2 Kings Chapter 8
New Kings in Syria and Judah
A. The restoration of the Shunammite woman’s land.
1. (2 Kings 8:1-3) The Shunammite woman returns to Israel after seven years
Then spake Elisha unto the woman, whose son he had restored to life, saying, Arise, and go thou and thine household, and sojourn wheresoever thou canst sojourn, for the Lord hath called for a famine, and it shall also come upon the land seven years. And the woman arose, and did after the saying of the man of God, and she went with her household, and sojourned in the land of the Philistines seven years. And it came to pass at the seven years end, that the woman returned out of the land of the Philistines, and she went forth to cry unto the king for her house and for her land.
COMMENTARY
a. Elisha spoke to the woman whose son he had restored to life
This woman was no stranger to the prophet. Back in 2 Kings 4, she and her husband had demonstrated remarkable godliness and generosity. They built a small upper room for Elisha, fed him, honored him, and cared for him whenever he passed through Shunem. Their hospitality was not forgotten by God. Through Elisha’s word and prayer, the Lord gave the barren couple a son. Later, when the child died suddenly, God used Elisha to raise him from the dead.
The mention of her son here immediately reminds the reader that this woman had already experienced the miraculous power of God in her household. She had seen God override nature itself to both give and restore life. Therefore, when Elisha warned her of coming judgment, she knew she could trust him. Her history with God established her confidence. This reflects Psalm 9:10, “They that know thy name will put their trust in thee.”
b. She went with her household and dwelt in the land of the Philistines seven years
Elisha warned her that a seven year famine was coming, ordained by the Lord. God was not reacting to circumstances; He had “called for a famine,” demonstrating that judgment is under His sovereign control. This echoes the truth of Amos 3:6, “Shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done it.” The famine was not random. It was part of God’s disciplinary hand upon the land.
The woman obeyed the prophet immediately. She uprooted her entire household and took refuge among the Philistines, a historically hostile people, because obedience mattered more than comfort or familiarity. Her action mirrors Abraham’s obedience in Hebrews 11:8, “He went out, not knowing whither he went.” Obedience often demands migration, sacrifice, and trust.
In Philistia, she and her family survived the famine, demonstrating that God preserves the obedient even when His hand of judgment falls broadly.
c. She went to make an appeal to the king for her house and for her land
After seven years, she returned to Israel to reclaim her ancestral property. During her absence, her land had seemingly been taken over or confiscated. By leaving the country, she forfeited her immediate legal claim, and the property had likely been absorbed either by royal administration or opportunistic neighbors.
Her appeal to the king shows two things:
She acted in faith that God would not allow obedience to result in permanent loss.
She had followed the prophet’s command. Now she believed God would vindicate her for that obedience. This reflects the principle of Hebrews 6:10, “For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love.”She understood that even righteous actions sometimes require formal appeal.
God’s providence does not negate proper legal or governmental processes. She sought justice through rightful channels.
Importantly, she returned not merely to reclaim land, but because she believed the God who restored her son would also restore her inheritance.
Her story demonstrates that no one who obeys God suffers ultimate loss. The Lord sees, remembers, and restores.
2. (2 Kings 8:4-6) Her land is restored
And the king talked with Gehazi the servant of the man of God, saying, Tell me, I pray thee, all the great things that Elisha hath done. And it came to pass, as he was telling the king how he had restored a dead body to life, that, behold, the woman, whose son he had restored to life, cried to the king for her house and for her land. And Gehazi said, My lord, O king, this is the woman, and this is her son, whom Elisha restored to life. And when the king asked the woman, she told him. So the king appointed unto her a certain officer, saying, Restore all that was hers, and all the fruits of the field since the day that she left the land, even until now.
COMMENTARY
a. Then the king talked with Gehazi
This is the same Gehazi who, in 2 Kings 5:20-27, was struck with leprosy for his greed and deceit toward Naaman. The text raises an immediate question, because a leper would normally be excluded from public interaction, especially from the king’s presence. This suggests one of two possibilities.
