You may subscribe yourself at the Ascension site here and receive notifications in your email, or just follow along on my blog. Bible in One Year Readings Index
Chapter 22: Another War with Aram
1 Kings 22:1-4 ~ The King of Judah visits King Ahab in Samaria
See 2 Chronicles 18:2-34 for the parallel passages to this chapter. Jehoshaphat of Judah was the son of King Asa and the great-great-great grandson of the David, king of the United Kingdom of Israel. He succeeded his father (good king Asa) as king of Judah in 870 BC; it was four years after Ahab became king of Israel. Ever since the division of the Kingdom of Israel in 930 BC, there had been intermittent fighting between the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the Southern Kingdom of Judah. For the first time since the division of the kingdoms, there was peace between the two kingdoms and an alliance was made that was sealed by a royal marriage: Ahab and Jezebel's daughter, Athaliah, married Jehoshaphat's son, Jehoram. It was a marriage that was to have dire consequences for the Kingdom of Judah.
The peace that was established with the Aramaeans of Damascus, after the army of the Northern Kingdom beat the Aramaeans at Aphek (1 Kng 20:26-34) and after Ahab released Ben-Hadad II, lasted three years. In the third year, in c. 853 BC, Jehoshaphat of Judah paid a visit to King Ahab in Samaria, the capital of the Northern Kingdom.
Jehoshaphat "came down" to Ahab in verse 2 because he came from the elevation of Jerusalem (c. 2400 feet above sea level) and then traveled north to Samaria. During that visit, King Ahab suggested a military alliance to take back the lands confiscated by the Aramaeans on the east side of the Jordan River, principally Ramoth-Gilead in the Transjordan, and the king of Judah agreed. It is evidently an alliance that will serve both kingdoms by retrieving lost territory and in weakening a common enemy.
1 Kings 22:5-12 ~ False prophets predict success
It was a common practice for kings to inquire of their prophets concerning the future, especially concerning military ventures (e.g., 2 Sam 2:1-2). Notice that the number of Ahab's court prophets is the same number as that given for the prophets of Baal that Elijah mentioned in 1 Kings 18:19. These court prophets are men who claim a prophetic gift in general (consulting many gods). It is unlikely that they were from among the 100 men of the brotherhood of prophets of Yahweh rescued by Obadiah (1 Kng 18:4, 13), but it is probably one of the prophets of the brotherhood, like the prophet in 20:35-43, will figure later in the story (1 Kng 22:8, 13-28).
After the court prophets gave their prediction of success, the king of Judah must have been uncomfortable as to whether they really spoke for Yahweh and requested another prophet (verse 7). Ahab then suggested Micaiah, who he admitted he "hates" because the prophet never has any good news for him, but he sent a messenger to bring the prophet.(3)
Question: What was the Law concerning the test for a true prophet of Yahweh? Dt 13:1-6; 18:20-22.
Answer: The only true prophet is one who speaks the words of Yahweh. He is always 100% accurate because God is all knowing. If he claims to speak for Yahweh and speaks falsely, the penalty was death.
1 Kings 22:13-17 ~ The message of the prophet Micaiah
At the same time the events are taking place at the threshing floor, Ahab's messenger has arrived at the house of Micaiah. The king's messenger may be giving the prophet advice in verse 13 or it may be a threat that he had better be in agreement with the court prophets. Micaiah's reply is that he can only say what Yahweh tells him "the mark of a true prophet.
Question: Who are the sheep and who is their shepherd? What does the prophecy mean?
Answer: In his prophecy, the "sheep" are the men of the army of Israel and the missing "shepherd" is Ahab. Yahweh's command that they return to their homes is because the battle is lost and Ahab is dead.
Question: Is this the first prophecy of Ahab's death? See 1 Kng 20:38-43; 21:19-20.
Answer: This is the third prophecy of his death. The first was made by one of the members of the brotherhood of prophets after Ahab released Ben-Hadad II from Yahweh's curse of destruction, and the second prophecy was delivered by Elijah after Naboth's murder.
1 Kings 22:18-23 ~ The second part of the prophecy
Ahab asked Jehoshaphat a rhetorical question to which he did not respond (verse 18), but his question shows that he has understood the prophecy as a prediction of the loss of the battle and a prophecy of his death.
In verses 19-22 the prophet describes his vision of the heavenly court. In the vision, God has made His judgment of Ahab known and asks for a volunteer to help to bring it about by encouraging Ahab to initiate the war with Aram. An unnamed "spirit" offers to encourage the prophets to give a false prophecy of victory. Notice the comparison of the two Israelite kings on their thrones in the company of their courtiers and God on His throne in the heavenly court surrounded by a host of angels.
There are divided opinions on Micaiah's vision in 1 Kings 22:19-23:
- It is a true vision and this is the way God moves human events to bring about a desired result.
- In order to protect himself from openly accusing the court prophets of lying, he has fabricated this story to excuse their false message. They are not responsible because it was a spirit who lied to them.
- The spirit who volunteers to present the lie to the court prophets is Satan (the devil), the "father of lies" (Jn 8:44-45).
The scene is somewhat similar to the events that took place in the heavenly court in the Book of Job 1:6-12, although we do not know if the "spirit" is good or evil like the evil spirit of Satan in Job. In any event, the false prophets don't realize it, but they are also instruments of God who has already judged Ahab and decreed that he should die.
