HEZEKIAH, (THIRTEENTH) KING OF
JUDAH. HOSHEA, (TWENTIETH) KING OF ISRAEL.
Accession of Hezekiah —
Political Circumstances of the Times — Religion the only
True National Policy — The Position of Assyria in relation
to Judah — Religion the Central Principle of Hezekiah's
Reign — Idolatry Abolished in Judah — Restoration of the
Temple Services — Purification of the Temple — Services of
Re-Consecration — Celebration of the Pass-over — Invitation
to the Northern Tribes — Subsequent Festival —
Re-arrangement of the Temple-Services — Provision for
Priests and Levites — General Inferences — Activity of
Hezekiah in regard to the Canon of Scripture.
(2 KINGS 18:1-6; 2
CHRONICLES 29-31)
There is not a more striking instance of Divine mercy on
the one hand,
nor yet, on the other, of the personal character of religion
even under the
Old Testament, than that Ahaz should have been succeeded on
the throne
of Judah by Hezekiah. His name, 1 "Strength of Jehovah," or,
perhaps
better, "God is might," was truly indicative of the
character of his reign. In
every respect — not only as regarded the king personally,
but also in the
results of his administration, as affecting his country and
people — this
period was in complete contrast to that which had
immediately preceded
it.
Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz, ascended the throne at the age of
twenty-five,
towards the close 2 of the third year of Hoshea's reign in
Israel. He was
therefore a witness of the events which befell Samaria. From
a merely
political point of view, the position of a king of Judah
must have been one
of no small difficulty. In the northern kingdom Pekah had
sown the wind,
and Hoshea would reap the whirlwind. The one had brought
upon himself
the might of Assyria; the other would ultimately lose crown
and life in his
attempts to shake off the yoke of the conqueror. And in his
ruin would
Israel be involved. Assyria was the paramount power, not
only in Samaria,
which was so soon to become a province of that empire, but
in Judah also.
For Ahaz had made himself tributary to it, and held his
crown almost at
the mercy of the great world-empire. And, as will appear in
the sequel,
Hezekiah himself was to feel the power of Assyria even
before he came
into actual conflict with it.
All this succession of evils, and those which were still to
follow, were the
consequences of the disbelief and unbelief of Ahaz. As he
had discarded
the religion of Jehovah, so he despised His Word. In the
political
circumstances of the country, the only alternative before
him was either to
trust in the Lord for deliverance, or else to surrender to a
foreign power.
Against the admonitions and warnings of the great prophet,
who had
assured him of Divine help, Ahaz had chosen the second
alternative. His
resolve was not only sin: it was folly. His short-sighted
policy brought in
another power whose domination could never afterwards be
permanently
shaken off. Afterwards, when the kingdom of Israel came to
an end, the
two rival world-empires, Assyria and Egypt, stood face to
face, only
separated by little Judah — an object of ambition to both, a
help to
neither, yet whose subjection was absolutely necessary to
Assyria, not
only in view of its further projects, but even if previous
conquests were to
be preserved. And for an Assyrian monarch not to be
successful was, as
this history has shown, to lose crown and life.
So matters stood when Hezekiah ascended the throne. Of all
the political
combinations possible to him, he chose none. He returned to
the point
from which Ahaz had departed. His policy was not to have any
policy,
but to trust in the living God, to obey His Word, and to
follow His
guidance. His policy was his religion, and his religion was
true policy. The
only occasion on which he was tempted to deviate from it was
at a later
time, and it well-nigh proved fatal to him, as in the sequel
it certainly did
to his successors. Not that Hezekiah neglected to avail
himself of political
combinations as they arose. Indeed, this became the source
of his danger.
He may have argued that not to make use of the means placed
within his
reach was fatalism, not faith. In this he erred. Yet he did
not put his trust
in such alliances. He treated them rather as means for
defensive, than as
instruments sought for offensive purposes. The only real
help which he
sought was that of the living God.