One possibility is that this event occurred before Gehazi was judged with leprosy. Second, it is possible that Gehazi was allowed to speak with the king while remaining at a distance because the king desired firsthand accounts of the miracles performed by Elisha. Clarke notes that a king might endure the presence of a leper from afar if his interest was great enough, especially if he wished to know the secret history of the prophet’s miracles.
Whether Gehazi had been healed or whether this took place chronologically earlier, the key point is that Gehazi was uniquely qualified to recount Elisha’s works. He had been present for many of the prophet’s private miracles and had intimate knowledge of Elisha’s ministry.
b. Tell me, please, all the great things Elisha has done
The king’s request reveals that even the rulers of Israel recognized that the hand of God rested upon Elisha. Even if the king was moved merely by curiosity, his inquiry demonstrates that Elisha’s ministry was publicly known and respected. This also means the king acknowledged that Elisha’s actions were not natural feats, but divine works.
This recognition placed responsibility upon the king. To acknowledge the works of God is to acknowledge the God behind those works. The miracles authenticated Elisha’s prophecies, and therefore the king’s curiosity functioned as an implicit admission that God’s Word through Elisha was true.
c. As he was telling the king
While Gehazi described how Elisha restored a dead child to life, the Shunammite woman herself arrived at that precise moment to appeal for her land. The timing was perfect. She arrived while her story was being retold. This was not coincidence. It was divine orchestration.
This is the providence of God, the unseen hand aligning events through His sovereign power. The exact moment Gehazi spoke of the resurrection of her son was the exact moment she appeared before the king. This fulfilled the truth of Psalm 37:23, “The steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord.”
Her obedience years earlier now met with God’s perfect arrangement of circumstances.
d. Restore all that was hers, and all the proceeds of the field from the day that she left
Once the king heard Gehazi’s testimony and verified it by questioning the woman, he immediately responded with generosity and justice. He not only restored her property, but also commanded that she receive all the proceeds from her land for the entire seven year period she had been gone. This included crops, profits, and revenue that had been produced in her absence.
This decision indicates two key truths.
First, the king recognized that God clearly favored this woman because the miracle involving her son was undeniable. If God supported her, the king wisely decided to support her also. This aligns with the principle seen in Proverbs 16:7, “When a man’s ways please the Lord, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.”
Second, the king’s action demonstrated that obedience to the Word of God brings no ultimate loss. Her departure from Israel was an act of obedience to Elisha’s word. She chose hardship and displacement rather than disobedience. Now God ensured she was repaid above and beyond what she lost.
i. Dilday’s observation
The king’s generosity stands in sharp contrast to the covetousness of Ahab, his father, who violently seized Naboth’s vineyard. Unlike Ahab, this king acted justly. Where Ahab took land, this king restored land. In the sovereignty of God, the son corrected the notorious sin of the father.
B. A new king in Syria
1. (2 Kings 8:7-9) Elisha is questioned by Ben-Hadad
And Elisha came to Damascus, and Benhadad the king of Syria was sick, and it was told him, saying, The man of God is come hither. And the king said unto Hazael, Take a present in thine hand, and go, meet the man of God, and enquire of the Lord by him, saying, Shall I recover of this disease. So Hazael went to meet him, and took a present with him, even of every good thing of Damascus, forty camels burden, and came and stood before him, and said, Thy son Benhadad king of Syria hath sent me to thee, saying, Shall I recover of this disease.
COMMENTARY
a. The man of God has come here
Elisha, once hunted by the Syrians, was now honored in Damascus. Their earlier attempts to seize him had failed because God repeatedly delivered His prophet. As a result, Elisha’s reputation grew beyond Israel. Even pagan courts recognized that the power of the living God rested on him. Ben-Hadad especially sought his presence because sickness reminded him of his own frailty. Crisis often drives even unbelievers to seek true spiritual authority.
