  “And

Joram said, Take an horseman, and send to meet them, and let him say,

Is it peace?”  Joram apprehended no danger. If the “company” had been a

band of Syrians, or other enemies, coming in hostile fashion, the watchman would

 have worded his warning differently. The king probably concluded that he was

about to receive tidings from the seat of war, and meant to ask, “Is the news

 good or bad — peaceful or the contrary?” No blame attaches to him for not

taking alarm at once.


18  So there went one on horseback to meet him, and said, Thus saith the

king, Is it peace? And Jehu said, What hast thou to do with peace! Turn

thee behind me.” Jehu chooses to accept the messenger’s words as if they were

his own, and not those of the king. “What does it matter to such a one as thee, a

mere common man, whether my tidings are peaceful or the contrary? I shall not

tell thee my errand.  Turn and follow in my train.” The messenger had no choice

but to obey.  An attempt at flight would have led to his being seized or slain.

“And the watchman told, saying, The messenger came to them, but he

cometh not again.”  The watchman evidently thought his not returning suspicious,

and reported it at once. Joram should now have taken alarm, but he did not. He

appears to have had no notion that any danger could be approaching.


19  Then he sent out a second on horseback,” -  Persistency in a course

shown by experience to be futile was characteristic of the sons of Ahab and

Jezebel (compare the conduct of Ahaziah, as described in ch. 1:9, 11, 13) –

which came to them, and said, Thus saith the king, Is it peace?” Exactly

the same inquiry as before, and no doubt in the same sense. Jehu, addressed with

the same words thinks it sufficient to give the same answer. His object is to lose

no time, but to reach the king as quickly as possible. “And Jehu answered,

What hast thou to do with peace? turn thee behind me.”


20  And the watchman told, saying, He came even unto them, and cometh

not again:” -  A still stranger circumstance, and one still more suspicious. The

second messenger could only have been sent out because the king disapproved the

detention of the first. Whoever, therefore, had detained the second messenger

must be consciously acting in opposition to the wishes of the king -  “and the

driving is like the driving of Jehu the son of Nimsh;” -  It is not meant that

Jehu was driving his own chariot (which great men never did, I Kings 22:34), and

drove in a furious manner, but that the “company” was being urged forward at

an unusual pace, in a reckless and hot-headed way. The watchman conjectured,

therefore, that Jehu must be leading them, since he had a character for impetuosity.

for he driveth furiously.” -  or, madly — “ like a madman.”


21  And Joram said, Make ready — rather, harness; literally, attach — i.e.

attach the horses to the chariot — and his chariot was made ready — literally,

and one attached, or harnessed, his chariot — and Joram King of Israel and

Ahaziah King of Judah went out, each in his chariot,” -  The uncle and the

nephew went out together, still, as it would seem, unapprehensive of any danger,

though the circumstances were certainly such as might well have aroused suspicion.

Joram was probably anxious to know the reasons which had induced the captain

of his host to quit his post at Ramoth-Gilead. Ahaziah probably accompanied him

out of politeness, though he too may have been curious to learn the news. If any

disaster had overtaken the army of Israel, the safety of Judah might also be

endangered“and they went out against Jehu — rather, to meet Jehu –

and met him in the portion of Naboth the Jezreelite.”  Humanly speaking,

this was accidental. The “portion of Naboth,” or his plot of ground, lay outside

the southeastern gate of the city, at no great distance from the walls; and it

happened that Joram and Jehu met within its limits. Had the king started a little

sooner, or had Jehu made less haste, the meeting would have taken place further

 from the town, and outside the “portion of Naboth.” But Divine providence so

ordered matters that vengeance for the sin of Ahab was exacted upon the

very scene of his guilt, and a prophecy made, probably by Elisha, years

previously, and treasured up in the memory of Jehu (v. 26), was fulfilled

to the letter.


