Deeper Commentary
2Ch 36:1 Then the people of the land took Jehoahaz the son of Josiah,
and made him king in his father’s place in Jerusalem-
2 Kings 23:31 says that Jehoahaz was the son of Hamutal, whereas his
brother Eliakim was the son of Zebudah (2 Kings 23:36). So we see that
Josiah practiced polygamy- another indication that he was not such a stellar
example of spirituality, despite his works of obedience to the Mosaic law;
see on 2 Chron. 35:19,20. And the mothers of his sons are blamed in Ez. 19
for leading them into very bad behaviour, so these were not good women.
2Ch 36:2 Joahaz was twenty-three years old when he began to reign; and he
reigned three months in Jerusalem-
It is possible that Josiah was spiritually sliding downwards in the
last 13 years of his reign; see on 2 Chron. 35:19,20. So the formative years
of his sons may not have been spent under a good parental influence, which
would explain their weakness and apostacy. LXX adds: "And he did that which
was evil in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his fathers had
done. And Pharaoh Neco bound him in Deblatha in the land of Hamath, that he
might not reign in Jerusalem".
2Ch 36:3 The king of Egypt deposed him at Jerusalem, and fined the land one
hundred talents of silver and a talent of gold-
2 Kings 23:35 says that Jehoiakim raised the tribute for the
Babylonians by imposing a poll tax on the people. And he succeeded in
raising the money. Yet such a tax ought to have been paid to the temple, but
Jehoiakim hadn't bothered doing that.
2Ch 36:4 The king of Egypt made Eliakim his brother king over Judah and
Jerusalem, and changed his name to Jehoiakim. Neco took Joahaz his
brother, and carried him to Egypt-
"Eliakim" means "God will raise", and "Jehoiakim" means the same, only
"Yah will raise". Perhaps the king made Eliakim swear by his God Jehovah,
that he would be subservient to him. But it could be that the "Jeh" prefix
meant something different to the Egyptians, and was effectively a sign of
subservience to them; it may even refer to an Egyptian god. Joahaz died in
Egypt (2 Kings 23:34) as prophesied in Jer. 22:12.
2Ch 36:5 Jehoiakim was twenty-five years old when he began to reign, and
he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem. He did that which was evil in the
eyes of Yahweh his God-
Jer. 22:13-18 gives an example of the sins of Jehoiakim- he built an
opulent home for himself and refused to pay the labourers for their work.
He also murdered the prophet Urijah who spoke against him (Jer. 26:20-23),
and burnt the scroll of God's words and persecuted Jeremiah (Jer. 36).
2Ch 36:6 Against him came up Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and bound him
in fetters, to carry him to Babylon-
It may not have been Nebuchadnezzar in person. "To carry him to
Babylon" means that was the intention, but it may not have happened. Jer.
22:18,19 says he was to be thrown out onto the garbage tip outside
Jerusalem like a dead donkey. 2 Kings says that bands of the Babylonians
attacked him at this time, and he may have been slain at this time.
2Ch 36:7 Nebuchadnezzar also carried of the vessels of the house of Yahweh
to Babylon, and put them in his temple at Babylon-
"Of the vessels" means they were not all taken at this time; that was
to happen later (:18). Babylon's original plan seemed to have been to make
Judah a tributary state, taking away the leadership and seeking to make
the youngsters like Daniel completely Babylonian, with a view to them
returning and governing Judah. Hence only part of the vessels were
initially taken. But this changed to a policy of complete destruction. It
would have been at this time that Daniel and his friends went into
captivity. Dan. 1:2 describes this situation: "He carried them into the
land of Shinar to the house of his god: and he brought the vessels into
the treasure house of his god". The captives were
paralleled with the temple treasures; they were taken into the temple as
evidence that Yahweh and His people had now been apparently dominated. But
Isaiah had prophesied that Bel would be rendered helpless and judged (Is.
46:1,2). The faithful captives would have remembered that, even when it
seemed their chips were down.