The title “man of God” was not used loosely. It meant someone whose words consistently proved true. This reveals the reach of Elisha’s ministry and how the Lord used him to testify of Himself even in foreign nations.
b. Take a present in your hand
Ben-Hadad sent Hazael with a lavish gift. Forty camel loads of goods symbolized both honor and desperation. The king wanted a favorable word from God concerning his illness. Yet gifts cannot purchase the favor of the Lord. Elisha had rejected Naaman’s gift in 2 Kings 5, a clear demonstration that the work of God is not for sale.
i. Poole’s observation
Poole rightly notes that Scripture does not say whether Elisha accepted the present. Based on his previous refusal of Naaman’s wealth, it is most probable that he did not. God’s prophet refused to become indebted to pagan kings, ensuring that the purity of his message remained unquestioned.
Ben-Hadad wanted assurance. But what he needed was repentance.
2. (2 Kings 8:10-13) Elisha’s enigmatic revelation
And Elisha said unto him, Go, say unto him, Thou mayest certainly recover, howbeit the Lord hath shewed me that he shall surely die. And he settled his countenance stedfastly, until he was ashamed, and the man of God wept. And Hazael said, Why weepeth my lord. And he answered, Because I know the evil that thou wilt do unto the children of Israel, their strong holds wilt thou set on fire, and their young men wilt thou slay with the sword, and wilt dash their children, and rip up their women with child. And Hazael said, But what, is thy servant a dog, that he should do this great thing. And Elisha answered, The Lord hath shewed me that thou shalt be king over Syria.
a. Go, say to him, “You shall certainly recover.” However the Lord has shown me that he will really die
Elisha gave a two part revelation. The illness itself would not kill Ben-Hadad. He would recover physiologically. Yet Elisha was also shown that Ben-Hadad would die, not from sickness, but by violent means. The prophet saw both the medical outcome and the political outcome.
i. Elisha’s words were entirely true
The king would recover from the disease, yet he would soon die at the hand of Hazael. God’s revelation included both the natural and the supernatural aspects of the situation.
ii. The king died, but not from the illness
Hazael’s rise to power, not the disease, brought Ben-Hadad’s end. God revealed the ultimate outcome while allowing the intermediate circumstances to unfold through human decisions.
b. He set his countenance in a stare… I know the evil that you will do
Elisha fixed his gaze on Hazael because God had shown him the inner corruption of the man standing before him. The prophet could see the violence, ambition, and cruelty forming in Hazael’s heart. Elisha knew this man would one day devastate Israel.
i. Morgan’s insight
Morgan notes that the prophet saw more in Hazael’s soul than the man himself could see. Divine revelation penetrated the hidden darkness of Hazael’s intentions.
c. And the man of God wept
Elisha’s prophetic gift did not harden him. It increased his compassion. Seeing the future devastation that Hazael would bring caused him to weep. He saw burning strongholds, slain young men, dashed infants, and ripped open pregnant women. He saw horrors that tore at the heart of a righteous man.
i. Elisha’s calling was a burden
Knowing what would come without the ability to stop it grieved him deeply.
ii. Meyer’s observation
Those closest to God feel the deepest sorrow for the sufferings of God’s people.
iii. Morgan’s insight
His tears flowed from love, even while he understood that Israel’s coming judgment was just.
d. But what is your servant, a dog, that he should do this gross thing
Hazael pretended to be shocked at the idea that he could commit such atrocities. Whether he had already planned the assassination or whether the evil in his heart was still dormant, he rejected the idea that he was capable of it. His response reveals the frightening depth of human self-ignorance.
i. He should have taken the prophecy as a warning
Instead of humbling himself, he dismissed the possibility and deflected responsibility.
ii. Spurgeon’s observation
Humans are often blind to the true depravity of their own hearts. Every believer knows this. None of us could have imagined, at our conversion, how weak our devotion would sometimes be and how prone our hearts still are to wander.
e. The Lord has shown me that you will become king over Syria
Some ask whether Elisha should have told Hazael this information. Did he create a self-fulfilling prophecy that encouraged Hazael to assassinate the king.
i. Reasons Elisha acted correctly
He did not tell Hazael how the king would die.