22  And it came to pass, when Joram saw Jehu, that he said, Is it peace,

Jehu?”  Still the same question is asked; but we cannot be sure that it is asked in

exactly the same sense. Something in the aspect of Jehu, and in his furious haste,

may by this time have alarmed the king. Or possibly he maybe merely repeating

the question put through his messengers, and still unanswered, Is all well with the

army or no? Has there been any disaster?” Jehu, at any rate, chooses to understand

his vague phrase in the former sense, as if he had asked, “Is it peace between

thee and me?” and answers in the negative – “And he answered, What peace,

so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so

many? literally, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and those

many witchcrafts of hers continue. By whoredoms are meant idolatries,

as so frequently in Scripture (Leviticus 19:29; 20:5; Jeremiah 3:2, 9; Ezekiel

16:17; 20:30; 23:11; Hosea 2:2; 4:12; 5:4; Nahum 3:4); by “witchcrafts”

all those magical practices which were so common at the time in Egypt, Assyria,

and Babylonia, and no doubt also in Phoenicia, and which were so strictly

forbidden by the Mosaic Law (Exodus 22:18; Deuteronomy 18:10).  Besides the

Baal-worship, Jezebel had introduced these unhallowed practices into the

kingdom of Israel. Jehu reproaches Joram with allowing them, and declares that

there can be no peace between him and his master under ouch circumstances.

Having gained his object and got within bowshot of the unsuspecting monarch,

he throws off the mask and declares uncompromising hostility. “No man could

use such terms of the queenmother who was willing any longer to be a subject.”


The will of God was to be done in this matter.  To Elisha was entrusted the

details (vs. 1-13).  This was a last resort or the nation must otherwise be

irretrievably injured.  In Jehu’s case a family was on the throne which had

introduced a licentious worship, had fostered it, and had persecuted the older

and purer religion, which, if it had not succeeded in taking so firm a hold upon

the people as to bind them to purity and virtue, at any rate had not been itself a

deeply corrupting influence. The mischief had spread so far that it was time to

try the last and severest measures, or to give up the contest entirely. The indictment

was made out against the ruling house of corrupting the national honor, and

undermining the national existence, of depriving the nation of a religion whose

spirit was pure and elevating, and giving it one whose spirit was corrupting and

licentious. In the case of the Maccabees, a foreign power, dominant over the

country by right of conquest, had formed the design of completely sweeping away

the Jewish religion and substituting for it the Greek, or rather the Syrian, polytheism

and idolatry. The crisis was even more terrible than that in Jehu’s time, the danger

more pressing and greater. In both these cases the nation seems to have waited with

the utmost patience, until there was no other remedy. Either a convulsion had

to be faced, or the national religion, the national morality, and the national

self-respect, would have been swept away. The nation in each case preferred

revolution to submission; and the sympathies of the sacred writers evidently go with

them in their choice.


Desperate diseases require desperate remedies. If Elisha and Jehu had waited

with folded hands for Joram and Jezebel to work out their wicked will, the Baal-

worship would have been riveted upon the northern, perhaps even upon the

southern, kingdom. If the Maccabee family had submitted to the agents of

Antiochus Ephiphanes, and failed to raise the standard of revolt, Judaism

would have been merged in heathenism, and have perished from the earth.

It may be added that if, in England, no resistance had been offered to James II.,

but his commands had been submitted to and carried out, then Great Britain

would have been recovered to the Roman obedience, and the witness to a purer

 Christianity than that of Rome, which has been held up to the world by the English

Church during the last two centuries, (Now four centuries – CY – 2011) - would

have been extinguished and crushed, with what loss to the nation, to Europe, and

to the world generally, it is impossible to estimate.  (Is this not true in America today

where Secular Progressives have tried to eradicate or neuter Fundamental

Christianity?  Dear Reader, What is your answer and whose side are you

on?  Jesus said “He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth

not with me scattereth abroad.” [Matthew 12:30] – as I write this – 7:38 pm –

January 25, 2011, there is a program on television on the ID channel which is

presenting a very negative congregation of Christians {my wife is watching it

as I work} – What is the purpose of this? Is it to discourage the general public

towards becoming a Christian?  Why is not a faithful and true  congregation of

Christians presented by this secular channel?  To me it is an example of someone

scattering, not only the so called Christians but the powers that be in the television

world, doing their part also – and thus history is repeating itself as in the days

of Ahab, Jezebel, Elisha and Jehu!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -  CY – 2011)



