---

I. AN UNFORTUNATE ALLIANCE. Jehoshaphat joins affinity with Ahab (ver. 1). This refers to the marriage of Jehoram his son with Athaliah, Ahab's daughter (2 Chronicles 21:6), eight or nine years before. The date may be approximately determined thus. Athaliah's son ascended the throne of Judah at the age of twenty-two (2 Kings 8:26), not forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2). But Jehoram his father reigned eight years (2 Chronicles 21:5; 2 Kings 8:17). Hence the fourteen years leading back to Ahaziah's birth must have been the last fourteen of the reign of Jehoshaphat. Since, then, Jehoshaphat reigned twenty-five years (1 Kings 22:42), Ahaziah's birth must have happened in the eleventh year of Jehoshaphat's and the fifteenth of Ahab's reign (1 Kings 22:41). But Ahab reigned twenty-two years (2 Kings 16:29). Hence the interval between Ahaziah's birth and Ahab's death must have been at least seven years. The wedding, therefore, of Jehoram and Athaliah may be set down eight or nine years prior to Jehoshaphat's visit to Samaria. The alliance that wedding represented was the first wrong step Jehoshaphat took. It was:

1. Unnecessary.

(1) Not required by the safety of the state. The army that, with no ally but God (2 Chronicles 14:12), had defeated Zerah's million of soldiers, could hardly stand in need of succour from the son of Omri. In league with Jehovah (2 Chronicles 17:3), Jehoshaphat should have reckoned himself dispensed from the necessity of seeking other confederate (Romans 8:31; 1 John 4:4).

(2) Not demanded by the glory of his crown. His diadem had descended from David; Ahab's was of recent date. Omri had been an upstart (1 Kings 16:16); David a prince legitimate, a sovereign created by special act of Jehovah himself. Then he (Jehoshaphat) had "riches and honour in abundance," second only to those of Solomon, both of which were tokens of Divine approbation (Psalm 112:3). Besides, he possessed a good name (2 Chronicles 17:3), which is better than great riches (Proverbs 22:1) or precious ointment (Ecclesiastes 7:1).

2. Dangerous.

(1) To his own religious character, which could not be improved thereby. "Evil communications corrupt good manners" (1 Corinthians 15:33). Few can touch pitch and not be defiled. Considering Ahab's infamous character (1 Kings 16:29-33), Jehoshaphat should have reasoned that the wider they stood apart the better for him (Proverbs 13:20), and should have remembered David's prayer (Psalm 28:3), as well as acted on David's resolution (Psalm 101:4).

(2) To his son's piety (if that son had any), which would not likely be increased thereby. Nothing more ruinous to a young man for both time and eternity than an irreligious wife (Proverbs 12:4); nothing more helpful than a woman that fears the Lord (Proverbs 31:11, 12). Whatever Jehoram was in youth - and his upbringing may be assumed to have been godly - when he reached the throne he was truculent and debased, a murderer and an idolater, both of the worst type. This appalling deterioration the writer of the Kings and the Chronicles ascribe to Athaliah's influence (2 Chronicles 21:6; 2 Kings 8:18).

(3) To the best interests of his kingdom, which were not likely to be furthered thereby. On the contrary, these were grievously hindered. Judah declined till, in respect of idolatry, she stood at a level almost as low as that of Israel (2 Chronicles 21:13).

3. Sinful. A daughter from the house of Omri no fitting mate for a son of Jehoshaphat. The offspring of a Jezebel and an Ahab a good man should not have taken to his bosom (2 Corinthians 6:14-16).

II. AN ILL-ADVISED JOURNEY. Jehoshaphat pays a visit to Ahab (ver. 2). The second wrong step of Judah's king:

1. Not demanded by duty. Nothing in his relations to Ahab or in the obligations resting upon him with reference to Ahab called for his journey to Samaria. Jehoshaphat in this case ran without being sent, always perilous for a good man.