Thus religion was the central principle of his reign and the
secret of his
success. The first act of his government was to abolish
every kind of
idolatry, whether of foreign or domestic origin. The "bamath"
or "high
places," were abolished; the matsebhoth, or stone
pillars and statues
erected for the worship of Baal, were broken down; and the
Asherah, 3 or
wooden symbol of the lascivious worship of Astarte, was cut
down. Nay,
even the brazen serpent, which had apparently been preserved
4 since the
time of Moses, and had, no doubt in degenerate times, become
almost an
object of worship, was now destroyed, having received the
appellation 5
which, when made an idol, it deserved — Nechushtan,
"brazen," a piece of
brass (2 Kings 18:4). In general, the sacred text describes
Hezekiah as
unequaled in religious earnestness and in conformity to the
Divine law by
any even of the pious kings that had preceded, or who
succeeded him, and
it places him on a level with "David his father." And this
is fully
vindicated by his abolition of even that form of Jehovah-
worship on
"heights" which Solomon, as well as Asa, Jehoshaphat,
Jehoash, Amaziah,
and Uzziah had tolerated (1 Kings 3:2;15:12, 14;22:43; 2
Kings 12:3; 14:4;
15:4, 35).
But the reformation initiated was not only negative, and
Hezekiah restored
the services of the Temple in their completeness and purity.
From the
detailed account in the Book of Chronicles, we learn that
"the house of the
Lord" had actually been closed (2 Chronicles 29:3, 7). By
this we
understand the closing of the Sanctuary itself, that is, of
the holy and most
holy places, since Ahaz continued to use the court of the
priests, although
for sacrifices at the heathen altar which he had reared. But
now the doors
of the Sanctuary were repaired, and once more thrown open.
Then
Hezekiah "gathered" the priests and Levites in "the wide
place on the
east," 6 probably some well-known locality in the eastern
part of the
Temple-buildings 7 (comp. Ezra 10:9; Nehemiah 8:1, 3, 16).
This for the
purpose of calling upon them to sanctify themselves, and to
remove the
heathen abominations which had defiled the Temple. And with
this object,
the king made in their hearing an earnest review of the
sinful past, with its
consequent judgments, and a declaration of his purpose "to
make a
covenant with the Lord."
The response to his appeal was immediate and hearty. In the
account of
the work now taken in hand by representatives of the Levites
they appear
once more according to their ancient division into the three
families of
Kohath, Merari, and Gershon, as David had arranged their
courses (1
Chronicles 23:6-23, comp. ver. 27). With these were
conjoined as a special
branch, probably on account of their pre-eminence (Numbers
3:30), the
representatives of the house of Elizaphan, a chief of the
Kohathites
(Exodus 6:18). Next in the enumeration we find the
representatives of the
three ancient divisions of Levite musicians — the sons of
Asaph, of
Heman, and Jeduthun (comp. 1 Chronicles 25:1-6; 2 Chronicles
5:12).
While these heads of Levite houses gathered their brethren
to do the work
assigned to them, the priests similarly cleansed the inner
part of the house,
when the Levites flung the remnants of past heathen
defilement into the
brook Kidron. It marks the zeal with which the work was
carried on that,
begun on the first day of the first month of the first year
of Hezekiah' s
reign — reckoning its ecclesiastical commencement from the
month Nisan 8
— it was completed on the sixteenth day. Then the vessels
which Ahaz
had cast away were restored, viz., the altar of
burnt-offering, the stands for
the brazen lavers, and that for "the sea" (comp. 2 Kings
16:14, 17). 9
The Temple having been thus purified, its services were
recommenced
with a grand function, when seven bullocks, seven rams, and
seven lambs
were offered for the congregation as burnt-offerings, and
seven he-goats as
sin-offerings 10 (comp. Leviticus 4:14; Ezra 8:35). In
strict accordance with
the Mosaic law, all the sacred functions were discharged by
the Aaronic
priesthood, with sprinkling of blood on the altar, and
imposition of hands
on the sacrifices, denoting their vicariousness (Leviticus
1:4; 4:4, 15, 24,
and Leviticus 4:7, 18, 30; 5:9). But what specially
distinguishes these
services is that the sin-offerings were brought not only for
Judah, but "for
all Israel" (2 Chronicles 29:24), indicating alike the
solidarity of "all Israel"
as the congregation of the Lord, and the representative
character of these
sacrifices. And in accordance with the institution of David,
the sacred
strains from Levite instruments, and the inspired hymns of
David and of
Asaph, 11 once more filled the Temple with the voice of
melody and of
praise, 12 while the king, the princes of Judah, and the
people responsively
bowed their heads in lowly worship.