2Ch 36:8 Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and his abominations which
he did, and that which was found in him, behold, they are written in the
book of the kings of Israel and Judah-
I have noted earlier that the kings are often described with a double
description- of their works, and of their heart. Some of them like
Jehoshaphat had imperfect works but good hearts for God; others performed
some outstanding works at some times, but their hearts were not devoted to
Yahweh. Here we have the same double reference; Jehoiakim's works were
abominations, and what was "found in him", by the Divine search of his
heart, was also [it is implied] very bad. I have noted before that "the
book of the kings" is not necessarily the books we know as 1 and 2 Kings
in our Bibles.
Jehoiachin his son reigned in his
place-
Jeconiah of 1 Chron. 3:16 is Coniah in Jer. 22:14, and Jehoiachin in 2
Chron. 36:8,9; 2 Kings 24:6. A reminder that people carried multiple names,
explaining some of the apparent contradictions in the genealogies. Ez. 19
says that he was effectively made king by his ambitious mother, whose hope
was to be the glorious queen mother, teaching her sons to be ambitious,
aggressive lions to that end.
2Ch 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign; and he
reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem. He did that which was evil
in the sight of Yahweh-
Jehoiachin of 2 Chron. 36:9 is also called Jeconiah or Jechoniah (1 Chron. 3:16,17); Coniah
(Jer. 22:24), and Jechoniah in 2 Chron. 24:1. We note that he was judged
as a sinner at eight years old, for what he did over a 70 day period. We sometimes tend to excuse ourselves on the basis of only being
products of our background. But eight year old Jehoiachin reigned a mere
three months and ten days: and God's comment was that "he did that which
was evil in the sight of Yahweh". We could, of course,
make the excuse that his surroundings, his immediate family, his
peers...were all idolatrous. But Yahweh evidently didn't see this as any
real excuse: he, at sweet eight years old, "did that which was evil" and
was punished accordingly. Not only does this give an unusual insight into
God's view of responsibility; but it shows that God expects even a child
to break away from background influences when they are evil.
However, 2 Kings 24:8 says he was 18. Although even so, 18 is very young to be condemned for 70 days' behaviour, and the points made above about God's sensitivity to sin still stand. Kings also gives "three months" rather than "three months and ten days", and it has been suggested that the "ten" has been misplaced by a copyist, explaining why 18 has been miscopied as 8.
2Ch 36:10 At the return of the year king Nebuchadnezzar sent, and brought
him to Babylon, with the beautiful vessels of the house of Yahweh, and
made Zedekiah his brother king over Judah and Jerusalem-
"Brother" is used in a very wide sense, and more means "uncle" here
(2 Kings 24:17). 2 Kings 24:17 says that Nebuchadnezzar changed the name
Mattaniah, 'gift of Yah', to "Zedekiah", 'Yah is right / just'. Perhaps
even Nebuchadnezzar perceived that Yahweh was judging Judah justly. But "Zedekiah" is
also "Yahweh our righteousness", but his birth name was
Mattaniah (2 Kings 24:17). We wonder if this was a pre existing name given
him by Josiah, and that Josiah named him this in keeping
with his vision of reestablishing the Kingdom of God, based around a
united Israel and Judah centered around worshipping Yahweh. For this is
the term associated with king of the restored kingdom in Jer. 23:6; 33:16;
51:10. But he again was a case of wasted potential.
2Ch 36:11 Zedekiah was twenty-one years old when he began to reign, and he
reigned eleven years in Jerusalem-
Hamutal his mother (2 Kings 24:18) is severely criticized in Ez. 19
as an ambitious, aggressive and scheming mother lion who set up her young
lion sons for destruction by wanting them to be kings. Instead they needed
to heed Jeremiah's message and humble themselves before Babylon, realizing
they had sinned, rather than trying to break away from Babylon to achieve
the independent kingship their mother was so obsessed with.
2Ch 36:12 He did that which was evil in the sight of Yahweh his God; he
didn’t humble himself before Jeremiah the prophet speaking the words of
Yahweh-
The prophets "spoke from the mouth of Yahweh"
Himself; and yet the people scoffed at them (2 Chron. 36:12,16 RV). The
power of inspiration was and is so great; and to not heed God's word is
therefore a personal affront to Him.