2. Not prompted by self-interest. Jehoshaphat's true interest lay in keeping as far apart as possible from the house of Omri (Proverbs 4:14). Had Ahab been a pious sovereign, Jehoshaphat might have profited by his society; being the opposite, Ahab could not advance Jehoshaphat's religion (Proverbs 13:20).

3. Not required by courtesy. Had Jehoshaphat been invited to Samaria, he might have found it difficult to decline without offending his royal brother. But Jehoshaphat travelled northwards of his own motion. Considering who Ahab was, it would have evidenced more prudence had Jehoshaphat stayed at home. To say the least, it was hazardous to fraternize with such a son of Belial as the King of Israel (2 Samuel 23:6, 7).

III. AN UNHOLY CONFEDERACY. Jehoshaphat makes a league with Ahab (ver. 3).

1. At what time? After enjoying Ahab's hospitality, which was sumptuous. The pleasures of the table have a tendency to lay one open to temptation; indulged in to excess, they lead to other sins (2 Timothy 3:4; 1 Peter 2:11). Gluttony and drunkenness go commonly together (Deuteronomy 21:20; Proverbs 23:21; Matthew 24:49); and all experience shows that when wine is in wit is out. Besides, it requires courage to accept a neighbour's hospitality - to eat his dinner and drink his wines-and deny his request. (N.B. - Beware of dining with those whose characters cannot be trusted!)

2. On whose persuasion? Ahab's. The King of Israel doubtless reasoned he had a double claim on Jehoshaphat, to whose son he had given a wife, and to whose self he had furnished a splendid entertainment. It is dangerous for good men to accept favours at the hands of the wicked. Jehoshaphat should have remembered David's prayer (Psalm 141:4).

3. For what object? To recover Ramoth-Gilead upon the northern frontier of Israel - a town which belonged to Israel (Deuteronomy 4:43; Joshua 21:38), and had been captured by Benhadad's father, not in the war with Baasha (2 Chronicles 16:4; 1 Kings 15:20), who was not Ahab's father, but in a subsequent unrecorded struggle with Omri who was. Benhadad had promised to restore it (1 Kings 20:34), but had neglected or refused to do so. Accordingly, Ahab may have argued that his plea for the projected campaign was good, as the monuments appear to show he had ground for thinking the time opportune, Shalmaneser II. of Assyria having shortly before, in the battle of Karkar, defeated the Syrian king (Sayce, 'Fresh Light,' etc., p. 121) Still it was not clear that this expedition, though justified by political and military considerations, was approved by God, and Jehoshaphat would have been excused had he viewed with suspicion any enterprise that had Ahab for its author.

4. In what terms? "I am as thou art," etc. (ver. 3). The magniloquence of this utterance was probably due to the time when and the place where it was given forth. Had Jehoshaphat not been dining with Ahab, he would most likely have consulted Jehovah before committing himself and his battalions in so pompous and foolhardy a fashion. Yet it may have proceeded from a constitutional pomposity of manner with which the southern king was afflicted (cf. 2 Kings 3:7), as were ancient sovereigns generally; compare the treaty of the Grand Duke of Kheta with Rameses II. of Egypt, "Behold, I am at one in heart with Ramessu-Meriamen, the great ruler of Egypt" ('Records,' etc., 4:29). The world has travelled far since the clays when kings could send their peoples to war without asking their opinion, simply to gratify revenge or slake ambition. Amount civilized nations subjects cannot now be plunged into hostilities by their rulers without their own consent. Learn:

1. The danger of mixed marriages.

2. The perils of the table (Proverbs 23:2, 6, 20).

3. The slipperiness of evil paths - one sin leads to another.

4. The propriety of wisely selecting companions (Proverbs 28:7, 19).

5. The folly of being confederate with wicked men.

6. The wisdom of consulting God before engaging in a doubtful enterprise. - W.

---

---

KJV: Now Jehoshaphat had riches and honour in abundance, and joined affinity with Ahab.

WEB: Now Jehoshaphat had riches and honor in abundance; and he joined affinity with Ahab.