The more direct sacrificial offerings for the people were
followed, at the
king's suggestion, by thankofferings (comp. Leviticus 7:11,
16), also of a
public character, to which "as many as were of upright
heart" — probably
they who had stood aloof from the idolatry of the previous
reign — added
burntofferings. As these thankofferings were brought by the
congregation
as a whole, the victims were not slain and flayed by the
offerers, as was
the case when brought by private individuals (Leviticus 1:5,
6); but this
part of the service devolved on the priesthood, who called
in, as in such
case they might, the assistance of the Levites. When we
remember that,
besides the special "burnt-offerings" of individuals (70
bullocks, 100 rams,
and 200 lambs), the "thankofferings" of the congregation
amounted to no
less than 600 oxen and 3,000 sheep (2 Chronicles 29:32, 33),
we scarcely
wonder that the priests alone should not have sufficed for
the service. And
as the text significantly marks, recalling the special
defection of the
priesthood, from the high-priest Urijah downwards (comp. 2
Kings 16:15),
the number of priests who had as yet sanctified themselves
was
proportionally smaller than that of the more faithful
Levites. "So the
service of the house of Jehovah was established. And
Hezekiah rejoiced
and all the people, because of that which God had prepared
to [for] the
people [probably referring to their willing participation
and contribution to
these services], for the thing had come suddenly" [without
long previous
preparation] (2 Chronicles 29:35, 36)-
What followed shows that, however sudden the impulse in this
religious
revival, it was neither transient nor superficial. Of all
the festivals in Israel,
the most solemn was that of the Passover. It commemorated
Israel's
national birthday as the redeemed of the Lord, and pointed
forward to that
better deliverance of which it was the emblem. Ordinarily
this feast
commenced on the evening of the 14th Nisan (Exodus 12:6, 8,
and
parallels). But in the present instance this was impossible.
Not only had
the cleansing of the Temple occupied till the 16th of the
month, but a
sufficient number of priests for the services had not yet
sanctified
themselves, while further time was required to make
announcement of the
Passover throughout all Israel. For, unlike the services at
the
reconsecration of the Temple, which seem to have been
confined to the
inhabitants of Jerusalem, this was to be observed as a great
national
festival. But it was possible to remove the difficulty thus
arising. The law,
while fixing the ordinary date of the Passover, had also
made provision for
an after-celebration of the feast on the corresponding day
of the second
month in cases of unavoidable hindrance (Numbers 9:6-13).
This is one of
the most instructive commendations on the character of the
Mosaic law. It
shows that the outward form was not of its essence, but was
flexible and
adaptable. Thus the law was not something rigidly outward
and absolutely
permanent, but gave indication of the possibility of an
enlargement by a
higher fulfillment of its spirit as distinguished from the
mere letter. Hence
such a provision seems like an unspoken pledge of a future
transformation
of the law, in accordance with the higher conditions and the
wants of new
circumstances. Lastly, it also affords a precedent and a
warrant for such a
change as that of the transference of the Sabbath from the
close of the
week to its beginning; from the day of rest to that of the
Resurrection of
Christ; from the memorial of the completion of the first
creation to that of
the second in the creation of the new heavens and the new
earth, wherein
dwelleth righteousness.
Of this legal provision of an after-Passover, Hezekiah
resolved to avail
himself. We mark as specially interesting in itself, and as
foreshadowing
great changes in the future political and ecclesiastical
organization of Israel,
that Hezekiah acted in this with the advice of "his princes
and all the
congregation in Jerusalem" (2 Chronicles 30:2). And yet more
interesting is
it to learn that the invitation to attend the Passover
addressed by the king
"and his princes" was sent not only to the cities of Judah,
but to all Israel,
"from Beersheba even to Dan." To this the text adds the
retrospective
notice that previous Paschal observances had been partial,
not general: "for
not in multitude [in large numbers] had they done it, as it
is written" 13 (2
Chronicles 30:5).