He did not tell Hazael to kill the king.
He did not tell Hazael how he would become king.
He acted against his own national interest, proving he spoke only at God’s command.
He may have hoped the prophecy would pierce Hazael’s heart and lead him to repentance.
ii. Spurgeon’s conclusion
God foreknew Hazael’s actions but did not compel them. Divine foreknowledge does not eliminate human responsibility. Hazael acted freely and wickedly, yet his actions unfolded within the sovereign knowledge of God.
3. (2 Kings 8:14-15) The assassination of the king of Syria
So he departed from Elisha, and came to his master, who said to him, What said Elisha to thee. And he answered, He told me that thou shouldest surely recover. And it came to pass on the morrow, that he took a thick cloth, and dipped it in water, and spread it on his face, so that he died, and Hazael reigned in his stead.
COMMENTARY
a. He told me you would surely recover
Hazael returned to Ben-Hadad and delivered only half of Elisha’s message. He reported the part that would calm the king but concealed the part that troubled his own conscience. Ben-Hadad would indeed recover from the illness itself, and Hazael repeated that portion truthfully. Yet he purposely omitted the revelation that the king would die soon and that Hazael himself would become king.
This selective reporting was intentional deceit. It positioned the king to feel safe and unsuspecting. Hazael used partial truth as the mask for treachery.
i. Poole’s insight
Poole observes that Hazael represented the prophet’s answer only in part so that the king’s sense of security would give Hazael the perfect opportunity to strike. By calming his master, he created the conditions needed for an unguarded, undefended moment.
This reveals how deceit often works. Half truth becomes the vehicle for full corruption.
b. So that he died
The next day, Hazael suffocated the king. The thick cloth soaked in water was an effective way to murder without obvious signs of violence. The act was cold, calculated, and deliberate. Hazael took the prophecy not as a warning to restrain evil, but as permission to fulfill the darkest desires of his own heart.
Ben-Hadad did not die from natural causes. He died because Hazael murdered him, and Scripture places full moral responsibility upon Hazael.
i. Spurgeon’s observation
Spurgeon explains that God’s foreknowledge does not negate human responsibility. God foresaw the murder, but Hazael freely chose to commit it. Predestination never forces a man to sin. When a man sins, he does so willingly, driven by the corruption of his own heart.
As Spurgeon puts it, the sinner is left to follow the turbulent passions within him. Hazael murdered because he wanted the throne and because the evil within him was unrestrained.
ii. Dilday’s note
Ancient Assyrian records support the biblical narrative. The Berlin inscription calls him, “Hazael, the son of nobody,” indicating he was not from a royal line. He seized power as an usurper. This external historical witness confirms the biblical account of his violent rise.
Hazael’s kingship began in blood, and his reign would become one of the most vicious toward Israel, exactly as Elisha had foreseen.
C. Two new kings in Judah
1. (2 Kings 8:16-24) The reign of Jehoram over Judah
And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel, Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign. Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem. And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, as did the house of Ahab, for the daughter of Ahab was his wife, and he did evil in the sight of the Lord. Yet the Lord would not destroy Judah for David his servant’s sake, as he promised him to give him always a light, and to his children. In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, and made a king over themselves. So Joram went over to Zair, and all the chariots with him, and he rose by night, and smote the Edomites which compassed him about, and the captains of the chariots, and the people fled into their tents. Yet Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah unto this day. Then Libnah revolted at the same time. And the rest of the acts of Joram, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah. And Joram slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David, and Ahaziah his son reigned in his stead.
COMMENTARY
a. Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat began to reign as king of Judah
The narrative of Judah’s kings resumes from 1 Kings 22:50, where Jehoshaphat’s reign ends and his son Jehoram begins to rule. Scripture now returns to his story.
i. Distinguishing the two Jehorams
There are two kings named Jehoram at this time.
Jehoram of Judah is the son of Jehoshaphat.
Jehoram of Israel, also called Joram, is the son of Ahab.