2Ch 36:13 He also rebelled against king Nebuchadnezzar, who had made him
swear by God; but he stiffened his neck, and hardened his heart against
turning to Yahweh, the God of Israel-
Turning to Yahweh with a soft heart therefore involved his accepting
that Judah had sinned, and therefore their servitude to Babylon was the
appropriate punishment. But egged on by his mother (see on :11), Zedekiah
broke his oath to Nebuchadnezzar, which he had made in the name of Yahweh.
He thus despised the Name. The parable of Ez. 17:12-20 clearly condemns
him for doing this (also Ez. 21:25). Ez. 17:14 explains the intention of
God in all this: "That the kingdom might be base, that it might not lift
itself up, but that by keeping his covenant it might stand". The idea may
be that it was God's plan that through keeping the covenant, the royal
family and leadership would be humbled, and this would bring about God's
favourite paradox- the brought down could then be exalted, "that... it
might stand". See on Ez. 17:24. But they refused to repent, to be humbled,
to be ashamed, and instead sought to wriggle out of the covenant by making
agreements with Egypt to attack the Babylonian forces, liberate Jerusalem
and perhaps later themselves from Babylon itself. Yet all these things had
been explicitly promised to Judah; God would do all these things, if they
repented. But instead of doing so, they sought by all manner of desperate
means to bring about this liberation in the strength of Egypt. This is so
typical of human behaviour. It is for us to learn the lesson.
Ez. 17:15 commented: "Shall he who does such things escape? Shall he break the covenant, and yet escape?". This is the language of Judah breaking covenant with God, just used in Ez. 16:59. God had designed the covenant between Zedekiah and the Babylonians, for the spiritual growth and repentance of the Jews. To break it was therefore to effectively break covenant with God. Or we could instead perceive that covenant breaking with God is reflected in covenant breaking with men. Our attitude to God becomes our attitude to men. Hence Ez. 17:19 specifically states: "Therefore thus says the Lord Yahweh: As I live, surely My oath that he has despised, and My covenant that he has broken, I will even bring it on his own head". Judah were light hearted in their attitude to everything; they "gave the hand" in covenant (Ez. 17:18) in order just to get "bread" (Lam. 5:6). They were in need, and instead of turning to God in repentance, they madly made promises of total loyalty to various peoples and their gods. It is this light hearted, not serious attitude, seeking for the immediate for the total sacrifice of principle, which dominates our age today.
2Ch 36:14 Moreover all the chiefs of the priests, and the people,
trespassed very greatly after all the abominations of the nations; and
they polluted the house of Yahweh which He had made holy in Jerusalem-
Their sin with "all" the abominable idols of the nations is in
contrast to how those nations were themselves loyal to their gods. But
Judah was so desperate for help that she prostituted herself to every
possible god of the nations. Hence Hosea describes her with the image of a
woman who is sexually addicted. This is what happens when someone
goes away from the true God; they will live a sad life of endless drifting
between idols, desperately trying to find as much benefit as possible from
as many of them as possible. The temple was therefore finally found to be
full of various idols and images to various gods.
2Ch 36:15 Yahweh, the God of their fathers, sent to them by His
messengers, rising up early and sending, because He had compassion on His
people and on His dwelling place-
2Ch 36:16 But they mocked the messengers of God, and despised His words
and scoffed at His prophets, until the wrath of Yahweh arose against His
people, until there was no remedy-
2Ch 36:17 Therefore He brought on them the king of the Chaldeans, who
killed their young men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and
had no compassion on young man or virgin, old man or gray-headed. He gave
them all into his hand-
The particular anger with the temple was because Judah had promised
unique loyalty to Babylon, and had therefore put Babylonian gods in the
temple of Yahweh. But when the Babylonians took Jerusalem, they found the
temple full of idols to other gods. As the prophets explain, her nakedness
was discovered, and she was put to shame before all her lovers. For she
had promised each of them unique loyalty and acceptance of their gods.
