2 Chronicles 16:1-6 In the six and thirtieth year of the reign of Asa Baasha king of Israel came up against Judah, and built Ramah… I. WHEN IT HAPPENED. "In the six and thirtieth year of the reign of Asa" (ver. 1). 1. An obvious error. Baasha ascended the throne of Israel in Asa's third year (1 Kings 15:33), and died in his twenty-sixth (1 Kings 16:8). Yet it follows not that this blunder was in the original text. Most likely it crept in through transcription. The existence of such mistakes is not fatal to the claim of Scripture to be regarded as inspired. 2. A probable solution. Different explanations have been given. (1) The thirty-six years of ver. 1 should be reckoned from the separation of the kingdoms (Usher, Jamieson); but against this stands the fact that the thirty-six years are stated to have belonged to the reign of Asa, while the assertion that no war occurred in Judah for thirty-five years after its commencement as a separate kingdom is incorrect (2 Chronicles 13:2). (2) In 2 Chronicles 15:19, instead of "thirty-five" should be read "five," and in 2 Chronicles 16:1, instead of "thirty-six" should be inserted "six" (Vaihinger in Herzog, Thenius, Bahr). Thus the war with Zerah would be later than the attack of Baasha, though reported before it; and the connection of the verses would be, "There was no war unto the fifth year of the reign of Asa; but in the sixth year Baasha came up." This shatters itself upon the two facts that Asa's reign began with ten years of quiet (2 Chronicles 14:1), and that Zerah's invasion must have been before Baasha's attack (2 Chronicles 16:8). To be sure, as numbers are being altered generally, the "ten" of 2 Chronicles 14:1 might be changed into "five;" but Hanani, in 2 Chronicles 16:8, could hardly speak of the Ethiopian invasion as an historical fact if it had not then taken place. (3) The six and thirtieth year should be the five and twentieth (Adam Clarke). In favour of this may be urged that it is a fair guess. (4) The text should be "in the sixteenth year of the reign of Asa" (Bertheau, Keil, Ewald, Kleinert in Riehm). The chronology of Asa's reign would thus run: (a) Ten years of quiet (2 Chronicles 14:1), in the third of which Baasha usurps the supreme authority in Israel (1 Kings 15:33); (b) the invasion of Zerah (2 Chronicles 14:9) between the tenth and fifteenth years, probably in the fourteenth; (c) the national covenant in the fifteenth year (2 Chronicles 15:10); (d) in the sixteenth the threatening advance of Baasha (2 Chronicles 16:1). The statement that Judah was exempt from war until the thirty-fifth year of Asa (2 Chronicles 15:19) may be harmonized with that in 1 Kings 15:16, 32, that "there was war between Asa and Baasha King of Israel all their days," by assuming that there was latent hostility between the two kingdoms from the first, but no outbreak of war until Asa's thirty-fifth year (Keil) - the attack here recorded not having culminated in any collision between the two powers on the field of battle, the work of causing Baasha to withdraw having been entrusted to Benhadad. II. HOW IT WAS OCCASIONED. By Baasha's advance against Judah (ver. 1). 1. The history of Baasha. The son of Ahijah, of the house of Issachar - not of Ahijah the prophet, who was an Ephraimite of Shiloh (1 Kings 11:29) - Baasha appears to have been originally a person of obscure station, though he afterwards rose to be a captain in the army of Nadab, Jeroboam's son, as Zimri subsequently was in that of Elah, Baasha's son (1 Kings 16:9). During the siege of Gibbethon he conspired against his master, smote him and usurped his throne. Not content with this, he put the whole house of Jeroboam to the sword - an act of cruelty which rebounded on himself and his house (1 Kings 16:12). In the twelfth year of his reign he formed the plan here narrated for inflicting a blow upon Judah and Asa. 2. The character of Baasha. More than likely a soldier of distinguished bravery (1 Kings 16:5), he was little other than a monster of cruelty (1 Kings 15:29) - two qualities not often allied. The true hero is seldom cruel; the cruel man is seldom brave. A faithful follower of Jeroboam in the matter of religion, he was an ardent idolater and a persistent corrupter of the people (1 Kings 16:2). 3. The project of Baasha. To fortify Ramah, the modern Er-Ram, in Benjamin (Joshua 18:25; Judges 19:3), about five miles north of Jerusalem. This town, which properly belonged to Judah - not to Israel (Bahr, Bertheau) - but which Abijah had taken from Jeroboam (ch. 13:19), Baasha had not previously conquered (Ewald), but at that time seized. His object probably was (1) to cut off all traffic between the kingdoms - in fact, blockade Jerusalem - that the southern kingdom might be forced to capitulate (Ewald, Bahr); (2) to prevent alliance between Judah and any power north of Israel (Bertheau); and (3) to obtain a footing within the territory of Judah as a basis for future operations (Josephus). III. IN WHAT IT CONSISTED. In three things. 1. Not repairing to Jehovah for assistance against Baasha, as he had formerly done against Zerah (2 Chronicles 14:11). Perhaps he deemed Baasha a more manageable opponent than the Ethiopian leader had been - an adversary that might be coped with successfully by his own craft, without calling in the battalions of Jehovah. Or, his preceding prosperity may have been his ruin, and this may have been the turning-point on that downward path of spiritual degeneracy which he pursued until he died. On any supposition it was an act of unbelief, and as such a sin; and, considering the success of his former application to Jehovah, an act of folly, and therefore a blunder as well as a sin. This he afterwards learnt from Hanani (ver. 9). 