This passage concerns Jehoram of Judah.
b. He walked in the way of the kings of Israel
This is a severe indictment. Judah sometimes had righteous kings, but Israel’s kings were uniformly wicked. For Jehoram to imitate Israel’s kings revealed profound spiritual decline. He abandoned the godly heritage of Asa and Jehoshaphat and embraced the idolatry and apostasy of Ahab’s dynasty.
i. The Chronicler adds more detail
2 Chronicles 21:11 states that Jehoram led Judah into Canaanite style idolatry. He did not merely sin privately. He caused an entire nation to sin publicly.
c. For the daughter of Ahab was his wife
Jehoram married Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel. This was a political alliance that became a spiritual disaster. Athaliah brought the corrupt religious influence of the northern kingdom directly into Judah’s royal house.
i. Josephus records that Jehoram murdered his brothers
According to 2 Chronicles 21:1-6, Jehoram killed his brothers and many leaders. Josephus says he did so at the urging of Athaliah, revealing her Jezebel-like character.
ii. The marriage polluted Judah
Some hoped the alliance would help Israel spiritually. Instead, it dragged Judah downward. Evil influence traveled in one direction, and it corrupted the Davidic throne.
iii. Knapp’s point
Jehoram reaped exactly what he sowed. His alliance with Ahab’s house led to decay, judgment, and loss. His posterity would suffer even more because of his sins.
d. Yet the Lord would not destroy Judah for the sake of David
Jehoram’s wickedness deserved sweeping judgment, yet God restrained His wrath because of His covenant with David. The Lord had promised David “a lamp,” meaning a continuing dynasty, a preserved family line, and an unbroken testimony. This looked forward ultimately to the Messiah.
i. The lamp symbolized covenant faithfulness
The promise referenced Psalm 132:17, “There will I make the horn of David to bud, I have ordained a lamp for mine anointed.” God’s faithfulness to David preserved Judah even when her kings were unfaithful.
e. In his days Edom revolted against Judah’s authority
The revolt of Edom demonstrated the weakness caused by Jehoram’s sin. He had hoped that his marriage alliance with Ahab would strengthen Judah politically, but in reality spiritual compromise weakened the nation militarily and politically.
Liberation movements around Judah were the fruit of judgment. A nation that forsakes God loses stability, influence, and authority.
f. He rose by night and attacked the Edomites
Jehoram attempted a night attack against Edom’s forces, but it failed to bring Edom back under Judah’s control. His efforts produced no lasting result, further confirming the decline of Judah under his reign.
Edom’s revolt continued permanently, recorded with the words, “unto this day.” Judah’s authority was visibly diminishing.
g. Libnah revolted at that time
Libnah was a priestly city. Its revolt likely arose because of Jehoram’s idolatry. When a king rebels against God, even historically loyal cities withdraw allegiance.
h. So Joram rested with his fathers
Jehoram died and was buried, but 2 Chronicles 21:20 notes that he was not buried in the tombs of the kings. Scripture denies him the honor given to earlier rulers because his life was wicked and destructive.
i. Elijah’s letter
According to 2 Chronicles 21:12-15, Elijah sent Jehoram a letter predicting judgment. His sons would be struck, his people would suffer, and Jehoram would die of a painful intestinal disease. 2 Chronicles 21:19 records that he died in excruciating torment, and no one mourned him.
ii. Knapp’s summary
Knapp calls Jehoram one of the most unlovely kings of Judah. His name means “exalted by the Lord,” yet his life was characterized by rebellion and decline, and he received a dishonored burial.
2. (2 Kings 8:25-29) The reign of Ahaziah over Judah
In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign. Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem, and his mother’s name was Athaliah the daughter of Omri king of Israel. And he walked in the way of the house of Ahab, and did evil in the sight of the Lord, as did the house of Ahab, for he was the son in law of the house of Ahab. And he went with Joram the son of Ahab to the war against Hazael king of Syria in Ramothgilead, and the Syrians wounded Joram. And king Joram went back to Jezreel to be healed of the wounds which the Syrians had given him at Ramah, when he fought against Hazael king of Syria, and Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah went down to see Joram the son of Ahab in Jezreel, because he was sick.