This verse is the fulfilment of the vision of slaughter in Ez. 9:1-11.
2Ch 36:18 All the vessels of God’s house, great and small, and the
treasures of the house of Yahweh, and the treasures of the king, and of
his princes, all these he brought to Babylon-
These were the vessels remaining after the deportation of :10, and
were largely the brass vessels which remained (2 Kings 25:13-15).
2Ch 36:19 They burnt God’s house and broke down the wall of Jerusalem, and
burnt all its palaces with fire, and destroyed all the beautiful vessels
of it-
Israel were told to "throw down", "break in pieces" and "utterly destroy"
the idols and altars of Canaan. There were times during their history when
they obeyed this command by purging themselves from their apostasy in
this. The Hebrew words used scarcely occur elsewhere, except very
frequently in the context of how God "broke down", "threw down" and
"destroyed" Israel at the hands of their Babylonian and Assyrian invaders
as a result of their not 'breaking down' (etc.) the idols. "Throw down" in
Ex. 34:13; Dt. 7:5; 12:3; 2 Chron. 31:1 is the same word in 2 Chron.
36:19; Jer. 4:26; 31:28; 33:4; 39:8; 52:14; Ez. 16:39; Nah. 1:6. "Cut
down" in Dt. 7:5; 12:3; 2 Chron. 31:1 later occurs in Is. 10:33; Jer.
48;25; Lam. 2:3. So Israel faced the choice: either cut down your idols,
or you will be cut down. The stone will either fall on us and destroy us,
or we must fall on it and become broken men and women (Mt. 21:44). For the
man untouched by the concept of living for God's glory, it's a hard
choice. God will conquer sin, ultimately.
2Ch 36:20 He carried those who had escaped from the sword away to Babylon;
and they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom
of Persia-
Being servants to the ruling dynasty of Babylon was the judgment upon
all the nations (Jer. 27:7). So God's people were sharing in the judgments
of the world, because they were not separate from the world. And thus the
punishment of the apostate amongst the new Israel will be to be "condemned
with the world" (1 Cor. 11:32). The critics claim that the sons or
descendants of Nebuchadnezzar ceased to reign at some point before Persia
took over. There were three kings of Babylon after Nebuchadnezzar before
Cyrus and the Persians took over: Evil-Merodach (Amil-Marduk) (2 Kings
25:27), Neriglissar and Nabonidus. The last two were not "sons"
of Nebuchadnezzar but they were both his sons in law. The Hebrew term
"sons" is very broad and easily includes this dimension.
2Ch 36:21 to fulfil the word of Yahweh by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the
land had enjoyed its Sabbaths. As long as it lay desolate it kept Sabbath,
to fulfil seventy years-
It would seem from 2 Chron. 36:21 that the law concerning the land
resting every Sabbath year was hardly ever kept, even by the righteous
kings. We can imagine how the thinking developed: father didn't do it.
grandfather didn't, none of the faithful old kings seemed that interested
in it... therefore every time that passage was considered in their study
of the Law, it was mentally bypassed. We are all absolutely expert at this kind of bypass.
The land of Israel had to be rested every Sabbath year. God's people
thought they could quietly ignore this inconvenient requirement of their
God, and get away with it. But God has His way, in everything, all the
time. Eventually the whole land had to go through 70 years laying
desolate, to compensate for the 70 Sabbaths (over 490 years) which His
people had ignored to keep (2 Chron. 36:21).
Closer study reveals the variableness of
outworking of the time periods. Jer. 25:11,12 and Jer. 29:10 speak of a 70
year period of Babylonian rule over Judah, beginning with the invasion of
BC597. But Babylon only ruled over Judah for 49 years, before Babylon fell
to the Persians. This would connect with the way that Zech. 4:3 speaks of
7 menorah candlesticks each with 7 lamps, making 49 lamps. 49 is the cycle
of 7 Sabbath years that culminated in the jubilee year, and the jubilee
year, the proclamation of liberty to the land (Lev. 25:8-12; 27:7-24) is a
figure used so often in Isaiah to describe the freedom of Judah once
released from Babylon. Lev. 26:34,43 speak of the land enjoying her
Sabbaths whilst Israel were in exile for their sins- i.e. for 49 years. So
it seems that there could have been some restoration after 49 years- but
it didn't happen. But Dan. 9:2 and 2 Chron. 36:21 seem to reinterpret
those 70 years of Jeremiah's prophecies as speaking of a 70 year period
during which Jerusalem and the temple would be desolate. See on Ez. 6:8.