                        Murder of Jehoram by Jehu (vs. 23-26)


23  And Joram turned his hands, and fled,” -  Joram made his charioteer turn

the chariot suddenly round, and fled by the way by which he had come. “Turning

the hands” is turning the chariot round by means of the hands; and Joram is said to

have done that which he caused to be done - “and said to Ahaziah, There is

treachery, O Ahaziah.”   Mirmah is “deceit” or “fraud” of any kind, and here

is not ill rendered by “treachery.”  Jehu’s conduct was not justified by the mission

given him (vs. 6-10), which certainly did not authorize him to commit a treacherous



24  And Jehu drew a bow with his full strength,” - This meaning is scarcely

contained in the Hebrew, which merely says that Jehu “filled his hand with his

bow,” that is to say, took his bow into his hands for the purpose of using it -  

and smote Jehoram between his arms; i.e. directed an arrow against

Jehoram with so true an aim, that it struck him in the middle of the back

between his shoulders – “and the arrow went out at his heart,” - This

was quite possible, for the heart lies towards the center of the chest, not

wholly on the left side. It is not necessary to suppose an oblique wound -

and he sank down in his chariot.”  Jehoram fell into the “well,” or

body, of the chariot, and there lay, the chariot being brought to a stand.


25  Then said Jehu to Bidkar his captain,” - literally, his thirdsman; -

his aide-de-camp,” probably one of those who was in his chariot with him —

Take up, and cast him in the portion of the field of Naboth the Jezreelite:”

“Take up the body,” i.e. “and cast it into the plot of ground which once belonged

to Naboth the Jezreelite, and was forfeited to the crown at his death (I Kings 21:15),

and taken possession of by Ahab” (Ibid. v.16). The reason for the order follows –

for remember how that, when I and thou rode together after Ahab his

father, the Lord laid this burden upon him.”  The Hebrew text is rkz, not

rkza “Remember” (imperative mood) is the correct translation. Jehu recalls his

captain’s recollection to an occurrence which was deeply impressed upon his

own. “When thou and I rode together after Ahab” probably means “when we

two stood behind Ahab in his chariot.” The Assyrian sculptures usually represent

the monarch as attended by two body-guards, who ride in the same chariot with

him, standing up behind him, and often interposing their shields to protect his

person. In this near proximity Jehu and Bidkar would hear any speech which

was addressed to Ahab. By a “burden” is meant a sentence of punishment

(compare Isaiah 13:1; 15:1; 17:1; Nahum 1:1).



26 “Surely I have seen yesterday the blood of Naboth,” - (compare I Kings

21:19, where the same idea of retribution is expressed, though in different words).

Jehu, after the lapse of fourteen or fifteen years, naturally had forgotten the exact

words used -  “and the blood of his sons,” - The execution of Naboth’s sons

had not been mentioned previously; but, under the rude jurisprudence of the age

(ch.14:6), sons were usually slain with their fathers. And, unless they had been

removed, Ahab could not have inherited the vineyard – saith the Lord; and I

will requite thee in this plat, saith the Lord.”  This was the gist of the

prophecy, which ran as follows: “In the place where dogs licked the blood of

Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine.”  “Now therefore take and

cast him into the plat of ground, according to the word of the Lord.”  The

evil prophesied against Ahab had been formally and expressly deferred to his

son’s days on Ahab’s repentance (I Kings 21:29).



                                    Murder of Ahaziah (vs. 27-29)


27  But when Ahaziah the king of Judah saw this, he fled by the way of

the garden house.”  As soon as Ahaziah saw Jehu shoot his arrow, he too took

to flight; not, however, in the same direction as Joram, but southwards, towards

his own land. If “garden house” is the right translation of ˆG"h" tybe, we can say

no more than that it was probably one of the lodges of the royal demesne, which

lay south-east and south of Jezreel, whereof nothing more is known. But it is quite

possible that we ought to translate, with the LXX., “by the way of Beth-Gan” —

e]fugen oJdo<n Baiq-ga>n. In this case “Beth-Gan” would be a village or town,

probably identical with En-gannim, which lay at the foot of the hills bounding the