COMMENTARY
a. Ahaziah the son of Jehoram began to reign
Ahaziah inherited the throne of Judah after the short and tragic reign of his father Jehoram. Jehoram ruled only eight years and died at forty with a cursed, painful death. His life should have served as a solemn warning to his son, yet Ahaziah walked in the same destructive path. His own reign lasted only one year, making it even shorter and more troubled than his father’s.
Ahaziah came to the throne at a moment of immense political upheaval. The year was approximately 841 b c, a turning point in Near Eastern history. Empires were shifting, alliances breaking apart, and Assyria was rising toward dominance. This geopolitical pressure formed the backdrop of Ahaziah’s brief and compromised rule.
i. Patterson and Austel on the year 841 b c
Patterson and Austel note that 841 b c was the year Shalmaneser the third of Assyria finally broke the western coalition that had resisted him for years. This meant that both Israel and Judah faced a shaken political world. Ahaziah would not survive the wave of events that followed.
ii. The age discrepancy
2 Kings 8:26 states that Ahaziah was twenty two when he began to reign.
2 Chronicles 22:2 states he was forty two.
Clarke rightly notes the reading in Chronicles is a scribal copy error. Twenty two is the only figure that fits the chronology. Such numerical slips are common in ancient manuscripts, and the consistency of the Kings record shows the correct age.
b. He walked in the way of the house of Ahab
Ahaziah followed the spiritual corruption of Ahab’s dynasty. This should not surprise the reader, because his mother was Athaliah, the granddaughter of Omri and daughter of Ahab and Jezebel. Through her influence, the idolatrous practices of the northern kingdom infected the Davidic line.
The text says he did evil in the sight of the Lord just as the house of Ahab did. His marriage connections to Ahab’s line drew him fully into Israel’s apostasy. Ahaziah’s identity was shaped more by his mother’s wicked heritage than by the spiritual legacy of David.
c. He went with Joram the son of Ahab to war against Hazael king of Syria
Ahaziah’s compromise became visible in his military alliances. Instead of trusting the Lord, he allied himself with Joram of Israel, the descendant of Ahab. Together they fought against Hazael of Syria at Ramothgilead.
This alliance exposed Judah to danger and violated the foundation of Judah’s covenant identity. Under Jehoshaphat, Judah had also improperly allied with Ahab, and the prophet rebuked him for it. Yet Ahaziah repeated this sin, joining himself to a king under God’s judgment.
i. His sympathy with Ahab’s house
Ahaziah’s loyalty to the northern dynasty ran so deep that he visited Joram when he was wounded and recovering in Jezreel. His spiritual loyalties were misplaced, and he aligned himself with a dynasty cursed by God.
This set the stage for his own downfall in the next chapter, where both he and Joram would meet divine judgment.
C. Two new kings in Judah
1. (2 Kings 8:16-24) The reign of Jehoram over Judah
And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel, Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign. Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem. And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, as did the house of Ahab, for the daughter of Ahab was his wife, and he did evil in the sight of the Lord. Yet the Lord would not destroy Judah for David his servant’s sake, as he promised him to give him always a light, and to his children. In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, and made a king over themselves. So Joram went over to Zair, and all the chariots with him, and he rose by night, and smote the Edomites which compassed him about, and the captains of the chariots, and the people fled into their tents. Yet Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah unto this day. Then Libnah revolted at the same time. And the rest of the acts of Joram, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah. And Joram slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David, and Ahaziah his son reigned in his stead.
COMMENTARY
a. Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat began to reign as king of Judah
The biblical narrative now resumes the southern royal line from 1 Kings 22:50, where Jehoshaphat’s reign concluded and Jehoram ascended to the throne. Judah’s history had temporarily been set aside while the narrative focused on Israel’s kings and the ministry of Elisha. At this point, Scripture reconnects the threads and returns to the Davidic dynasty.
i. Distinguishing the two Jehorams
The historical setting contains two rulers with the same name.
