The Fallible Synthetic Study Bible — 2 Chronicles 25:25

✦ Public-domain source — quoted & attributed⚙ AI synthesis — generated, verify

2 Chronicles 25:25–28 — The Death of Amaziah. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.

The Voices✦ 3 public domain

The Pulpit CommentarySpence & Exell, eds.1880s

The composition of the previous two verses dismisses delicately the fact that Joash, ignominiously bringing "Amaziah to Jerusalem" (ver. 23), contemptuously left him there, with a present of his life, though less his honour and much wealth.

The Pulpit editors read the chronicler's silence as tact: Joash left Amaziah alive in Jerusalem on purpose, and that mercy is what the fifteen years measure.

source ↗

Keil & DelitzschBiblical Commentary on the Old Testament1860s

Although conquered and taken prisoner by Joash, Amaziah did not lose the throne. For Joash, contented with the carrying away of the treasures of the temple and of the palace, and the taking of hostages, set him again at liberty, so that he continued to reign, and outlived Joash by about fifteen years.

source ↗

Charles EllicottCommentary for English Readers1878

END OF THE REIGN ( 2Chronicles 25:25-28 .) (Comp. 2Kings 14:17-20 .) (25) And Amaziah. —Identical with 2Kings 14:17 . (See Notes there.)

Ellicott's brevity is itself the datum: he treats vv. 25 to 28 as the Kings text carried over, which is why our thread to 2 Kings 14 is tiered verbal.

source ↗

Amaziah son of Joash king of Judah lived for fifteen years after the death of Jehoash son of Jehoahaz king of Israel.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

’ă·maṣ·yā·hū ḇen- yō·w·’āš me·leḵ yə·hū·ḏāh way·ḥî ḥă·mêš ‘eś·rêh šā·nāh ’a·ḥă·rê mō·wṯ yō·w·’āš ben- yə·hō·w·’ā·ḥāz me·leḵ yiś·rā·’êl

Word by word16 · parsed

אֲמַצְיָ֤הוּ’ă·maṣ·yā·hūAmaziahH558

√ ʼĂmatsyâh — Amatsjah, the name of four IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

בֶן־ḇen-sonH1121

√ bên — a son (as a builder of the family name), in the widest sense (of literal and figurative relationship, including grandson, subject, nation, quality or condition, etcNounmasculine singular construct

יוֹאָשׁ֙yō·w·’āšof JoashH3101

√ Yôwʼâsh — Joash, the name of six IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

מֶ֣לֶךְme·leḵkingH4428

√ melek — a kingNounmasculine singular construct

יְהוּדָ֔הyə·hū·ḏāhof JudahH3063

√ Yᵉhûwdâh — Jehudah (or Judah), the name of five IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

וַיְחִ֨יway·ḥîlivedH2421

√ châyâh — to live, whether literally or figurativelyConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular

châyâh: to live, whether literally or figuratively (Qal consecutive imperfect) The chronicler's chosen verb for these fifteen years is life, not reign. Keil and Delitzsch explain the historical shape of it: Joash took the temple and palace treasure and hostages, then "set him again at liberty," so Amaziah's remaining time is a granted remainder rather than a recovered kingship. Reading the pericope forward, the verb turns ironic: the man who is said to live is the man v. 27 will report struck down by his own people.

חֲמֵ֥שׁḥă·mêšfor fifteenH2568

√ châmêsh — fiveNumberfeminine singular construct

עֶשְׂרֵ֖ה‘eś·rêh. . .H6240

√ ʻâsâr — ten (only in combination), iNumberfeminine singular

שָׁנָֽה׃šā·nāhyearsH8141

√ shâneh — a year (as a revolution of time)Nounfeminine singular

Singular shâneh after the numeral, the normal idiom; nothing theological rides on it.

אַחֲרֵ֣י’a·ḥă·rêafterH310

√ ʼachar — properly, the hind partPreposition

Preposition only, but it is the first of the unit's three uses of ʼachar.

מ֔וֹתmō·wṯthe deathH4194

√ mâveth — death (natural or violent)Nounmasculine singular construct

mâveth: death, natural or violent The noun of death enters the pericope first as another man's death, the boundary Amaziah outlives. By v. 27 the same root returns as the Hiphil וַיְמִיתֻ֖הוּ (H4191 mûwth), "and they caused him to die." The unit therefore opens with a death Amaziah survives and closes with a death done to him, and the lexical bracket is the chronicler's, not the translator's.

