Bible Commentaries

The End of Ahab

1 Kings 20:34). It is clear that Benhadad has recovered his independence, and is probably in a position of superiority; it is certain that he has not restored Ramoth-gilead as he had promised to do, and his 1 Kings 22:42 of the same chapter we have seen how Ahab was rebuked for allowing the enemy to escape. It has been supposed that this conduct on the part of Ahab may have been due partly to compassion and partly to weakness. The judgment of the Lord was, however, expressed in the severest terms: "Because thou hast let go out of thy hand a man whom I appointed to utter destruction, therefore thy life shall go for his life, and thy people for his people" ( 1 Kings 20:42). In 1 Kings 22:3 we see these words signally fulfilled: The king of Israel seems to have had a good cause when he said to his servants, "Know ye that Ramoth in Gilead is ours, and we be still, and take it not out of the hand of the king of Syria?" On this occasion Ahab entered into an alliance with Jehoshaphat king of Judah for the purpose of taking back the city which belonged to Israel. Jehoshaphat made a deferential as well as a friendly reply, but insisted upon the fulfilment of a religious condition. Jehoshaphat would make inquiry at the word of the Lord. Thereupon four hundred prophets were gathered together, and with one consent they advised that the attack should be made upon Ramoth-gilead. Surely this was enough to satisfy the judgment and the conscience of the most religious 1 Kings 22:14). The humility of this answer is as conspicuous as its firmness. Its profound religiousness saves it from the charge of being defiant. Micaiah recognises himself merely in the position of a servant or medium who has nothing of his own to say, who is not called upon to invent an answer, or to play the clever man in the presence of the kings; he was simply as a trumpet through which God would blow his own blast, or a pillar on which God would inscribe his own message, or a voice which God would use for the declaration of his own will. It is unjust to attribute obstinacy or any form of self-will or self-worship to Micaiah. If he had consulted his natural inclination alone, he would have sought favour with the king, and the logical effect of his subsequent position would have been that Ahab would have endeavoured for ever to silence him by constituting him the prince and leader of the four hundred prophets. Micaiah said in effect, what was said centuries afterwards: "We have this treasure in earthen vessels." Micaiah lived in God, for God, and had nothing of his own to calculate or consider. Until preachers realise this same spiritual independence, they will be attempting to accommodate themselves to the spirit of the times, and even the strongest of them may be betrayed into connivances and compromises fatal to personal integrity and to the claims of truth.

Now came the critical moment. Now it was to be seen whether Micaiah was to be promoted to honour, or thrust away in contempt and wrath. It is easy to read of the recurrence of such moments, but difficult to realise them in their agony. Yet these are the moments which make history in its sublimest lines. It is not too much to say that there have been points of time at which if certain men had given way, the whole economy of the world would have been wrecked. The king addressed himself to the prophet, saying: "Shall we go against Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall we forbear?" The answer of Micaiah must have been a surprise to all who heard it, for he said, "Go, and prosper: for the Lord shall deliver it into the hand of the king" ( 1 Kings 22:15). This is an answer which cannot be understood in print. It was evident, however, that Ahab was in no doubt as to its meaning, for the tone of the prophet was a tone of almost contemptuous irony. If king Ahab had taken Micaiah's literal answer, he would have gone forth to the battle comforting himself with the thought that he was carrying out the will of heaven; but he knew in his own soul that Micaiah was not uttering that which expressed the reality of the case. With anger the king said unto him, "How many times shall I adjure thee that thou tell me nothing but that which is true in the name of the Lord?" ( 1 Kings 22:16). Then Micaiah replied in symbolic language, the meaning of which was vividly clear to the mind of Ahab; for, turning to Jehoshaphat, he said, "Did I not tell thee that he would prophesy no good concerning me, but evil?" ( 1 Kings 22:18). Thereupon Micaiah charged the whole band of prophets with being under the inspiration of a lying spirit, and thus he put a stigma upon and extracted from their judgment every particle of dignity and authority. But this was not to be borne, for Zedekiah went near and smote Micaiah on the cheek and taunted him as being the only prophet in Israel. Micaiah had to bear the sarcasm conveyed in the angry inquiry, "Which way went the Spirit of the Lord from me to speak unto thee?" ( 1 Kings 22:24). Micaiah like a true prophet leaves his judgment to the decision of time. He will not stoop to argue, or to exchange words either of anger or of controversy; he simply says that Zedekiah will one day see the meaning of the whole prophecy, and until that day controversy would be useless. Micaiah had to pay for his fearlessness: he was carried unto Amon the governor of the city, and to Joash the king's 1 Kings 22:28). See whether it is not a moment to be proud of when Micaiah turns away in the custody of his persecutors, having delivered his soul with fearlessness that did not cower or blanch even at the sight of death in its most ghastly forms. Surely it is due to history to recognise the fact that there have been men who have not counted their lives dear unto themselves when they were called upon to testify for truth and goodness. The martyrs must never be forgotten. Dark will be the day in the history of any nation when the men who shed their blood that truth might be told and honour might be vindicated, are no longer held in remembrance. In vain do we bring forth from our hidden treasure the coins of ancient times, the robes worn in high antiquity by kings and priests, the rusty armour of warriors, if there is no longer in our heart the tenderest recollection of the men who wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented, that they might save the torch of truth from extinction and the standard of honour from overthrow.