2Ch 36:22 Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of
Yahweh by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished-
Daniel understood from Jeremiah’s prophecies that Jerusalem’s fortunes
would be revived after the 70 year period was ended. Yet he goes on to ask
God to immediately forgive His people, as if Daniel even dared
hope that the period might be shortened. Daniel lived into the reign of
Cyrus (Dan. 6:28), and so he would have witnessed “the going forth of the
commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem” (Dan. 9:25; Ezra 1:1). But
it seems to me that whilst the prophecy of the 70 years came true in one
sense, the Jews didn’t respond as they should, and so the time of Zion’s
true freedom in the Messianic Kingdom was delayed. Daniel had been
petitioning the Father to not delay beyond the 70 year period in doing
this. But in another sense, the prophecy was re-interpreted; Daniel was
now told that there was to be a “seventy weeks of years” (Dan. 9:24 RSV)
period involved in order to gain ultimate forgiveness for Israel as Daniel
had just been praying for. The 70 years had become “seventy weeks of
years”. The command to rebuild Jerusalem was given in the first year of
Cyrus; but Daniel must have watched in vain for any sign that
Zion’s glad morning had really come. And so it is recorded that in the
third year of Cyrus Daniel was given a vision that confirmed to him that
“the thing was true, but the time appointed was long [Heb. ‘extended’; the
word is also translated “greater”, “more”]: and he understood the thing”
(Dan. 10:1). What was “the thing” that was true, which Daniel sought to
understand? Surely it was the vision of the 70 years that he had sought to
“understand” in Dan. 9:2. The Hebrew dabar, translated “thing”, is
usually translated “word”. He was comforted that the word of prophecy
would come true; it was “noted in the scripture of truth” (Dan. 10;21). It
was just that it had been extended in its fulfilment; “for yet the vision
is for many days” (Dan. 10:14). And this was how he came to “understand
the thing / word”. The essential and ultimate fulfilment of the 70 years
prophecy would only be after a long time, involving 70 “weeks of years”.
Thus Daniel came to “understand” the vision (Dan. 10:1); hence he was so
shocked, depressed and disappointed that the fulfilment would not be in
his days. But he is set up as a representative of those of us in the very
last days who shall likewise “understand” (s.w. Dan. 12:10) the very same
prophecies which Daniel studied. Daniel is described as both
understanding, and also not understanding (Dan. 10:1; 12:8). Surely the
idea is that he understood the principle of deferment and the outline
meaning of the prophecy; but he didn’t understand the details. And so
perhaps it is with us who will, or do, likewise “understand” as Daniel
did.
Yahweh stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he
made a proclamation-
This is the same word for "noise" in
Ez.
37:7: “So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was
a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his
bone”. This meant that the “whole house of Israel” was to stand up from
their graves and return as a mighty army to the land. Their attitude in
Babylon was exactly as in Ez. 37:11: “behold, they say, Our bones are
dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts”. These were the
very sentiments of Jeremiah in Lamentations, and those who wept by the
waters of Babylon when they remembered Zion. They were revived by the gift
of the Spirit, the breath / spirit which was blown into them by God's
initiative.
Throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing saying-
The restoration prophecies speak of how “all nations” are to
be gathered to Zion; they are those who scattered Judah amongst the
nations; not every literal nation. And who “scattered” Israel? The Hebrew
word is used in Jer. 50:17 to describe how Babylon scattered Judah amongst
the nations. And most significantly, the same word occurs again in Est.