1 Kings 22:24-28 ~ The reaction of Micaiah's prophecy
The same prophet who made the iron horns (22:21) struck Micaiah and challenged the prophecy that is contrary to his own (probably just as Micaiah feared). King Ahab ordered for Micaiah to be imprisoned and fed a merger diet of bread and water. God's prophet, surrounded by four hundred false prophets, and the two kings and their courtiers, suffered both humiliation and physical abuse. It is the fate of all true prophets who are a Biblical "type" of Jesus Christ, God's supreme prophet, who will also suffer every kind of humiliation and abuse at His Passion.
Question: How does Micaiah defend his prophecy to Zedekiah?
Answer: The events themselves will prove or disprove the truthfulness of his prophecy and that he has spoken with the authority of God.
The Battle at Ramoth-Gilead
1 Kings 22:29-38 ~ Ahab's death at Ramoth-Gilead
Unfortunately the king of Judah was not impressed with Micaiah's prophecy of disaster and decided to go into battle against the Aramaeans with the king of Israel based on the prophecy for success by the four hundred court prophets.
Ahab was struck by the arrow in a small gap between the pieces of his scale armor. Realizing that he was wounded, Ahab commanded his chariot driver to retreat, but the battle was raging so fiercely that the driver couldn't turn the chariot around and withdraw. The driver or a third man in the chariot held Ahab up so the soldiers wouldn't realize he had been wounded and become discouraged (war chariots held two and three man teams). As the battle continued, Ahab bled to death.
When the blood was washed out of the floor of the chariot into the pool, the dogs licked up the blood in the water and the unclean cult prostitutes bathed in his blood. Dogs were unclean scavengers and the cult prostitutes were considered an abomination (Lev 18:22/19; Dt 23:18-19:17-18). These double indignities were God's judgment on Ahab in atonement for his sins. God forgave Ahab when he repented the murder of Naboth in 21:29, but forgiveness is one thing and atonement for those sins for which one has been forgiven is another matter altogether. God is merciful but He is also just (see 2 Sam 12:13-15).
1 Kings 22:39-40 ~ Summary statement of Ahab's reign
The year of Ahab's death is c. 853 BC. The story of Ahab ends with the same formula statement as the other kings of Israel in 1 Kings. The story of Ahab's son will continue in 2 Kings 8:25-29. Ahab's son Ahaziah was the son-in-law of King Jehoshaphat of Judah. The "ivory house" does not mean his palace was made of ivory but that it had costly ivory embellishments and furniture inlaid with ivory.
1 Kings 22:41-51 ~ The reign of Jehoshaphat in Judah (870-848)
The same formula summary of the reign of Jehoshaphat is given as for other Davidic kings except with the notice that, like his father Asa, he was a righteous king in God's eyes.
Question: What one failure is mentioned?
Answer: He did not abolish worship in the form of sacrifice and incense at the "high places."
This does not necessarily mean idol worship. Yahweh commanded that right worship could only be offered on His one, holy altar (Dt 12:1-14), and the people may have been erecting their own altars to Yahweh on hills and offering their own form of worship. It is another indication that right worship can only be offered at the Temple by Yahweh's ordained priesthood, and any other form of worship, even in the name of Yahweh, is illicit worship and forbidden.
1 Kings 22:52-54 ~ King Ahaziah of Israel (853-852)
Another formula summary is given for Ahaziah son of Ahab and Jezebel. He ruled for two years as the ancients counted with 853 counting as "year #1 and 852 as year #2. He is also compared to Jerobaom who first led Israel into the sin of idol worship. Ahaziah followed the sinful examples of his father and mother. His story will be continued in chapter 1 of 2 Kings in the third part of the Elijah cycle.
CHALLENGE: “The argument from contingency is flawed: (1) Everything could be fated, so nothing would be contingent; (2) we can explain how things are by their history, which could be infinite; (3) there could be multiple ultimate causes; (4) you could call the first, necessary cause something other than God; and (5) if everything needs a cause, then God also must have a cause.”
DEFENSE:
None of these objections overturn the contingency argument.
First, the argument from fate simply proposes a single, ultimate cause—fate itself—for contingent things. It doesn’t show they aren’t contingent. It is not necessary for a person to be standing the way it is necessary for a square to have four sides. People can stand or sit, but squares must have four sides. If a person is fated to stand, he could also be fated to sit, and his posture is contingent.
Second, history (and whether history might be infinite) is not part of this argument. We are asking why things are the way they are now, not what history preceded this.
Third, one could trace the chain of causes for each of the many contingent things up to higher causes, but these would not end in a multiplicity of ultimate explanations, for explanations converge as we go higher. An example is the four fundamental forces of physics (electromagnetism, the strong force, the weak force, and gravity), which explain the state of innumerable contingent physical things. An important goal of science is to find ways to unify these forces and any others that exist.
There cannot be a multiplicity of ultimate explanations. If one proposed a certain set of explanations as ultimate, then they would have to exist within some kind of framework that would allow them to relate to one another. Otherwise, they would not be able to interact to produce the contingent states of affairs we see. However, the framework would then be more fundamental than the proposed explanations, so they would not be ultimate.
Fourth, one can always reject the term “God,” but this argument shows that there is a First Cause that is a necessary Being. This does not prove the full Christian understanding of God, but it can be supplemented by other arguments.
Fifth, God would not need a cause because, per the argument, God is necessary rather than contingent.
Jimmy Akin, A Daily Defense: 365 Days (Plus One) to Becoming a Better Apologist
No comments:
Post a Comment