Jehoram of Judah, son of Jehoshaphat
Jehoram of Israel, son of Ahab, often called Joram
The Jehoram in this passage is the king of Judah, not the northern ruler.
b. He walked in the way of the kings of Israel
This description is a sweeping condemnation. Israel’s kings, from Jeroboam onward, were consistently idolatrous and rebellious against the Lord. For a Judean king to walk in their ways represented severe spiritual decay.
Jehoram forsook the spiritual heritage of Asa and Jehoshaphat. He rejected the temple centered faithfulness of Judah and adopted the Baal influenced apostasy of Ahab’s regime.
i. The Chronicler adds more detail
2 Chronicles 21:11 reveals that Jehoram led Judah into Canaanite style idolatry. His sin was not merely personal. He corrupted the entire nation. He institutionalized false worship, ensuring that Judah followed the path of spiritual ruin.
c. For the daughter of Ahab was his wife
The root of Jehoram’s apostasy lies in his marriage. His wife was Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel. This marriage brought the venom of the northern kingdom into the Davidic line. Instead of Judah lifting Israel upward, Israel pulled Judah downward.
i. Josephus records that Jehoram murdered his brothers
2 Chronicles 21:1-6 describes Jehoram killing all his brothers and several leading officials. Josephus adds the detail that he acted under Athaliah’s influence, showing her Jezebel like character. She became one of the most wicked women in Judah’s history.
ii. The marriage polluted Judah
The alliance was politically sensible but spiritually disastrous. The influence of Ahab’s house overwhelmed the godly heritage of Judah. Evil traveled downward. Righteousness did not travel upward.
iii. Knapp’s point
Jehoram reaped exactly what he sowed. His ungodly alliance produced disaster in his life, in his reign, and in the generations that followed. His sins bore bitter fruit for decades.
d. Yet the Lord would not destroy Judah for the sake of David
Jehoram’s wickedness deserved national destruction, yet God restrained His judgment. This restraint flowed from His covenant with David. God had promised David a lasting dynasty, a perpetual lamp, and an enduring testimony.
The stability of Judah rested not on Jehoram’s righteousness, but on God’s covenant faithfulness.
i. The lamp symbolized covenant fidelity
The “lamp” recalls Psalm 132:17, “There will I make the horn of David to bud, I have ordained a lamp for mine anointed.”
This phrase pointed ultimately to Christ, the eternal heir of David’s throne.
e. In his days Edom revolted against Judah’s authority
This rebellion revealed the diminishing strength of Judah under Jehoram. He believed that his alliance with Ahab would increase Judah’s influence. Instead, it weakened the nation. Edom had been under Judah’s control since David’s time, but under Jehoram they successfully broke free.
Spiritual compromise always weakens a nation politically and militarily. Judah’s decline began the moment her king abandoned the Lord.
f. He rose by night and attacked the Edomites
Jehoram attempted a surprise night assault, but it failed to restore control. The revolt continued and became permanent, recorded with the words, “unto this day.”
Judah’s external decline reflected Jehoram’s internal spiritual collapse.
g. Libnah revolted at that time
Libnah was a priestly city. Its revolt strongly implies a spiritual reason. When a king abandons the Lord, the priestly and faithful centers of the nation respond with resistance. Even loyal cities turned away from Jehoram because he had turned from the Lord.
h. So Joram rested with his fathers
Jehoram died and was buried in the city of David, but 2 Chronicles 21:20 reveals a devastating detail. He was not buried in the royal tombs. He was denied the honor typically given to a king of Judah.
His life ended in disgrace because he had lived in rebellion.
i. Elijah’s letter
In 2 Chronicles 21:12-19, Elijah sent Jehoram a prophetic letter announcing judgment. God struck him with a terrible disease of the intestines. He died in agony, and Scripture records that no one regretted his passing.
ii. Knapp’s summary
Knapp says Jehoram is among the most unlovely kings of Judah. His name meant “exalted by the Lord,” yet he lived in rebellion and ended in humiliation. He sowed corruption and reaped dishonor.