Plain of Esdraelon, nearly due south of Jezreel (Zerin), and which is now known

as Jenin (see the Map of Western Palestine, by Mr. Trelawney Saunders,

compiled from the surveys of the Palestine Exploration Fund, where Ahaziah’s

flight is well traced – “And Jehu followed after him; and said, Smite him

also in the chariot.” -  rather, in his chariot, not in that of Jehoram, since the

two kings rode respectively in their own chariots (v. 21). It was a bold step in

a pretender not yet settled upon the throne to provoke the hostility of a

neighboring country by murdering its monarch; but Jehu probably thought he

had more to fear from Ahaziah himself, who had been on such close terms of

friendship with Jehoram, than from any probable successors. He, therefore,

finding him in his power, pursued after him and slew him. From a religious point

of view he could justify the act; since the commission given to him (v. 7) was to

smite all the house of Ahab, and Ahaziah was Ahab’s grandson. And they

did so at the going up to Gur, which is by Ibleam. The “ascent of Gur,”

rWgAhle[}m", was probably the rising ground between the southern edge of

the Plain of Esdraslon and the place known as” Ibleam,” or “Bileam

(I Chronicles 6:70), which is reasonably identified with the modern Bir-el-

Belameh, two miles south of Jenin. Here the steep ascent necessarily delayed

the chariot, and Ahaziah’s pursuers gained upon him, approached him, and

wounded him. “And he fled to Megiddo,” -  Wounded at the ascent

of Gur, and despairing of making his way through the rough mountainous

country which lay between him and Jerusalem, Ahaziah suddenly changed

his route, perhaps thereby baffling his pursuers, and, skirting the hills, had

himself conveyed to Megiddo (Ledjun), where he died, either of his

wounds, or through some fresh violence on the part of Jehu (II  Chronicles

22:8-9). The reconciliation of  that passage with the present passage is

difficult, but not wholly impossible. Perhaps the Chronicler means by “Samaria

the kingdom, not the town.


28  And his servants carried him in a chariot to Jerusalem,” - No

king of the house of David had as yet been buried elsewhere than in the

rock-hewn sepulcher which David had constructed for himself and family

at Jerusalem. As soon, therefore, as Ahaziah was dead, his attendants

conveyed his dead body in a chariot to the Judaean capital. Jehu did not

oppose, having no quarrel with the dead – “and buried him in his

sepulcher” -  i.e. in the particular excavation, or loculus, which he had

prepared for himself. Jewish, like Egyptian, kings seem to have made it

their business to see to the construction of their tomb as soon as they

mounted the throne. Thus Ahaziah, though he had reigned but a year

(ch.8:26), had already prepared, himself, a sepulcher. His “servants”

buried him in it – “with his fathers in the city of David.  (compare

ch. 8:24; I Kings 11:43; 14:31; 15:8, 24; 22:50).


29  And in the eleventh year of Joram the son of Ahab began Ahaziah

to reign over Judah.”  In ch. 8:25 the accession of Ahaziah is placed in Joram’s

twelfth, instead of his eleventh, year. The slight discrepancy is sufficiently explained

by the double reckoning of a king’s “first year,” familiar to chronologists, either:


  • from the date of the accession to the end of the current civil year; or
  • from the date of the accession to the same day in the ensuing year.



                                    Death of Jezebel (vs. 30-37)


30  And when Jehu was come to Jezreel,” - Some commentators suppose

that Jehu did not engage personally in the pursuit of Ahaziah, but, leaving that to a

portion of his retinue, pushed on with all haste to Jezreel, where Jezebel was,

the originator of all the mischief.” But it is certainly more natural to understand

(with Josephus) that Jehu himself pursued. The pursuit to Ibleam, where Ahaziah

was mortally wounded, and the return to Jezreel, need not have occupied more than

about three hours – “Jezebel heard of it;” -  She would naturally be the first to

hear. On the death of her son, which must have been plainly seen from the walls

of Jezreel, she become practically the chief authority in the place, and indeed in the

kingdom. Jehoram’s sons were probably minors – “and she painted her face,”

- literally, and she put her eyes in antimony; i.e. she adorned her eyes with the

dark dye which has always been fashionable in the East, and which is still used

at the present day. The dye is spread both on the upper and the lower eyelids.