יוֹאָ֥שׁyō·w·’āšof JehoashH3101

√ Yôwʼâsh — Joash, the name of six IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

Yôwʼâsh: Joash, the name of six Israelites The same four consonants name Amaziah's father (word 2) and the Israelite king whose death is dated here (word 11). Ellicott records that this verse is "Identical with 2Kings 14:17," and the Verifier confirms H3101 shared with 2 Kings 12:20, where a Joash of Judah also dies by conspiracy. The name is a hinge between two royal houses and two assassinations.

בֶּן־ben-sonH1121

יְהוֹאָחָ֖זyə·hō·w·’ā·ḥāzof JehoahazH3059

√ Yᵉhôwʼâchâz — Jehoachaz, the name of three IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

מֶ֣לֶךְme·leḵkingH4428

√ melek — a kingNounmasculine singular construct

יִשְׂרָאֵ֑לyiś·rā·’êlof IsraelH3478

√ Yisrâʼêl — Jisrael, a symbolical name of JacobNounpropermasculine singular

Israel names the northern kingdom here, the victor of vv. 17 to 24, not the patriarch.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

Amaziah son-of-Joash king-of-Judah, and-he-lived five ten year after the-death-of Joash son-of-Jehoahaz king-of-Israel.

Where the English smooths the original

וַיְחִ֨י וַיְחִ֨י (way·ḥî, H2421 châyâh, Qal consecutive imperfect) is not "reigned" but "and he lived." BSB's flat "lived" drops the narrative waw that chains this survival to the humiliation just recorded, and the verb itself measures breath rather than rule: the chronicler counts the years Amaziah went on existing after the king who had beaten him was gone. K&D notes that he "did not lose the throne," so the choice of châyâh over a verb of reigning is deliberate understatement.
יוֹאָ֥שׁ BSB writes "Jehoash" at word 11 and "Joash" at word 2, but the Hebrew is the identical יוֹאָשׁ (H3101) in both places. The English supplies a distinction the consonants do not make, and the reader loses the fact that Amaziah's father and Amaziah's conqueror bear one and the same name, so that the verse sets Joash against Joash.
שָׁנָֽה׃ "Five ten year": שָׁנָֽה (H8141 shâneh, "a year as a revolution of time") stands in the singular after the numeral, the ordinary Hebrew idiom, and the interlinear leaves word 7 (‘eś·rêh) with no gloss of its own because it only completes the compound number. "For fifteen years" is right in sense but hides that Hebrew counts a plurality with a singular noun.
אַחֲרֵ֣י אַחֲרֵ֣י (H310 ʼachar, properly "the hind part") governing the construct noun מ֔וֹת (H4194 mâveth) is "after the death-of," a noun phrase and not the clause "after he died." This same preposition returns twice in v. 27 ("from after YHWH," "after him"), and its adjectival cousin H314 stands in v. 26 ("the latter ones"); the English renders the one Hebrew root four different ways.

The Voices✦ 3 public domain

Charles EllicottCommentary for English Readers1878

The Hebrew is faulty here. “Behold, they are written” is the customary phrase in the Chronicles ( 2Chronicles 20:34 ; 2Chronicles 24:27 ); “are they not written” being that of Kings.

Ellicott is describing a real textual difficulty in the received Hebrew, not correcting Scripture's content; he lists MSS, Syriac, Vulgate and Arabic support for the smoother reading.

source ↗

The Pulpit CommentarySpence & Exell, eds.1880s

we should justly feel in this instance that we had no feeble argument for the identity of the two works, called by rather different titles - by the writer of the pre-Captivity, "the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah," and by him of the post-Captivity, "the book of the kings of Judah and Israel."

An inference about sources, offered by the Pulpit editors as an argument from resemblance, not as a documented fact.

source ↗

Keil & DelitzschBiblical Commentary on the Old Testament1860s

On the book of the kings of Judah and Israel, see the Introduction.

Keil and Delitzsch decline to argue the point here; the referral is honest and we cannot follow it, since their Introduction is outside this brief.

source ↗

As for the rest of the acts of Amaziah, from beginning to end, are they not written in the Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel?