3:8: “And Haman said unto king Ahasuerus, There is a certain people
scattered abroad and dispersed among the people in all the provinces
of thy kingdom...”. It is quite wrong for us to imagine Judah sitting
quietly by the rivers of Babylon, all huddled together. They were
scattered throughout all the many provinces / colonies of the Babylonian
empire. This was why Cyrus’ decree bidding the Jews return to rebuild
Jerusalem had to be published “throughout all his kingdom”, and
Jews living “in any place” of that kingdom were included in the
invitation. It was Babylon who had “parted my land” by dividing it up
amongst the various ‘Samaritan’ peoples who were transported there from
other conquered territories. And their being in Babylon is paralleled with
being scattered to the four corners of the world as it was known to them:
“Ho, ho, come forth, and flee from the land of the north, saith the LORD:
for I have spread you abroad as the four winds of the heaven, saith the
LORD. Deliver thyself, O Zion, that dwellest with the daughter of Babylon”
(Zech. 2:6-7). And consider Zech. 7:14: “But I scattered them with a
whirlwind among all the nations whom they knew not. Thus the land was
desolate after them [i.e. this concerns the Babylonian invasion], that no
man passed through nor returned”. Indeed, Zech. 8:7,8 speaks of the
restoration as coming from both West and East of Israel, implying that the
Babylonians had sold some of the Jews as slaves in Greece and north
Africa.
2Ch 36:23 Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, Yahweh, the God of heaven has
given all the kingdoms of the earth to me; and He has commanded me to
build Him a house in Jerusalem which is in Judah-
Cyrus clearly had a
sense of relationship with Yahweh, and I have argued that he was one of
the potential Messiah figures who could have reestablished the Kingdom at
the restoration. I
It is significant that Ezra and Nehemiah speak of the "God of Heaven" (e.g. Ezra 1:2) whilst Zechariah speaks of the "God of the earth" or 'land' of Israel, perhaps because the Angel of Israel literally went to Heaven when the glory departed from Jerusalem, and returned, in a sense, at the restoration- to depart again at the Lord's death ("Your house is left unto you desolate"; of the Angel that once dwelt in the temple).
Whoever there is among
you of all his people, Yahweh his God be with him, and let him go up-
"His God..." sounds as if Cyrus had not adopted Yahweh as his own God. And
yet he does recognize that "He is God". We can know things about
God, without grasping their personal reality. That is the lesson of Cyrus.
Amos 9:11-15 is most comfortably interpreted when read as referring to the restoration of Judah and the “remnant” of the ten tribes to the land under Ezra: “In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old: That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this. Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt. And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them. And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God”. “I will raise up” uses a Hebrew word very commonly featured in the records of the restoration, when the people were exhorted to “rise up and build” (Ezra 1:5; 3:2; 10:4,15; Neh. 2:18,20). The statement that they would “close up the breaches thereof” is exactly the language of Neh. 6:1, which records that the walls were rebuilt so that there was no breach [s.w.] therein. It was after the Babylonian invasion that Zion was “fallen” and ‘ruined’ (s.w. Jer. 31:18; 45:4; Lam. 2:2,17). “I will build it” is exactly the theme of the records of the return from Babylon (Ezra 1:2,3,5; 3:2,10; 4:1-4; Neh. 2:5,17,18,20; 3:1-3, 13-15; 4:1,3,5,6,10,17,18; 6:1,6; 7:1). Surely Amos 9 is saying that at the rebuilding at the time of the restoration, God’s people could have ushered in the Kingdom age of agricultural plenty and victory over their Arab neighbours. But they intermarried with Edom, and suffered drought because they didn’t fulfill the requirements to rebuild Zion correctly. But the words of Amos were still to come true in some form- they are given an application in Acts 15:17 which may appear to be way out of context, i.e. to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. Thus words which could have had a plain fulfilment at the restoration were given a delayed fulfilment; but they were not fulfilled in a literal sense, but in a spiritual one. And so it is with prophecies like Ezekiel 38, and the temple prophecies of Ezekiel. They will be fulfilled in spiritual essence, but probably not in strict literality, although they could have been had God’s people been more ‘fulfilling’ of them.
Previous Chapter