It at once increases the apparent size of the eye, and gives it unnatural brilliancy.

The Oriental nations, Babylonians, Assyrians, Medes, Persians, were acquainted

with the practice from very early times; and it is not surprising that it was known

to Jezebel. What was her exact object in applying it is more doubtful. The older

commentators suppose that she intended to “summon up all her seductive

fascinations in order to tempt and conquer Jehu;” but more recent writers argue

that her probable age renders this incredible, since she had already a grandson

who was twenty-three years of age (ch. 8:26), and must therefore have been

herself at least fifty. But, if we remember that Cleopatra was forty when she held

Antony as her slave and hoped to captivate Augustus, it would seem to be not

altogether beyond the bounds of possibility that a Phoenician princess of fifty

may have thought that, by the use of art, she might reader herself a captivating

personage. There is, at any rate no evidence that “putting the eyes in antimony”

was an ordinary or a fitting preparation for meeting death in a way worthy of a

queen. Jezebel, trusting in the charms and the fascination which had been so

potent over Ahab, may have imagined that she had still enough beauty left to

capture Jehu, provided she increased her natural attractions by a careful use

of all the resources of art -  “and tired her head,” -  Phoenician

statues of goddesses have their hair arranged in long pendent curls, and

bear on their heads a small conical cap with a ribbon wreathed round the

base. The artists probably had queens and princesses as their models. There

is no evidence that false hair was worn in Phoenicia, either by men or

women“and looked out at a window.”  Windows, sometimes open,

sometimes latticed, were common in Oriental houses from the earliest

times. They mostly looked into the court round which a house was

commonly built; but some few were in the external wall of the building; and

through these new arrivals might be reconnoitered. Jezebel “looked out,”

partly to see, but perhaps still more to be seen.


31  And as Jehu entered in at the gate, she said, Had Zimri peace, who

slew his master?”  So defiant an utterance is quite incompatible within intention

to captivate and conciliate. Probably, therefore, we should understand the queen

either as saying affirmatively, “Peace to thee, Zimri!” (or, “Hail, Zimri!”) “slayer

of thy lord,” or else as asking, “Is it peace” (i.e. “Is it peace now between thee

and me?”), Zimri, slayer of thy lord?” In either case, Zimri is an honorific

appellation, recalling the fact of another Israelite general, who had revolted, slain

his master, and reigned as king.


32  And he lifted up his face to the window, and said, Who is on my side?

Who?”  Whatever Jezebel’s intention, Jehu yielded not a jot; he was deaf to her

flatteries, blind to her seductions. He had made up his mind for “war to the knife”

before he embarked upon his enterprise, and the feeble attempts of a queen

whose part was played out, whose age he knew, and whom he no doubt regarded

as an old woman, had no power on him.  Instead of responding to her

blandishments, he took a stern and hard line.  He would not see her privately. He

summoned to his aid the menials of the palace — the eunuchs -those on whom

beauty has least influence. “Who is on my side? who?” he exclaimed (literally,

Who is with me? who?”); thus calling on the court servants to desert their

masters, the guards to turn their swords against their employers, the menials to

consummate an intra-palatial revolution. We cannot deny to Jehu the credit of

vigor, promptness, audacity, the talent to seize on the opportunity of the moment,

and to make the most of it; but he must ever present himself to us as the

rough soldier, with no courtesy, with no chivalry, bent on accomplishing

his own ends, and shrinking from no deed of blood, no precedent pessimi

exempli, if thereby his ends might be brought about. “And there looked out

to him two or three eunuchs.”  Eunuchs had become an integral part both

of the Jewish and of the Israelite courts from the time of David (I Chronicles 28:1).

They are an institution which almost necessarily accompanies polygamy; and they

had long held high office in. Egypt, in Babylon, and in Assyria. A position outside

nature, at variance with all men’s natural feelings and aspirations, of necessity

depraves the character, weakens the moral principle, and ends by debasing the

class. In Oriental history, the lowest, vilest part is always played by the eunuchs

of the palace, who are ever ready to take part in any intrigues, in any conspiracies,

and who seem to be almost wholly devoid of the ordinary feelings of humanity.

