Chapter 19

1 Jehoshaphat, reproved by Jehu, visiteth his kingdom. 5 His instructions to the judges, 8 to the priests and Levites.

1. And Jehoshaphat. Chapter 19 contains materials not appearing in the record of Kings. It includes such items as the prophetic rebuke of Jehoshaphat after his return from Ramoth-gilead (vs. 1–3), the king’s personal efforts at religious reformation (v. 4), and his reform of the judicial system (vs. 5–11).

Returned. Ahab and Jehoshaphat had been unsuccessful in their efforts to retake Ramoth-gilead. The troops returned to their homes, and the enterprise was presumably abandoned (see 1 Kings 22:36). The record implies that the Syrians had successfully repulsed the attack, but had made no attempt to follow up their success. Jehoshaphat returned to Jerusalem sound and unhurt, a sadder but wiser man.

2. Jehu the son of Hanani. Hanani was the name of the prophet who had rebuked Asa for relying on the king of Syria rather than on the Lord, and who had been thrown into prison for his rebuke (ch. 16:6–10), and Jehu was the prophet who boldly rebuked Baasha for his iniquity (1 Kings 16:1–7). Jehu was also the historian of Jehoshaphat’s reign (2 Chron. 20:34).

To meet him. Jehoshaphat was rebuked at a most auspicious time when, downcast and dispirited, he approached his capital. At such a moment the prophetic message could do a most telling work on his heart.

Help the ungodly. From a human standpoint, the conduct of Jehoshaphat in joining with Ahab in an attack on Syria might have appeared wise. Syria was growing in power, a menace to both Judah and Israel. The Hebrews had a right to recover the cities across the Jordan that Syria had taken from them. Probably Jehoshaphat had carefully appraised the situation and may have felt that his undertaking against Syria was sound. But the venture did not have divine sanction and in carrying it out Jehoshaphat was associated with a man whom the Lord could not bless. Ahab was a base idolater, while Jehoshaphat had been endeavoring to wipe out idolatry. There was little in common between the two, and Jehoshaphat had no right to join himself to so base a man. He would have been much better off and would have been surer of success if he had gone against Syria alone. With God’s help and blessing he could have succeeded, even without the assistance of the forces of Ahab. Human help can prove to be more of a curse than a blessing, if it does not have the benediction of Heaven.

Wrath upon thee. God was not pleased with Jehoshaphat’s course, and made His displeasure known by an open rebuke. The following chapter mentions a great attack upon Judah by the forces of Moab, Ammon, and Mt. Seir and the wrecking of Jehoshaphat’s navy.

4. From Beer-sheba to mount Ephraim. That is, all of Judah, from Beersheba in the extreme south to Mt. Ephraim and the borders of Israel on the north. Compare the expression “from Dan even to Beersheba” employed of all Judah and Israel (1 Sam. 3:20; 2 Sam. 3:10; 17:11; 24:2, 15; 1 Kings 4:25; 1 Chron. 21:2; 2 Chron. 30:5).

5. Set judges. Jehoshaphat revised the judicial system by establishing and maintaining efficient courts of justice, with a court of appeal at Jerusalem (see PK 197).

Fenced cities. There were probably local judges in the smaller villages, where minor cases could be decided. The local elders may have served as judges in the rural areas. Jehoshaphat appointed judges in the larger courts in the more important cities.

6. Take heed. Jehoshaphat urged the new judges to consider the importance of their work. They were to administer justice impartially to all classes, to the poor as well as the rich.

For the Lord. The judge was primarily a servant of God. He was to be fearless and impartial in all his decisions (see Deut. 1:17; Ps. 82:1–4; Eccl. 5:8).

With you. God is interested in justice and is present in the courtroom. He marks every impartial verdict and notes every breach of justice.

7. Fear of the Lord. The man who has the responsibility of administering justice constantly faces the task of deciding cases, and he must do his work in recognition of the fact that the eyes of the Lord are upon him. He must constantly settle matters in dispute, and in so doing he must remember that every decision he makes is registered in the books of heaven.