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

wə·ye·ṯer diḇ·rê ’ă·maṣ·yā·hū hā·ri·šō·nîm wə·hā·’a·ḥă·rō·w·nîm hă·lō hin·nām kə·ṯū·ḇîm ‘al- sê·p̄er mal·ḵê- yə·hū·ḏāh wə·yiś·rā·’êl

Word by word13 · parsed

וְיֶ֙תֶר֙wə·ye·ṯerAs for the restH3499

√ yether — properly, an overhanging, iConjunctive wawNounmasculine singular construct

yether: properly, an overhanging, a remainder The formula word for what the compiler has left out. It is an editorial confession as much as a cross-reference: this narrative is selective, and the chronicler says so. The Verifier finds the same H3499 with H3789 and H5612 at 2 Kings 15:15 and 1 Kings 16:20, the identical closing formula applied to other kings.

דִּבְרֵ֣יdiḇ·rêof the actsH1697

√ dâbâr — a wordNounmasculine plural construct

dâbâr: a word In the royal formula dibrê means annals, the recorded matters of a reign, but the noun never stops meaning word. The chronicler's own book bears this title, so the verse quietly names the genre it belongs to: a king's life reduced to words others wrote down.

אֲמַצְיָ֔הוּ’ă·maṣ·yā·hūof AmaziahH558

√ ʼĂmatsyâh — Amatsjah, the name of four IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

הָרִאשֹׁנִ֖יםhā·ri·šō·nîmfrom beginningH7223

√ riʼshôwn — first, in place, time or rank (as adjective or noun)ArticleAdjectivemasculine plural

riʼshôwn: first, in place, time or rank Paired with its opposite in the next word, it forms the chronicler's habitual bracket for a complete reign. Ellicott notes the same formula at 2 Chronicles 20:34 and 24:27.

וְהָאַחֲרוֹנִ֑יםwə·hā·’a·ḥă·rō·w·nîmto endH314

√ ʼachărôwn — hinderConjunctive waw, ArticleAdjectivemasculine plural

ʼachărôwn: hinder, latter Built on the same root as ʼachar in v. 25 and v. 27. The unit's whole vocabulary of sequence (after the death, the latter acts, from after YHWH, after him) is one Hebrew family, and this adjective is where it becomes a verdict on a whole life: the latter things of Amaziah were not like the former.

הֲלֹא֙hă·lōare they notH3808

√ lôʼ — not (the simple or absAdverbNegative particle

הִנָּ֣םhin·nām. . .H2005

√ hên — lo!Interjectionthird person masculine plural

Interjection with a plural suffix, "behold them"; see the divergence on the blended idiom.

כְּתוּבִ֔יםkə·ṯū·ḇîmwrittenH3789

√ kâthab — to grave, by implication, to write (describe, inscribe, prescribe, subscribe)VerbQalQalPassParticiplemasculine plural

kâthab: to grave, by implication to write Qal passive participle, masculine plural: the acts stand written, a settled state and not an event. The root is first of all to engrave, which gives the formula its weight: a reign that ended in flight and murder is nevertheless fixed in a record the reader is invited to consult.

עַל־‘al-inH5921

√ ʻal — above, over, upon, or against (yet always in this last relation with a downward aspect) in a great variety of applicationsPreposition

סֵ֥פֶרsê·p̄erthe BookH5612

√ çêpher — properly, writing (the art or a document)Nounmasculine singular construct

çêpher: properly, writing, the art or a document A scroll, not a bound book. Which scroll is disputed: the Pulpit Commentary argues at length that the post exilic "book of the kings of Judah and Israel" and the pre exilic "book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah" are one work under two titles, while Keil and Delitzsch simply refer the reader to their Introduction. Either way the source is lost, and the citation is now a pointer into silence.

מַלְכֵי־mal·ḵê-of the KingsH4428

√ melek — a kingNounmasculine plural construct

יְהוּדָ֖הyə·hū·ḏāhof JudahH3063

√ Yᵉhûwdâh — Jehudah (or Judah), the name of five IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

וְיִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃wə·yiś·rā·’êland IsraelH3478

√ Yisrâʼêl — Jisrael, a symbolical name of JacobConjunctive wawNounpropermasculine singular

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-rest-of words-of Amaziah, the-former-ones and-the-latter-ones: are-they-not, behold-them, written upon the-book-of the-kings-of Judah and-Israel?