The eunuchs who “looked out” to Jehu were probably the chief eunuchs of  the

palace, who had authority over the others, and indeed over the court officials



33  And he said, Throw her down.”  A splendid example of the wicked man’s

prompt and bold and unscrupulous decision. A queen, a queen-mother, always more

tenderly regarded than an ordinary queen-regnant, a princess in her own right (see

v. 34), daughter of a neighboring and powerful potentate, settled in her kingdom

for over thirty years, the most powerful person in the state during that entire period,

backed up by the numerous and dominant party of her co-religionists, she is to

Jehu nothing but a wicked woman who is in his way; she inspires him with no awe,

she does not even touch him with any feeling of respect. “Throw her down.”

History presents no parallel to such an indignity. Kings and queens had been, time

after time, removed by violence; their lives had been taken; they had been

transplanted to another sphere of being. But the open casting forth from a window

of a crowned head by the menials of the court, at the command of a usurper, was

a new thing, unprecedented, unparalleled. It must have been a shock to all

established notions of propriety. In commanding it Jehu showed his superiority to

existing prejudice, his utter fearlessness, and his willingness to create a new

precedent, which might seriously shake the monarchical principle. “So they

threw her down:” -  There appears to have been no hesitation. The boldness

of Jehu communicated itself to those whom he addressed; and the eunuchs

violently seized the person of the queen, and precipitated her from the

window to the ground below. She fell on the road by which the palace was

approached, and lay there bleeding and helpless – “and some of her blood

was sprinkled on the wall,” -  As she fell, some portion of her body struck

against the wall of the palace, and left splashes of blood upon it. There

were probably some projections from the wall between the window and the

ground“and on the horses:” -  As her body struck the projections, a bloody

shower spurted from it, which fell in part upon the horses that drew Jehu’s

chariot“and he trode her underfoot.” Jehu had his chariot driven over the

prostrate corpse, so that the hoofs of his horses, and perhaps his own person,

were sprinkled with the royal blood


34   “And when he was come in i.e. when Jehu had established himself in the

royal palace -  “he did eat and drink, and said,” -  His first care was to refresh

himself — to order a banquet to be served, and to satisfy his appetite with food

and drink. Not till afterwards did he bethink himself of the bloody corpse of his

late queen and mistress, lying on the cold ground uncared for and untended,

exposed to scorn and ignominy. When the thought occurred to him, it brought

about a certain amount of relenting. Go, see now this cursed woman,” –

 He calls Jezebel, “a cursed woman,” not inappropriately. She had brought a

curse on her husband, on her sons, and on her grandsons; she had been the

evil genius of two countries, Israel and Judah; she had been the prime mover

in a bloody persecution of the worshippers of Jehovah; and was the true

original source of the present revolution, which was to result in the deaths of so

many others – “and bury her: for she is a king’s daughter.” As queenmother,

Jehu, it seems, would not have regarded Jezebel as entitled to burial; but as

daughter of Eth-Baal, King of the Zidonians (I Kings 16:31), and so a princess

born, he allowed her claim. Perhaps he feared lest further insult to the corpse

might provoke the resentment of the Phoenician monarch, and draw down upon

him that prince’s hostility.


35  And they went to bury her: but they found no more of her than the

skull, and the feet, and the palms of her hands.” The harder parts of the

human frame ; perhaps also the less palatable, since cannibals say that the palm

of the human hand is excessively bitter. Dogs in Oriental countries are ever

prowling about, especially in the vicinity of towns, on the lookout for food, and

will eat flesh or offal of any kind. They have been called “the scavengers of the

East,” and the phrase well describes them.  Wild dogs of Jezreel prowling about

the mounds where the offal is cast outside the gates of the town by the inhabitants.”


