Chapter 20

1 Ben-hadad, not content with Ahab’s homage, besiegeth Samaria. 13 By the direction of a prophet, the Syrians are slain. 22 As the prophet forewarned Ahab, the Syrians, trusting in the valleys, come against him in Apheck. 28 By the word of the prophet, and God’s judgment, the Syrians are smitten again. 31 The Syrians submitting themselves, Ahab sendeth Ben-hadad away with a covenant. 35 The prophet, under the parable of a prisoner, making Ahab to judge himself, denounceth God’s judgment against him.

Israel’s Wars With Syria in the Days of Baasha and Ahab

1. Ben-hadad. This chapter is quite different in contents and spirit from most of the material in Kings. It gives an interesting and valuable picture of the political life of the times. Benhadad had grown to be a powerful king and now occupied the dominant position among the rulers of western Asia, as is evidenced by the fact that the Assyrian records list him first among the western allies who fought against Shalmaneser III at Qarqar (see on v. 34).

Thirty and two kings. These were the heads of small Syrian city-states that recognized the suzerainty of Damascus.

Horses, and chariots. The number is not given, but at the battle of Qarqar, Benhadad is reported to have had 1,200 chariots, 1,200 cavalrymen, and 20,000 infantry, as compared with 2,000 chariots and 10,000 infantry for Ahab.

3. Thy gold is mine. Historical items recorded in the Bible are often given in great brevity. We therefore do not know what the situation was that led to Benhadad’s demand. It may be the sequel to some military advantage gained by the Syrian king over Ahab, or, more likely, it may simply mean a demand on the part of Benhadad for Ahab to recognize him as his lord, with Israel henceforth a vassal state to Syria.

4. I am thine. Ahab answered in conciliatory but humiliating terms. He was afraid. Either he had been outmaneuvered by Benhadad in some previous test of strength, or he did not have the courage to run the risk of war.

6. Search thine house. Such a demand was only adding insult to injury. Ahab had already been reduced to the humiliation of acknowledging that his silver and gold, and even his family, were the property of the Syrian king, but the present demand called for an immediate search of the palace and homes of Samaria, with the surrender of anything belonging to any of the people that might appeal to the plunderes. That meant unqualified and abject surrender.

7. Seeketh mischief. It seems evident that Benhadad was seeking for some excuse to pillage the city.

9. Tell my lord. Ahab’s refusal is phrased in as gentle terms as possible. He continues his acknowledgment of suzerainty, agreed upon at his first submission, and is willing to recognize himself to be the “servant” or slave of the Syrian king. He expresses his willingness to comply with the demands already accepted, but the latter demands he “may not” accept. By such a conciliatory reply Ahab hoped to induce Benhadad to adopt a more reasonable attitude.

10. The dust of Samaria. The words of Benhadad involve a threat of utter destruction and a boast of irresistible strength. The expression seems to mean that so numerous are the people who follow the Syrian king, there is insufficient dust in Samaria to fill the hands of the soldiers.

11. Let not him. Ahab’s courageous answer, expressed in four Hebrew words, has the flavor of a proverb.

12. Was drinking. Benhadad received the message while he was at a feast drinking. Orders were given to his subordinates in a single word, sЊimu, which means “set,” or “form.” Perhaps the Syrian king was too indignant and astonished for more words. He was acting out his utter contempt for the insignificant Hebrew king, and under the influence of drink he had become foolishly reckless. It was a case of “senses gone, courage strong.”

13. A prophet. The situation in Israel had probably changed considerably since the great day at Carmel. Men of the prophetic order may again have been permitted to be about the land.

I will deliver. Without directions from the prophet, Ahab might not have had the courage to attack. It would mean much to Ahab, much to the elders and the nation, to have the present inglorious humiliation changed into a glorious victory.

14. Who shall order? Ahab must have had a considerable degree of confidence in God and in His prophets to ask the questions he did. The fate of the nation was at stake, and a prophet acting as the spokesman for God was accepted by the king as the virtual commander in chief.

15. The young men. The prophet had given directions and the king obeyed. “Young men” is here probably used as a technical military term. These may have been select shock troops, well trained and well armed, under the command of provincial officers.

Seven thousand. This was probably the extent of Israel’s standing military force. At Qarqar, Ahab is reported to have had 10,000 infantrymen.