Where the English smooths the original

דִּבְרֵ֣י דִּבְרֵ֣י (diḇ·rê, H1697 dâbâr, "a word") is the plural construct of word, not of act. BSB's "the acts" is a fair idiomatic reading of the annalistic formula, but the Hebrew keeps the archive sense: what remains of Amaziah is a record of words, the matters spoken and written about him. The book of Chronicles itself is named from this noun.
הָרִאשֹׁנִ֖ים הָרִאשֹׁנִ֖ים (H7223 riʼshôwn) and וְהָאַחֲרוֹנִ֑ים (H314 ʼachărôwn) are two articular plural adjectives, "the former ones and the latter ones," agreeing with the words. BSB's "from beginning to end" converts a matched pair of adjectives into a span of time. Ellicott calls it "The former and the latter" and notes it is "his usual formula."
הִנָּ֣ם הֲלֹא֙ (H3808, "are they not") and הִנָּ֣ם (H2005 hên, "lo!" with a third person masculine plural suffix) sit side by side, which is why the interlinear can give word 6 no gloss of its own. Ellicott states the problem plainly: "The Hebrew is faulty here," the Chronicles idiom "Behold, they are written" and the Kings idiom "are they not written" having been blended. No English rendering can show both at once.
עַל־ עַל־ (H5921 ʻal, "above, over, upon") with סֵ֥פֶר (H5612 çêpher) is "written upon a scroll," the idiom of marks made on a surface. "In the Book" reads like a codex with pages; the Hebrew pictures a written roll.

The Voices✦ 4 public domain

Charles EllicottCommentary for English Readers1878

This clause is added by the chronicler, not so much with the aim of assigning a date, as of asserting the real connection between Amaziah’s defection from Jehovah, and the calamities that overtook him.

source ↗

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges—1880s

The Chronicler characteristically connects the conspiracy with Amaziah’s apostasy; in Kings the fact only of the conspiracy is stated. a conspiracy ] Athaliah, Joash, Amaziah each fell one after the other before a conspiracy. Jehoiada’s example had far-reaching results.

The closing sentence is Cambridge's own wry judgment: the precedent set by Jehoiada's righteous coup in 2 Chronicles 23 became a habit of regicide. Suggestive, and not something the chronicler says.

source ↗

Albert BarnesNotes on the Bible1834

The writer means that the violent death of Amaziah followed on his apostasy, not closely in point of time - for it must have been at least 15 years after 2 Chronicles 25:25 - nor as, humanly speaking, caused by it; but, in the way of a divine judgment, his death was a complete fulfillment of the prophecy of 2 Chronicles 25:16

Barnes guards the chronology honestly ("at least 15 years") while still reading the death as divine judgment, which is the balance this verse requires.

source ↗

Matthew HenryConcise Commentary on the Whole Bible1706

A man's pride shall bring him low; his ruin may be dated from his turning from the Lord.

source ↗

From the time that Amaziah turned from following the LORD, a conspiracy was formed against him in Jerusalem, and he fled to Lachish. But men were sent after him to Lachish, and they killed him there.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

ū·mê·‘êṯ ’ă·šer- ’ă·maṣ·yā·hū sār mê·’a·ḥă·rê Yah·weh qe·šer way·yiq·šə·rū ‘ā·lāw bî·rū·šā·lim way·yā·nās lā·ḵî·šāh way·yiš·lə·ḥū ’a·ḥă·rāw lā·ḵî·šāh way·mî·ṯu·hū šām

Word by word17 · parsed

וּמֵעֵ֗תū·mê·‘êṯFrom the timeH6256

√ ʻêth — time, especially (adverb with preposition) now, when, etcConjunctive waw, Preposition-mNouncommon singular

ʻêth: time, especially now, when "And from the time that" is a causal date, not a calendar one. Ellicott reads the clause as the chronicler asserting "the real connection between Amaziah's defection from Jehovah, and the calamities that overtook him," and Barnes agrees that the death followed the apostasy "not closely in point of time," since at least fifteen years intervened. The preposition therefore carries theology: the clock the chronicler runs is moral.