This brotherly invitation to the feast of Israel's birth and
the common
worship of their God and Redeemer was, so to speak, the
answer which
repentant Judah now made to that fratricidal war which
Israel had so lately
waged with the object of exterminating the kingdom of David.
And the
letters of the king and the princes bore such tender
references to past sin
and judgment, and to present national calamity,
14 and
breathed such a
spirit of religious hope for the future, as almost to rise
to the level of New
Testament sentiment.
In spite of the mockery with which at least at first the
invitation was
received by the majority in what still remained of the
northern kingdom,
the final response was truly encouraging (comp. vers. 10,
18). In Judah it
was both hearty and unanimous (2 Chronicles 30:12). From the
other parts
of the country "a multitude of people, even many," came from
out of five
of the tribes that still constituted the kingdom of Israel.
For Naphtali had
been annexed to Assyria, and Reuben and Gad been deported.
15 The
festival in Jerusalem was followed by a spontaneous national
movement
against idolatry. For while the purification of the Temple
had been a public
act of reform initiated by the king, it was left to the
people gathered in
Jerusalem to remove the altars in the capital, whether in
private houses or
in more public places, which were the remnant of the
idolatrous worship
introduced by Ahaz (2 Chronicles 28:24).
The only drawback to the right observance of the Passover
festivities was
that many of the worshippers "were not sanctified."
Accordingly the
Levites had to offer for them the Paschal lamb, which, by
the law, each
offerer should have slain for himself and his house. This
applied specially
to those who had come from the northern kingdom (ver. 18).
If, none the
less, they were allowed to partake of the Paschal feast,
this was a
concession almost necessary in the circumstances, since
otherwise theirs
would not at all have been a Passover; and for this Hezekiah
implored and
obtained forgiveness from the Lord.
16
How deeply this revival had struck its roots appears from
the voluntary
resolve of the people to follow up the seven days of the
Passover by other
seven days of festivity. For the wants of the people during
that time King
Hezekiah and the princes made liberal provision (vers. 23,
24). It was at
this time also that the removal of all traces of idolatry
from the land,
briefly noticed in 2 Kings 18:4, took place. This was
effected, as the fuller
account in the Book of Chronicles explains, by a spontaneous
popular
movement which extended beyond Judah to "Ephraim also and
Manasseh"
(2 Chronicles 31:1), although, as we may reasonably
conjecture, only in
districts from which the chief inhabitants had come to
Jerusalem. Closely
connected with the restoration of the Temple services were
the
arrangements now made for their orderly continuance. The
"courses" of
the priests and Levites were once more settled. The public
sacrifices of the
congregations — daily, Sabbatic, and festive — were provided
by the king
as his contribution, the "portion of his substance." The
latter was indeed
very large (comp. 2 Chronicles 32:27-29); but the number of
sacrificial
animals and other requisites furnished by the king according
to the
requirements of the law (Numbers 28, 29) was correspondingly
great. It
has been calculated to have amounted to "nearly 1,100 lambs,
1 13
bullocks, 37 rams, and 30 goats, besides vast quantities of
flour, oil, and
wine for the accompanying meat and drink-offerings."
17
For the personal support of the ministering priests and
Levites nothing
more was required than the re-enactment of the ancient
provision of
firstfruits, tithes, and firstlings (Exodus 23:19; Numbers
18:12, 21, etc.;
Leviticus 27:30-33). These, together with "the tithe of
dedicated things" 18
(Leviticus 27:30; Deuteronomy 14:28), were now offered in
such quantity
as not only to suffice for the wants of the priesthood, but
to leave a large surplusage, to the thankful joy and surprise of Hezekiah and
the princes.