Away the kings have gone, and instead of relying upon the word of the Lord, or taking refuge in the sanctuary of great principles, they invent little tricks for the surprise and dismay of the enemy. The king of Israel disguised himself, and Jehoshaphat made himself as the king of Israel, but all their inventions came to nothing. A certain man drew a bow at a venture and smote the king of Israel between the joints of the harness. The poor king was fatally struck, he "was stayed up in his chariot against the Syrians, and died at even: and the blood ran out of the wound into the midst of the chariot.... And one washed the chariot in the pool of Samaria; and the dogs licked up his blood; and they washed his armour; according unto the word of the Lord which he spake." So will perish all the enemies of the Lord. Differences of merely accidental detail there will always be, but no honour can mark the death of those who have gone contrary to the will of heaven, and taken counsel of their own imagination. How long shall the lesson of history be wasted upon us? How long will men delude themselves with the mad infatuation that they can fight against God and prosper? Horsemen and chariots are nothing, gold and silver are valueless, all the resources of civilisation are but an elaborate display of cobwebs: nothing can stand in the final conflict but truth, and right, and purity. These are the eternal bulwarks, to these are assured complete and unchangeable victory. If God be for us, who can be against us? and if God be against us no matter what kings are for us, they shall be blown away of the wind as if contemptuously, and cast out as refuse which is of no value. My soul, be thou faithful to the voice of history nor tell lies to thyself, nor operate merely through imagination, ambition, or selfish calculation, for the end of this course is death: not heroic death, not death over which coming men and women will weep; but death that shall be associated with dishonour, a thing to be forgotten, an event that never can be named without bitterness and shame.

Selected Note

The Books of the Kings.—This section of Jewish history originally formed only one book in the sacred writings. It was customary with the Jews to name the sacred books from the word or words with which they commenced; and, while this practice may have given rise to the designation, "Kings" ( 1 Kings 1:1), it is right to observe that the title is well fitted to indicate the character of these historic compositions.

The annals given in these sacred registers are necessarily brief; but they extend from the close of David's reign till the commonwealth was dissolved, a period of four hundred and twenty-seven years. Succinct as is the history contained in these books, there are some peculiarities in them which should not be overlooked, and from which not a little may be learned. There is not here a simple biography of the various kings that occupied the thrones of Judah and Israel, nor is there a mere detail of national movements and events, nor even a tabular register of ecclesiastical affairs. The throne, the state, and the church, are all exhibited in their mutual relations and bearings upon each other. Kings and people are held up to view as existing and acting under the immediate government of God; and hence the character of the ruler is always tested by the mode in which he adheres to the laws of the Almighty, and developes the moral excellences of the people. The notice of his accession to royal office is generally accompanied with an estimate of his conduct, and the standard to which he is likened or contrasted is either the character of David, of his own father, or of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, "who made Israel to sin." All the political events which are recorded, are brought forward chiefly to exhibit the influence of religion on national prosperity: and, in this way, to show how the divine King of Israel observed the conduct of his subjects, and rewarded their fidelity or avenged their wickedness with expressions of righteous indignation. And the affairs of the Church are all portrayed with the design of giving prominence to the same important truth. Idolatry in Israel was treason against their King; religious defection was open revolt; and every act of overt wickedness was an act of rebellion. Hence there is a constant comparing or contrasting of religious state and feeling with those of former times, and especially are the oracles of truth continually elevated as the perfect standard to which the thoughts and actions of all should all be conformed. The Mosaic promises and warnings are strikingly verified in the Books of Kings—for this object they were written; and to the manifestation of this the author has made his whole narrative conduce.

Much variety of opinion exists with reference to the author of these records, and the period of their composition. Jewish tradition ascribes the authorship of the treatise to Jeremiah the prophet; a supposition which is greatly strengthened by the similarity of style and idiom which is traceable between the language of the Books of Kings and that of Jeremiah.