36  Wherefore they came again, and told him.”  The men whom

he had sent to bury Jezebel returned, and told the king what they had

found. The narrative woke another chord of memory which had hitherto

slept. “And he said, This is the word of the Lord, which he spake by his

servant Elijah the Tishbite,” - The prophecy referred to is doubtless that

recorded in I Kings 21:23. It is, however, here expanded, either because Jehu’s

recollection was not exact, or because the record in I Kings is abbreviated. The

great point of the prophecy is common to both records, viz. that the dogs should

eat Jezebel at Jezreel, on the scene of her iniquities – “saying, In the portion

of Jezreel shall dogs eat the flesh of Jezebel:” -  It is not quite clear what is

meant by the portion (ql;je) of Jezreel. Probably there is no allusion to the “portion”

(hq;l]j,) of Naboth (vs. 25-26). Rather the same is meant as by lje in I Kings

21:23, viz. the cultivated space or “portion” of land outside the wall of the town.

Retribution should overtake her near the  scene of her latest crime - By

this the just judgment of God  would be made the more  conspicuous. Him

that dieth of Ahab in the  city the dogs shall eat; and  him that dieth in the

field shall the fowls of the air eat. But there was none  like unto Ahab,

which did sell himself to  work wickedness in the sight of  the LORD,

whom Jezebel his wife stirred  up.” - incited, instigated and urged  to sin).

(Ibid. vs. 23-25)


37  And the carcass of Jezebel shall be as dung upon the face of the

field” -  (compare Psalm 83:10; Jeremiah 9:22; 16:4; Zephaniah 1:17).

The expression was proverbial – “in the portion of Jezreel (see the comment

on the preceding verse); so that they shall not say, This is Jezebel.”  The

fragments of the body were so scattered that there could be no collective tomb,

no place whereat admirers could congregate and say, “Here lies the great queen

 here lies Jezebel.” To rest in no tomb was viewed as a shame and a disgrace.




                        ADDITIONAL NOTES (vs. 25-37)




All throughout history evil-disposed men have persisted in wicked and cruel conduct,

just as if it was not only possible, but probable, that retribution would be escaped.

The Bible warns “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed

speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.”

(Ecclesiastes 8:11)  - [ OH, THE WONDERS OF TECHNOLOGY – I WOULD



FOUND ON YOU TUBE – It is said that Dr. Lee preached this sermon over

1,000 times and is one of the most famous sermons of all time. – CY – 2011]


The lesson thus needs continually to be impressed on men, that, sooner or later,

retribution must come that there is no escape from it,  Retribution must




            Disbelief in retribution is essentially atheistic. It implies either that there is

            no God, or that God is without one or more of those attributes which make

            Him God. A just God must have the will to punish; an omnipotent God

            must have the power to punish. If a so-called God did not punish sin, he

            must be either not just, or not omnipotent, or not either; but then He would

            not be God. A God without vengeance, i.e. who cannot and will not punish,

            is no God, but a divinity fashioned from one’s thoughts. GOD’S

            TESTIMONY IS THIS:  “These things hast thou done, and I kept

            silence; thou thoughest that I was altogether such a one as thyself:

            but I will reprove thee, and set them in order before thine eyes.”

            (Psalm 50:21)  “The Day of the Lord WILL COME  - (II Peter 3:10)



            GOD IS TRUE. God has said to each man, through his conscience, that he

            will punish sin. Remorse and regret, the dissatisfaction of a guilty conscience,

            are such punishment begun. In His Word God has expressly declared

            that He “will reward every man according to his works” (Psalm 62:12;

            Proverbs 24:12; Matthew 16:7; Romans 2:6; II Timothy 4:14); that He

            will by no means clear the guilty” (Exodus 34:7); that “indignation

             and wrath, tribulation and anguish, shall be on every soul of man

             that doeth evil” (Romans 2:8-9). Nothing is more plainly taught in the

            whole of Scripture, from the beginning to the end, than requital,

            retribution, condign punishment. Ahab’s case is singular, not in the

            general principle, but only in the exact correspondence between

            the sin and its punishment. Such correspondence is rare and abnormal; but

            it does occur from time to time, and, when it occurs, there is something

            about it that is most impressive and striking. When the author of

            proscription, Marius, is himself proscribed; when the dethroner of kings,

            Napoleon L, is himself dethroned; when the inventor of conspiracies, Titus

            Oates, falls a victim to an invented conspiracy; when Robespierre and

            Danton, who have ruled by the guillotine, perish by the guillotine; —

            poetic justice” as it has been called, is satisfied, and the world at large is

            forced to recognize and acknowledge that requital has taken place

            in a signal way.