No iniquity. It is a comfort to remember that the great Judge of the world is a righteous judge and therefore His every decision is true and righteous (see Deut. 32:4; Ps. 9:8; 67:4; 96:13; Rev. 19:11).

Nor respect of persons. A righteous judge decides every case on its merits rather than according to the personalities involved. Altogether too often there is “respect of persons” in the matter of rendering decisions. Personal friends are favored, and those in a position to return favors are shown special considerations. Such judgments are neither impartial nor righteous, nor do they bring the blessing of Heaven. The Lord of heaven is no respecter of persons (Deut. 10:17; Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Gal. 2:6; Eph. 6:9; 1 Peter 1:17), and His followers are to be like Him. The practice of flattering and favoring men of wealth and position while despising and defrauding those who are poor and humble, later brought down upon the leaders of Israel some of the most emphatic denunciations found anywhere in the writings of the prophets.

Nor taking of gifts. The justice of Heaven is not for sale, but that is not always the case with the justice of men. Decisions are often influenced by gifts. Presents are not always given from worthy motives, and favors received often anticipate favors in return. Bribery does not necessarily involve silver or gold. Many an individual in a position of trust has been bought off by accepting some seemingly innocent token. Every man faced with the responsibility of making decisions must ever be on the alert that he does not allow a gift of any nature to be the determining factor in the verdict rendered.

8. In Jerusalem. A superior court or high court of appeal was established in the capital (see on v. 5).

Of the Levites. David had previously appointed 6,000 Levites as officers and judges (1 Chron. 23:4). Moses had decreed that priests and Levites should serve as judges (Deut. 17:8, 9).

Chief of the fathers. These were the heads of families or clans (see Deut. 1:15–17). Their age and experience would help them to render just and wise decisions.

When they returned to Jerusalem. A change in vowel pointing permits this clause to be translated “and they dwelt in Jerusalem.” The LXX implies a further change when it renders the second part of the verse, “and to judge the inhabitants of Jerusalem.” The court here under consideration was a central high tribunal at the nation’s capital which could function in both religious and civil cases (see PK 197).

9. Charged them. Jehoshaphat showed sincere concern over the matter of an impartial administration of justice and did everything within his power to set before the new judges the solemn responsibility that was theirs, encouraging them to be absolutely just and above reproach in carrying out their high commission.

Fear of the Lord. Compare v. 7 and 2 Sam. 23:3.

10. What cause soever. That is, the cases that might come before the central court at Jerusalem from other cities of the nation. It is clear from this passage that this court at the capital was a supreme court of appeal (see on v. 8).

Between blood and blood. Cases concerning bloodshed (see Deut. 17:8; 19:4–13; Ex. 21:12–15; 22:2; Num. 35:11–33).

Between law and commandment. That is, questions concerning the interpretation and application of the various laws and regulations that made up the Hebrew legal code.

Warn them. Jehoshaphat had admonished the judges to serve faithfully and with a perfect heart, in the fear of the Lord (vs. 6, 7, 9), and now he admonished them that they in turn should admonish the people who came before them to refrain from evil in order that they might not bring judgment upon the nation.

11. Amariah. According to 1 Chron. 6:8–11, Amariah was the fifth after Zadok, the high priest of David’s time (2 Sam. 17:15). Since Jehoshaphat was the fifth from David, the same Amariah is indicated in both instances.

Matters of the Lord. The high priest was the natural head of the high court in the matter of religious cases.

The king’s matters. Zebadiah was to be the head of the high court in all civil or criminal cases.

With the good. Jehoshaphat was expressing his faith that God would be with those who would be true to Him and upright in their service. The word for “shall be” should be translated as a wish, thus making the last sentence a benediction or prayer: “And may the Lord be with the good.”

Ellen G. White comments

1–11PK 196–198

1 PK 196

2 FE 295

2, 3 PK 196

4–11PK 197