16. At noon. The sally was made at noon, when at the heat of the day the attackers were probably resting unarmed, with no expectation of being attacked.

Drinking himself drunk. Benhadad at this time was probably well under the influence of liquor, unable to evaluate the situation or to make wise decisions.

17. There are men. Since the sortie was made at noon, the approach was detected and there was not complete surprise. Word was sent to the king that a group of Hebrews was seen approaching.

18. Take them alive. In his haughtiness Benhadad ordered all the Hebrews to be seized, whether they had come out to negotiate terms of peace, whether they were offering to surrender, or whatever their purpose might be.

20. They slew. They fought man to man and hand to hand. An alert group of archers or spearmen might have been able to keep the little band of Hebrews at bay, but the Syrians did not awake to the situation till it was too late. Panic seized the host, and they turned and fled.

21. Smote the horses. Ahab was himself particularly well equipped with chariots. He set upon the Syrian horses and chariots, which probably were unprepared for the Hebrew attack. The result was a complete rout for the Syrian hosts.

22. Return of the year. Israel’s regnal year seems to have begun in the spring, with the month Nisan (see p. 138). This is the season when military campaigns were set on foot in Mesopotamia and Palestine, and is called “the time when kings go forth to battle” (2 Sam. 11:1). Ahab was advised by the Lord to expect another attack from Syria the following year, after the rainy season of the winter was over.

23. Of the hills. Even the Syrians attributed the Hebrew victory to divine aid. But they had no true understanding of the omnipotence of Jehovah. Ancient polytheism was based on the idea of the local power and influence of deities. There was, for instance, a Baal of Hermon, a Baal of Lebanon, a Baal of the summit of Zaphon, and a Baal-shamin, who was the god of the heavens, of the mountaintops, and of lightning and thunder.

These Baalim are often mentioned in ancient religious texts as gods of war, as well as gods of the mountains, the clouds, and thunder. It may be that the Syrians were thinking primarily in terms of Baal, so prominent in Israel since the days of Jezebel, as the god who had given Ahab victory. Samaria lay in the mountainous region of Ephraim. If victory was to be secured for Syria, it was felt that the Israelites must be lured away from the hills into the valley, giving the Syrians both tactical and religious advantage.

24. Take the kings away. The counsel to remove the kings was probably due to the fact that as vassals these kings accompanied the king only through compulsion, and therefore were not so efficient or dependable in battle as would be leaders appointed by Benhadad himself.

25. Thou hast lost. The Syrian losses must have been unusually severe, requiring a replacement of practically the entire army. War places a low estimate upon human life or treasure.

26. Return of the year. That is, at the beginning of the next new year in the spring, the usual time for military campaigns in Palestine (see on v. 22).

Numbered the Syrians. Rather, mustered the Syrians for battle.

Aphek. Several Biblical places bore this name (see on 1 Sam. 4:1). The city referred to here was probably the one 3 3/4 mi. (6 km.) east of the Sea of Galilee, on the highway between Beth-shan and Damascus. Whichever city is meant it was probably the Aphek where Joash of Israel was later, according to Elisha’s prophecy, to smite the Syrians till they were consumed (2 Kings 13:14–19).

27. Were all present. The marginal reading, “were victualled,” or the translation “were provided for,” or “furnished with provisions” is preferred. Israel had been mustered and fully supplied, or provisioned, with all things necessary for war. There had been time and opportunity to do this, since the struggle had been foretold (v. 22).

Flocks. Heb. chasЊiph, occurring only here in Scripture. It seems to indicate something separated, like two little flocks of goats that have been separated from the main herd.

28. Ye shall know. God did not intend that either Ahab or the Syrians should ascribe the coming victory to any other cause than His own intervention in Israel’s behalf. By His granting victory to His people, the heathen should know that the Lord only was God (see 2 Kings 19:16–34). God planned that the majesty of His name should be vindicated before all the peoples of earth (see Ps. 67:2; 102:15; 138:4; Eze. 20:9). By granting Israel victory over the great host of Syrians, Jehovah would show in the eyes of the nations around that He was a God not only of the hills but also of the valleys, and indeed of all the earth.

29. Hundred thousand footmen. The loss for Syria this time seems to have been largely among the infantry, whereas the previous season it was “the horses and chariots” (v. 21) that were especially mentioned as having been smitten.