אֲשֶׁר־’ă·šer-thatH834

√ ʼăsher — who, which, what, thatPronounrelative

אֲמַצְיָ֙הוּ֙’ă·maṣ·yā·hūAmaziahH558

√ ʼĂmatsyâh — Amatsjah, the name of four IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

סָ֤רsārturnedH5493

√ çûwr — to turn off (literal or figurative)VerbQalPerfectthird person masculine singular

çûwr: to turn off, literal or figurative The verb of leaving a road. Combined with mê-ʼachărê it is the standing Hebrew idiom for desertion from a following: a retainer who stops walking behind his lord. Matthew Henry fastens the whole ruin to this one verb, writing that "his ruin may be dated from his turning from the Lord," which is precisely the chronicler's own dating formula turned into a maxim.

מֵאַחֲרֵ֣יmê·’a·ḥă·rêfrom followingH310

√ ʼachar — properly, the hind partPreposition-m

Second of the unit's three uses of ʼachar: after the death (v. 25), from after YHWH, after him (word 13).

יְהוָ֔הYah·wehthe LORDH3068

√ Yᵉhôvâh — Jehovah, Jewish national name of GodNounpropermasculine singular

Yᵉhôvâh: Jehovah, Jewish national name of God The covenant name (H3068, given in the interlinear as Yah·weh) is the object of the desertion, and it is the only name in the verse that is stated: the conspirators go unnamed, the messengers go unnamed, but the one walked away from is named. Chronicles measures a reign against this name, not against Judah's borders or its treasury, which is why v. 27 can make one turning the cause of a death fifteen years later.

קֶ֛שֶׁרqe·šera conspiracyH7195

√ qesher — an (unlawful) allianceNounmasculine singular

qesher: an (unlawful) alliance A rare noun, in only 13 verses, and its rarity is what makes the link to the surrounding history a real verbal one. The Verifier finds it with its cognate verb at 2 Kings 12:20 (Joash of Judah, Amaziah's father, killed by his servants) and at 2 Kings 15:30, and finds it again in the Kings parallel at 2 Kings 14:19. Cambridge draws the dynastic conclusion: "Athaliah, Joash, Amaziah each fell one after the other before a conspiracy."

וַיִּקְשְׁר֨וּway·yiq·šə·rūwas formedH7194

√ qâshar — to tie, physically (gird, confine, compact) or mentally (in love, league)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine plural

qâshar: to tie, physically or mentally, in love or league The neutral root for binding is what Hebrew uses for treason: a conspiracy is men tied to one another. The cognate accusative construction intensifies rather than merely repeats.

עָלָ֥יו‘ā·lāwagainst himH5921

√ ʻal — above, over, upon, or against (yet always in this last relation with a downward aspect) in a great variety of applicationsPrepositionthird person masculine singular

בִּירוּשָׁלִַ֖םbî·rū·šā·limin JerusalemH3389

√ Yᵉrûwshâlaim — Jerushalaim or Jerushalem, the capital city of PalestinePreposition-bNounproperfeminine singular

וַיָּ֣נָסway·yā·nāsand he fledH5127

√ nûwç — to flit, iConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular

nûwç: to flit, to flee The verb of flight. The last king of Judah named in this chapter leaves Jerusalem not in procession but in retreat, on the road the Verifier also finds at 2 Kings 14:19 with the same lexeme.

לָכִ֑ישָׁהlā·ḵî·šāhto LachishH3923

√ Lâkîysh — Lakish, a place in PalestineNounproperfeminine singularthird person feminine singular

Lâkîysh: Lakish, a place in Palestine A fortified city of the Shephelah; the Pulpit Commentary lists its dossier (2 Chronicles 11:9, Joshua 10:3, 2 Kings 18:14, Micah 1:13 among others) and reports that Eusebius places it seven Roman miles south of Eleutheropolis. Cambridge adds a motive our text does not state: "Perhaps he was trying to reach Egypt." Flagged as inference, not datum.

וַיִּשְׁלְח֤וּway·yiš·lə·ḥūBut men were sentH7971

√ shâlach — to send away, for, or out (in a great variety of applications)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine plural

אַחֲרָיו֙’a·ḥă·rāwafter himH310

√ ʼachar — properly, the hind partPrepositionthird person masculine singular

לָכִ֔ישָׁהlā·ḵî·šāhto LachishH3923

√ Lâkîysh — Lakish, a place in PalestineNounproperfeminine singularthird person feminine singular

וַיְמִיתֻ֖הוּway·mî·ṯu·hūand they killed himH4191

√ mûwth — to die (literally or figuratively)Conjunctive wawVerbHifilConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine pluralthird person masculine singular

mûwth: to die, literally or figuratively (Hifil) Causative: they made him die. The chronicler does not name them, does not say the deed was just, and does not report a trial. He has already supplied the only cause he cares about in the verse's first clause.