            ABROGATION OF THE SENTENCE. Infinite time is at the disposal

            of the Almighty. Men are impatient, and, if retribution does not overtake

            the sinner speedily, are apt to conclude that it will never overtake him. But

            with the Almighty “one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand

            years as one day” (II Peter 3:8).  - The important thing to be borne in

            mind is the end; and the end will not be reached till “the judgment is set,

             and the books are opened” (Daniel 7:10), and men are “judged out

            of those things which are written in the books, according to their

             works (Revelation 20:12). Punishment may be long in coming — the

            ungodly may continue during their whole lifetime in prosperity. But there

            remains a future.






                                    The Fate of Jezebel (vs. 30-37


  • Her Daring Defiance. When Jehoram had been slain, the end of Jezebel,

            the prime mover and presiding spirit in all the wickedness that had been

            wrought in Israel, could not be far distant. Jezebel perfectly apprehended

            this herself, for, on hearing that Jehu had come to Jezreel, she prepared to

            give him a defiant reception. While one loathes the character of the

            woman, it is impossible not to admire the boldness and spirit with which

            she faces the inevitable. Her proud, imperious nature comes out in her last

            actions. She paints her eyelids with antimony, tires her head, and adorns

            her person, as if she was preparing for some festal celebration. Then she

            plants herself at the window, and, when Jehu appears, assails him with

            bitter taunting words. “Is it peace, thou Zimri, thy master’s murderer?”

            she mockingly asked. What a power for evil this woman had been in

            Israel!  What a power, with her strong intellect and will, she might have

            been for good!  (And dear reader, How is it with you and me?  How

            are we using our talents?  for evil?  for good? – As John Greenleaf

            Whittier said “Of all the words of tongue or pen, the saddest are

            these, what might have beenCY – 2011)


  • Her Ghastly End. If Jezebel thought, by this show of imperious defiance,

            to produce any effect on Jehu, perhaps to disarm him by sheer admiration

            of her boldness, she had mistaken the man. Jehu’s impetuous nature was

            not to be thus shaken from its purpose. He quickly brought the scene to a

            conclusion. “Who is on my side? who?” he cried, lifting up his eyes to the

            windows. Two or three eunuchs, no friends of Jezebel, and anxious only to

            please the new ruler, gave the needful sign. “Throw her down,” was the

            pitiless order; and in another instant the painted Jezebel was hurled from

            the palace window, and, dashed on the ground, was being trodden by the

            hoofs of the horses. Pitiless herself, she now met with no compassion. One

            who had shed much blood, and rejoiced in it, her own blood was now

            bespattered on the wall and on the horses. Jehu had no compunctions, but,

            fresh from the dreadful spectacle, entered the palace, and sat down to eat

            and drink. But the climax was yet to come. As if even he felt that,

            vengeance being now sated, some respect was due to one who had so long

            held sway in Israel, he bade his servants “Go, see now this cursed woman,

            and bury her: for,” he said, “she is a king’s daughter.” The servants went,

            but soon returned with a shocking tale. Attracted by the scent of blood, the

            prowling city dogs had found their way into the enclosure, and, short as the

            time had been, all that remained of haughty Jezebel was the skull, and feet,

            and palms of the hands, strewn about the court.


  • A Prophecy Fulfilled. Such was the dreadful end of this haughty,

            domineering, evil woman. Possibly even Jehu could not restrain a shudder

            when he heard of it. He had not thought of it before, but now he recalled

            the close of that awful prophecy of Elijah to Ahab, “The dogs shall eat

            Jezebel by the wall of Jezreel (I Kings 21:23), the terms of which had

            been repeated to him by Elisha’s messenger, (v. 10). That word of God

            had been fulfilled with ghastly literalness! Would that men would lay

            to heart the lesson, and believe that all God’s threatenings will be

            as certainly fulfilled!



"Excerpted text Copyright AGES Library, LLC. All rights reserved.

Materials are reproduced by permission."


This material can be found at:



If this exposition is helpful, please share with others.