Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible
2 Kings 10:29-36
A Summary Of The Reign Of Jehu (841-814/13 BC) And Of His Failure To Respond To YHWH's Covenant (2 Kings 10:29).
While Jehu had certainly removed the worship of the Phoenician Baal (Baal Melqart) from the land, what he failed to do was carry the reforms even wider and also remove the abominations of Jeroboam the golden calves at Bethel and Dan. Thus he lost the opportunity of truly reforming Yahwism. Instead of a strict return to the laws and covenant of YHWH, he allowed the loose ways and ineffectual worship of a Yahwism intermingled with the worship of the local Baal. This served to demonstrate that his activities had not genuinely been carried out because of his real love for YHWH, but simply out of a politically motivated religious zeal.
Analysis.
a However from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, with which he made Israel to sin, Jehu did not depart from after them, to wit, the golden calves that were in Beth-el, and that were in Dan (2 Kings 10:29).
b And YHWH said to Jehu, “Because you have done well in executing what is right in my eyes, and have done to the house of Ahab according to all that was in my heart, your sons of the fourth generation will sit on the throne of Israel” (2 Kings 10:30).
c But Jehu took no heed to walk in the law of YHWH, the God of Israel, with all his heart. He did not depart from the sins of Jeroboam, with which he made Israel to sin (2 Kings 10:31).
b In those days YHWH began to cut parts off from Israel, and Hazael smote them in all the borders of Israel, from the Jordan eastward, all the land of Gilead, the Gadites, and the Reubenites, and the Manassites, from Aroer, which is by the valley of the Arnon, even Gilead and Bashan (2 Kings 10:32).
a Now the rest of the acts of Jehu, and all that he did, and all his might, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel? And Jehu slept with his fathers, and they buried him in Samaria. And Jehoahaz his son reigned instead of him. And the time that Jehu reigned over Israel in Samaria was twenty eight years (2 Kings 10:34).
Note that in ‘a' the behaviour of Jehu is described, and in the parallel we are referred for his other behaviour to the chronicles of the kings of Israel. In ‘b' his reward for what was good in what he did is described, and in the parallel his punishment for what he did that was wrong. Centrally in ‘c' we have the central verdict on his reign, that he did not walk in the Law of YHWH the God of Israel in that he continued to follow the ways of Jeroboam.
‘However from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, with which he made Israel to sin, Jehu did not depart from after them, to wit, the golden calves that were in Beth-el, and that were in Dan.'
The purge that Jehu had carried out had put him in a powerful position for thoroughgoing reform. The nation was behind him and at the same time in awe of him. It was ripe for change. But he stopped short of what to YHWH was the essential requirement for any king of Israel, that he destroy the golden calves at Bethel and Dan and return to true Yahwism, thereby indicating that his loyalty was not truly given to YHWH and His covenant.
Note how this is especially emphasised before the note of commendation. He was to be rewarded for what he had achieved, but with the recognition that he had failed in the main objective. It was thus not unqualified approval.
‘And YHWH said to Jehu, “Because you have done well in executing what is right in my eyes, and have done to the house of Ahab according to all that was in my heart, your sons of the fourth generation will sit on the throne of Israel.” '
Jehu was commended by YHWH for bringing his judgment on the house of Ahab, the task to which he had been called, but it will be noted that nothing is said about the further purges. They had not been a part of his remit. And his reward for what he had done was that his dynasty would last for four generations. But that was as gar as it went. There is a deliberate contrast here with the everlasting dynasty of David. Jehu's was strictly limited. He was not a man after God's own heart.
‘But Jehu took no heed to walk in the law of YHWH, the God of Israel, with all his heart. He did not depart from the sins of Jeroboam, with which he made Israel to sin.'
Where Jehu failed was in a willingness to follow wholeheartedly after YHWH. He failed to walk in the Law of YHWH, Israel's true God, with all his heart. He could have called on Elisha and with him worked out how Israel could be brought back to the true way, but instead he turned to the compromised way of Jeroboam. It was politically simpler, but religiously disastrous, for the way of Jeroboam was not the way of the Law of YHWH..
‘In those days YHWH began to cut parts off from Israel, and Hazael smote them in all the borders of Israel, from the Jordan eastward, all the land of Gilead, the Gadites, and the Reubenites, and the Manassites, from Aroer, which is by the valley of the Arnon, even Gilead and Bashan.'
The result was that YHWH brought grief on Israel with the result that (like Judah under Jehoram) it began to lose part of its kingdom. Hazael, the king of Aram, smote them by invading Transjordan and taking possession of all the land of Israel east of Jordan. This may have been his way of rebuking Jehu for submitting to the king of Assyria rather than entering into an alliance with Hazael against Assyria, who was able for a time to hold out against Assyria, or it may simply have been political opportunism in view of the current weakness of Israel with a view to obtaining control of the trade routes. Either way it robbed Israel of much of its wealth. Transjordan would not finally be recovered until the time of Jeroboam II, the fourth king of Jehu's dynasty (2 Kings 14:25).
The geographical descriptions cover the whole of Israel east of the Jordan right down to Aroer, by the valley of the Arnon River, on the border with Moab. Note the emphasis on the fact that this was the direct activity of YHWH. Powerful king Hazael might be, but he was under YHWH's command, and unwittingly carrying out His will.
‘Now the rest of the acts of Jehu, and all that he did, and all his might, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?'