שָֽׁם׃šāmthereH8033

√ shâm — there (transferring to time) thenAdverb

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-from-time that Amaziah turned-aside from-after YHWH, a-conspiracy they-conspired against-him in-Jerusalem, and-he-fled to-Lachish; and-they-sent after-him to-Lachish, and-they-put-him-to-death there.

Where the English smooths the original

סָ֤ר סָ֤ר (sār, H5493 çûwr, Qal perfect third masculine singular) is "he turned off, turned aside," and מֵאַחֲרֵ֣י (H310) is "from after." BSB's "turned from following the LORD" is accurate in sense, yet the Hebrew image is spatial and military: he stepped out of the line that walks behind YHWH. The perfect tense marks a completed defection, dated but not timed.
וַיִּקְשְׁר֨וּ וַיִּקְשְׁר֨וּ (H7194 qâshar, "to tie, gird, confine") with its own cognate noun קֶ֛שֶׁר (H7195 qesher, "an unlawful alliance") is a figura etymologica: "they bound a binding against him." BSB's passive "a conspiracy was formed against him" is smooth but loses both the active unnamed plural subject and the word play. Hebrew leaves the conspirators anonymous while making them the grammatical agents.
וַיִּשְׁלְח֤וּ וַיִּשְׁלְח֤וּ (H7971 shâlach, Qal consecutive imperfect third masculine plural) is active: "and they sent after him." BSB supplies the subject "men" and turns the clause passive ("But men were sent after him"). The Hebrew has no object at all: what they sent is left unsaid, and the same anonymous they who bound the conspiracy are the ones who reach Lachish.
וַיְמִיתֻ֖הוּ וַיְמִיתֻ֖הוּ (H4191 mûwth) is Hiphil, causative: "and they caused him to die," with the suffix carrying the object. "They killed him there" is right, but the Hiphil makes explicit that his death was brought about by agents, and it answers the noun mâveth in v. 25: the king who lived fifteen years past one man's death is made to die by his own.

The Voices✦ 3 public domain

Keil & DelitzschBiblical Commentary on the Old Testament1860s

in the city of Judah, is surprising, since everywhere else "the city of David" is mentioned as the burial-place, and even in our passage all the ancient versions have "in the city of David."

A text critical judgment, and the clearest statement of it in this brief: the error is explained mechanically by the following word.

source ↗

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges—1880s

upon horses ] Render, upon the horses ; i.e. upon the horses of some of his pursuers. The conspirators thereby announced the complete success of their conspiracy.

source ↗

The Pulpit CommentarySpence & Exell, eds.1880s

those same royal horses presumably with which he had fled to Lachish. This seems the most natural suggestion arising from the memorandum made here, and may indicate that they visited him with no additional gratuitous disrespect.

Directly contrary to Cambridge on the same article. We record the disagreement rather than choosing for the reader.

source ↗

They carried him back on horses and buried him with his fathers in the City of Judah.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

way·yiś·śā·’u·hū ‘al- has·sū·sîm way·yiq·bə·rū ’ō·ṯōw ‘im- ’ă·ḇō·ṯāw bə·‘îr yə·hū·ḏāh

Word by word9 · parsed

וַיִּשָּׂאֻ֖הוּway·yiś·śā·’u·hūThey carried him backH5375

√ nâsâʼ — to lift, in a great variety of applications, literal and figurative, absolute and relativeConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine pluralthird person masculine singular

nâsâʼ: to lift, in a great variety of applications A common verb doing final work: the body of a reigning king is lifted like cargo. Read against v. 25, where he "lived" fifteen years, and v. 27, where "they caused him to die," this is the third stage of a steady grammatical demotion, from subject who lives, to object who is killed, to object who is carried.

עַל־‘al-onH5921

√ ʻal — above, over, upon, or against (yet always in this last relation with a downward aspect) in a great variety of applicationsPreposition

הַסּוּסִ֑יםhas·sū·sîmhorsesH5483

√ çûwç — a horse (as leaping)ArticleNounmasculine plural

çûwç: a horse (as leaping) Definite in Hebrew. Whose horses they were is the whole question the commentators divide over; see the divergence.