2. Seeking a league with Benhadad of Syria. (Ver. 2.) This Benhadad, or son of Ader (LXX.) - in the Assyrian inscriptions Bin-hidri, the son of Hadar, the supreme divinity of Damascus (Schrader, 'Die Keilinschriften,' p. 200) - was the son of Tabrimon, the son of Hezion, the King of Syria (1 Kings 15:18). Damascus, his capital - in Hebrew Dammesek, in Assyrian Dimaski and Dimmaska, in Arabic Dimesch-eseh-Schdm, or shortly, esch-Scham - had been a town in the days of Abraham (Genesis 14:15; Genesis 15:2), and is still one of the few towns of antiquity that have never lost their primitive splendour and renown. It has been styled "the pearl of the Orient, the beautiful as Eden, the fragrant Paradise, the plumage of the Paradise peacock, the coloured collar of the ring-dove, the necklace of beauty, the door of Caaba, the eye of the East, the Eden of the Moslem," with other such hyperbolical expressions (Riehm's ' Handworter-buch,' art. "Damascus;" cf. Stanley's 'Sinai and Palestine,' pp. 414, etc.; 'Picturesque Palestine,' 3:143, etc.). Its king was at this time in league with Baasha, who hoped with his assistance to subdue the southern kingdom. He was thus an enemy to Judah, as his predecessor Rezon had been to the united empire (1 Kings 11:25); and Asa might have reasoned, that not much help of a genuine kind could be obtained from him, least of all by such a stratagem as that adopted. 3. Resorting to bribery in order to gain his end. Those who use dishonourable methods to procure any advantage generally overestimate the advantage they are willing in this way to buy; and, as a consequence, discover in the long run they have been miserably duped. Even had Asa not been at fault in the value he put upon Benhadad's alliance, the means he took to gain it were bad. The argument addressed to Baasha should never have been employed by Asa. The league of Abijah with Tabrimon should never have existed to lend countenance to the proposed league between Asa and Benhadad. But bad actions once done are easily repeated by the doers of them, and imitated by the children of those doers; while children find less difficulty in copying the evil than in following the good examples of their parents. Then Asa, while justified in attempting to dissolve the league between Benhadad and Baasha, should not have resorted to bribery. "A gift destroyeth the heart" (Ecclesiastes 7:7) of him that gives as of him that receives it. Far less for such an unhallowed purpose should he have robbed the temple, even if it had been permissible to displenish the palace. But not even "the treasures of the palace" should have been employed in dishonourable schemes (the secret-service money of modern governments falls under this condemnation); and much less "the treasures of the Lord's house." Upon the gold and silver of both Church and state should be inscribed, "Holiness unto the Lord," IV. TO WHAT IT CONDUCTED. Seeming success. Wicked schemes often appear to prosper for a season (Psalm 37:1; Psalm 92:7). Three things resulted from Asa's statecraft. 1. Benhadad accepted the bribe. (Ver. 4.) The golden and silvern keys of mammon can unlock the doors of most hearts. Great grace is needed to resist the power of money. "Wealth maketh many friends," and "every man is a friend to him that giveth gifts" (Proverbs 19:4, 6). Sometimes others besides wicked persons are guilty of "taking gifts out of their bosom" (Proverbs 17:23). Asa's present was too much for Benhadad's virtue. The King of Syria deserted his ally, the King of Israeli for the King of Judah, as he would by-and-by desert the King of Judah for the next highest bidder. Nor did he merely not assist Baasha, maintaining as it were an attitude of armed neutrality between the hostile powers, but he treacherously "sent the captains of his armies against the cities of Israel; and they smote Ijon and Dan, and Abel-maim, and all the store-cities of Naphtali" (see Exposition). Bad as Baasha was, and infamous as was his project, the character and conduct of Benhadad were equally reprehensible and offensive. But it is no part of wicked men's creed that they should change not when they swear to their own hurt (Psalm 14:4), or that they should keep faith with one another longer than appears for their advantage so to do. Modern kings and statesmen are sometimes charged with acting on similar lines in the making and the breaking of treaties. If the charge is true, it is not to their credit, and must ultimately turn to their people's hurt. 2. Baasha desisted from his fortifications. He left off building Ramah, and allowed his work to cease (ver. 5). Had Baasha been engaged upon a good work, upon God's work, the falling away of Benhadad would have mattered nothing; but being a wicked man himself, and occupied with a wicked enterprise, when the prop which supported him fell, he also was precipitated to the ground. When creature-arms fail the saints, the saints lean the heavier on the Almighty Arm; when wicked men are deprived of that in which they trust, they have nothing else to trust to. 3. Asa despoiled Bamah, and turned its stones and timber to his own use. He built therewith Geba and Mizpah (ver. 6); i.e. he fortified them. Both were in Benjamin, the former two miles and a half north of Ramah, on the road to Michmash; the latter, thirteen miles and a half from Ramah, on the north road from Jerusalem. Thus what Baasha had collected for the injury, Asa employed in the defence, of Judah. So believers may legitimately use the arguments and learning of heretics and unbelievers to establish the truth which these seek to overthrow (Bossuet). Again. whereas Baasha intended to despoil Judah, he was himself despoiled by both Benhadad (ver. 4) and Asa (ver. 6). Mischief-makers often find their mischief return upon their own heads, and violent dealers see their violence descend upon their own patens (Psalm 7:15, 16; Proverbs 26:27; Matthew 7:2). LESSONS. 1. The lust of acquiring the true parent of war (James 4:1, 2). 2. The wickedness of bribery (Proverbs 17:23) 3. The certainty of retribution (Numbers 32:23; Galatians 6:7). 4. The baseness of treachery (Proverbs 25:19; Proverbs 27:6; Obadiah 1:7). - W. Parallel Verses KJV: In the six and thirtieth year of the reign of Asa Baasha king of Israel came up against Judah, and built Ramah, to the intent that he might let none go out or come in to Asa king of Judah. |
    |