In answer to the king's inquiry the high-priest Azariah
explained that the
large store accumulated was due to the special blessing
bestowed by the
Lord on a willing and obedient people (2 Chronicles
31:5-10). The
collection of this store began in the third month — that of
Pentecost —
when the wheat harvest was completed, and it ended in the
seventh month
— that of Tabernacles, which marked the close of the fruit
harvest and of
the vintage. And these contributions, or dues, came not only
from Judah,
but also from "the children of Israel" (ver. 6); that is,
from those in the
northern kingdom who had joined their brethren in returning
to the service
and the law of their Lord.
For the storage of these provisions, Hezekiah ordered that
certain
chambers in the Temple should be prepared, and he appointed
officials,
who are named in the sacred text, alike for the supervision
and the
administration of these stores (verses 11-19). Again and
again it is noted
with what "faithfulness" one and the other duty were
discharged by each
in the special department assigned to him (verses 12, 15,
18). 19 The
provision for the priesthood included not only those who
were for the
time actually on service in the Temple,
20 but also the
others in the priest
cities, together with their wives and children, and lastly
to those in the
country districts around these cities (vers. 16-19). These
and all kindred
arrangements were extended throughout all Judah. And the
detailed account
given of the religious activity of Hezekiah closes with the
twofold notice
that he "wrought the good, the right, and the truth before
Jehovah his
God;" and that in all he undertook, whether as matter of
public or private
religious arrangement, "he did it with all his heart, and
prospered" (2
Chronicles 31:20, 21).
To the description of the reformation inaugurated by the
piety of
Hezekiah, it seems desirable to add some further
particulars, either
illustrative of the text or derived from other notices in
Holy Scripture. As
regards the trustworthiness of the account of the
sacrificial worship in the
restored Temple — that it was not of later invention, and
designed to bear
out the priestly institutions first enforced in the time of
Ezra — we have
to point to the important fact that the number of sacrifices
and sin-
offerings in the time of Hezekiah notably differs from that
at the
dedication of the Temple in the time of Ezra (comp. 2
Chronicles 29:21, 32
with Ezra 6:17). This, considering especially the symbolism
of numbers,
shows that the one account could not have been framed upon
the other. It
follows that the Mosaic institutions must have existed in
and before the
time of Hezekiah, and could not, as a certain school of
critics contends,
have originated with the priesthood at a much later period.
Indeed, as we
follow the present line of argument, by a comparison of the
services in the
time of Hezekiah with the Mosaic institutions to which they
bear
reference, the conviction grows upon us not only of the
existence of the
latter, but of their general acknowledgment, since, keeping
in view the
circumstances of the previous reign, it is impossible to
suppose that all
this could have been "invented" in the first year of
Hezekiah' s reign. And
as connected with this we mark that not only were the
liturgical services
conformed to a previous model — the Davidic — but that the
hymns
chanted were in "the words of David and of Asaph the seer"
(2 Chronicles
29:30). This seems not only to imply the existence at the
time.of Davidic
and Asaphite psalms — the absence of any mention of other
Psalm-
collections here deserving special notice — but even to
indicate some
orderly collection of these Psalms in books. In short, it
casts light on the
beginning of the present arrangement of the Psalter in five
books. It may
well have been that, subject to later revision, the former
collection of
Psalms consisting, roughly speaking, of the two first books
of Psalms
(now Psalm 1-41; 42-72), was now enriched by the addition of
a further
collection — roughly speaking, the present third book of
Psalms (Psalm
73-89), which in its present form begins with an Asaphite
Psalm (Psalm
73), and has in succession eleven Psalms of the same
authorship 21 (Psalm
73-83). But whatever our view, or more accurately, our
conjectures, on
this subject, there cannot at least be doubt that Hezekiah
actively busied
himself, under competent guidance, with the collection and
arrangement of
the existing sacred literature of Israel. This is expressly
mentioned as
regards a part of "the Proverbs of Solomon, which the men of
Hezekiah,
king of Judah, collected" 22 (Proverbs 25:1). And to this,
as assuredly
among the most important parts of Hezekiah' s activity, the
closing notice
of his religious work done by him may also bear reference:
"And in every work that he began in the service of the house
of
God, and in the law, and in the commandments, to seek his God,
he did it with all his heart, and prospered" (2 Chronicles 31:21).
|