30. A wall fell. The city was probably small, with a large number of Syrians crowded within the walls. The general pandemonium that ensued could easily have resulted in the death of a large number of men.

Into an inner chamber. Literally, into a “chamber within a chamber.” Benhadad’s refuge was probably within the citadel of the city, and especially strong place usually found in walled Oriental cities that could be used as a place of last retreat.

31. Merciful kings. It was a good report that had gone out among the nations around that the kings of Israel were merciful kings. If all rulers would only rule with mercy and compassion, if kindness took the place of cruelty, and justice and brotherly love the place of oppression and wrong, what a different world this would be.

32. Thy servant Ben-hadad. Only a short time before it was Ahab who had been the servant and Benhadad the lord (v. 20). Boastful Benhadad was no longer boasting, and had good reason to ponder Ahab’s message of the season before, “Let not him that girdeth on his harness boast himself as he that putteth it off” (v. 11).

Diligently observe. What would Ahab’s answer be? Would it mean life or death? The men were watching for any sign that might indicate Ahab’s reaction. In his addressing Benhadad as “brother,” they had their answer. The suspense was over and the danger past. The victor had committed himself. It would be clemency and friendship, rather than no quarter and death. Ahab’s extraordinary attempt at courtesy is displayed by receiving Benhadad into his own chariot.

34. I will restore. This refers to the cities which “Ben-hadad, the son of Tabrimon, the son of Hezion,” took from Baasha at the instigation of Asa (ch. 15:18–22). The fact that the present Benhadad refers to some previous king who took these cities from Israel as “my father,” proves conclusively that that king and the present Ben-hadad could not have been one and the same individual, as is held by some today. It was Benhadad I who was a contemporary of Baasha, and Benhadad II who was the contemporary of Ahab.

Streets. These are thought to be bazaars for purposes of trade, with the possessor having extraterritorial privileges. It is interesting to note that Syria had been in possession of such privileges in Samaria.

36. Slay thee. The command to strike had been given by “the word of the Lord” (v. 35). The companion, who was probably a brother prophet, should have promptly obeyed despite the disagreeableness and repulsiveness of the task. The swift judgment upon him served to drive home the lesson that unquestioning obedience should be given to the word of the Lord.

38. Ashes. This should read “bandage,” or “covering.” The Hebrew words for “ashes” and “bandage” are from the same root, only the vowel pointings being different. The word for “ashes” is Хepher, and for “bandage,” Хapher. The bandage probably served a dual purpose, to cover the wound and to disguise the prophet so that he might not be recognized by Ahab.

Face. Literally, “eyes.”

39. He cried. The meaning of the parable is clear. The bandaged prophet represented Ahab, the man entrusted to him, Benhadad.

40. Busy. Not about his business, but paying attention to everything else except the one matter of supreme importance.

Thy judgment. The king pronounces the verdict, not realizing that he is passing sentence against himself. The judgment is like that of David against himself in the parable of the ewe lamb (2 Sam. 12:5–7) or in the story of the two brothers (2 Sam. 14:10, 11).

41. Took the ashes away. Rather, took the bandage, or covering, away (see on v. 38).

42. Thy life. God had delivered Ben-hadad into the hands of Ahab to be destroyed. Ahab failed to sense his responsibility or to take advantage of his opportunity. In the harsh demands made upon him by Benhadad only the year before (vs. 3–6), Ahab should have sensed the character of the man with whom he was dealing, and should have acted accordingly. Benhadad was not to be trusted. He was only playing for time. A few years later Ahab was to pay for his leniency with his life (ch. 22:31–36).

43. Heavy and displeased. Ahab refused to acknowledge the justice of his sentence. He became angry and sullen, and showed no trace of true repentance or godly sorrow. But he had pronounced this sentence against himself, and with a finality that offered no appeal. Ahab, in his anger, no doubt would have preferred to seize the prophet for this outspoken rebuke, but this he could not well do, in view of the fact that he himself had given the judgment. He returned home far from happy, displeased with the prophet rather than himself, finding fault with the ways of God rather than with his own mistakes. The unregenerate human heart ever seeks to justify its mistakes; a man’s ways are generally right in his own eyes.

The Kingdoms of Israel and Judah in Elijah’s Time