Having summed up Jehu's reign from the religious standpoint, the prophetic author refers us for further historical detail to the annals of the kings of Israel, which had clearly survived. He was not interested in presenting a strict history of Israel. His concern was with YHWH's dealings with Israel.
‘And Jehu slept with his fathers, and they buried him in Samaria. And Jehoahaz his son reigned instead of him.'
Jehu died peacefully and was buried in Samaria, and Jehoahaz his son reigned instead of him. But it was over a much depleted kingdom. Jehu had turned out to be a failure.
‘And the time that Jehu reigned over Israel in Samaria was twenty eight years.'
The length of the king's reign is usually given in the introduction to his reign, but in the case of Jehu there had been no introduction. Thus it is given here. So meanwhile Jehu had reigned over Israel for twenty eight years. All, however, that we know about his reign was that it was a missed opportunity. The silence about his secular activities is a strong reminder to us that the only things that are important in life are the things that are genuinely achieved for God. Jehu had had the opportunity to bring Israel back to YHWH, but instead he had been too concerned about his own affairs. How tragic it will be for us also if our lives are so overtaken with compromise and religious half-heartedness that we too fail to serve God faithfully.
Brief Note On Hazael, King Of Aram.
As a young man Hazael had been anointed by Elijah with a view to his future, a reminder that in spite of his later might he was very much a king under YHWH's control (1 Kings 19:15). He came to the throne of Aram in around 843 BC after his interlude with Elisha during which Elisha foresaw the distress that he would bring on Israel (2 Kings 8:7). In 842 BC he advanced on Ramoth-gilead (2 Kings 8:29). This may have been with the aim of bringing Israel into a coalition with himself against the threatening Assyrians under Shalmaneser III, or it may simply have been with a view to securing the trade routes. As we have seen it resulted in the death of Jehoram and the rise of Jehu. But in 841 BC Jehu (with Israel substantially weakened and having necessarily forfeited Israel's alliances with Tyre and Judah) paid tribute to Shalmaneser III and swore fealty to him. Shalmaneser had invaded Aram and had besieged Hazael in Damascus, but having failed to take Damascus he had moved on, and now took tribute both from Israel and from Tyre. Jehu's action may well have been instead of entering into an alliance with Hazael, or it may simply have been hurried necessity. Hazael appears to have resisted the Assyrian pressure, forcing them to move on.
The extract from the Black obelisk read as follows:
“In the eighteenth year of my reign I (i.e. Shalmaneser III) crossed the River Euphrates for the sixteenth time. Hazael of Aram put his trust in the numerical strength of his army and called out his army in great numbers. He made Sanir, a mountain peak which stands out in front of Lebanon, his strong position, but I fought with him and defeated him, smiting with weapons sixteen thousand of his experienced troops. I snatched away from him 1,121 of his chariots and 470 of his cavalry horses, together with his baggage train. He fled to save his life but I followed after him and surrounded him in Damascus his capital city. I cut down his plantations and marched as far as the mountains of Hauran (in other words the siege failed so that he eventually moved on). I destroyed, tore down and burned numberless villages, carrying innumerable spoil from them. I marched as far as the mountains of Ba‘ali-rasi, a headland by the sea, and put up on it a representation of my royal person. At that time I received tribute from the people of Tyre, Sidon and from Jehu, son of Omri.”
A superscription then adds, “The tribute of Jehu, the son of Omri. Silver, gold, a golden bowl, a golden vase, golden cups, golden buckets, tin, a staff for the royal hand, puruhati fruits.” This submission by Jehu is actually pictured on an obelisk set up by the Assyrian king in the main square of Nimrud, with ‘Jehu, the son of Omri' bowing before the king. The tribute was not large and was more in the nature of a token submission.
Hazael again resisted Shalmaneser a few years later, after which Assyria withdrew for a generation, being taken up with other enemies threatening its borders. But having to stand alone may well have been why Hazael felt bitter against Israel, with the subsequent successful invasion of Transjordan consequently taking place, although presumably it was also with a view to taking over the valuable trade routes. We know nothing about any other relations between Hazael and Jehu, which may suggest that Jehu was able to hold his own west of Jordan in spite of the reverses east of Jordan (As is clear above Hazael had been weakened by the Assyrian invasion, giving Jehu time to build up his own strength, even though that was not sufficient for him to be able to defend Transjordan), but Hazael would subsequently continually harass Jehu's successor, Jehoahaz, finally reducing him to a token fighting force (2 Kings 13:3; 2 Kings 13:7). He also invaded Gath, as well as robbing Judah of its treasures during the reign of Jehoash (2 Kings 12:15). Late in his reign, however, Assyria would return under Adadnirari III and the ageing Hazael would be subdued, and would have to pay him tribute. This was recorded on the Nimrud slab inscription as follows:
Having spoken of the submission of a number of nations including ‘mat-Humri' (the territory of Omri i.e. Israel) Adadnirari goes on to say “I marched to Aram and shut up Mari' (Hazael), king of Aram, in Damascus his capital city. The awful splendour of the god Ashur his lord overwhelmed him, and he seized my feet expressing submission. 2,300 talents of silver, 20 talents of gold, 300 talents of copper, 5,000 talents of iron, embroidered linen garments, an ivory bed, a couch embossed and inlaid with ivory, countless of his own goods and possessions I received in his own palace at Damascus, his capital city.”
Thus by the time of his successor Benhadad, Aram had been weakened whilst Israel would have recovered some of its strength.
End of note.