וַֽיִּקְבְּר֥וּway·yiq·bə·rūand buriedH6912

√ qâbar — to interConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine plural

qâbar: to inter The royal formula verb. That the conspirators bury him with his fathers rather than dishonour the corpse suggests a palace coup within the dynasty, not a revolution against it: they wanted a different son of David on the throne, and 2 Chronicles 26:1 gives them Uzziah.

אֹת֛וֹ’ō·ṯōwhimH853

√ ʼêth — properly, self (but generally used to point out more definitely the object of a verb or preposition, even or namely)Direct object markerthird person masculine singular

עִם־‘im-withH5973

√ ʻim — adverb or preposition, with (iPreposition

אֲבֹתָ֖יו’ă·ḇō·ṯāwhis fathersH1

√ ʼâb — father, in a literal and immediate, or figurative and remote applicationNounmasculine plural constructthird person masculine singular

ʼâb: father, literal and immediate or figurative and remote The plural with suffix makes the covenant line, not merely a family plot. Amaziah is gathered to the kings whose God he left, which is the chronicler's last quiet irony.

בְּעִ֥ירbə·‘îrin the CityH5892

√ ʻîyr — a city (a place guarded by waking or a watch) in the widest sense (even of a mere encampment or post)Preposition-bNounfeminine singular construct

ʻîyr: a city, a place guarded by waking or a watch The noun itself means a watched place. In the disputed phrase it should almost certainly read "the city of David"; the ancient versions, some Hebrew manuscripts, and the Kings parallel all do.

יְהוּדָֽה׃yə·hū·ḏāhof JudahH3063

√ Yᵉhûwdâh — Jehudah (or Judah), the name of five IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

Judah here is the received text's reading and the probable source of the error; see the divergence and the apparatus.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-they-lifted-him upon the-horses, and-they-buried him with his-fathers in-the-city-of Judah.

Where the English smooths the original

וַיִּשָּׂאֻ֖הוּ וַיִּשָּׂאֻ֖הוּ (H5375 nâsâʼ, "to lift") is simply "and they lifted him," or bore him as a load. BSB's "carried him back" supplies the direction; the Hebrew says only that the body was hoisted. The same root is used of lifting up the face, the voice, and a burden, so the verse ends a king's story with him as freight.
הַסּוּסִ֑ים הַסּוּסִ֑ים (H5483 çûwç) carries the article: "the horses," not "horses." Both Cambridge and the Pulpit Commentary press the definite article, though in opposite directions: Cambridge takes them as "the horses of some of his pursuers," so that the transport "announced the complete success of their conspiracy," while the Pulpit editors take them as "those same royal horses presumably with which he had fled to Lachish," a sign that no further insult was added. The Hebrew article permits both and settles neither.
בְּעִ֥יר בְּעִ֥יר יְהוּדָֽה, "in the city of Judah," is the reading of the received Hebrew here, where the burial formula everywhere else reads "the city of David." Keil and Delitzsch call it "surprising" and judge that יהוּדה "would therefore seem to be an orthographical error for דויד, occasioned by the immediately following" Judah; Ellicott calls it flatly "A transcriber's mistake for city of David." BSB prints the Hebrew as it stands, and this note is where the reader should know that the versions do not.
עִם־אֲבֹתָ֖יו עִם־אֲבֹתָ֖יו (H5973 with H1 ʼâb, masculine plural construct with suffix) is "with his fathers," the dynastic burial formula. It is the one dignity the verse grants him: assassinated, he is still laid among David's line. Hebrew says nothing about honour or dishonour; the formula does the work.

The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.

⚙

Grand Commentary — the unit, read whole

synthesis · verify

AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.

i. Fifteen years of granted life — 25:25

⚙ The pericope opens not with a reign but with a survival: וַיְחִ֨י (H2421 châyâh), "and he lived," five ten year. Keil and Delitzsch supply the mechanism, that Joash, "contented with the carrying away of the treasures of the temple and of the palace, and the taking of hostages, set him again at liberty," so that Amaziah "outlived Joash by about fifteen years." The Pulpit editors hear tact in the chronicler's arrangement: the previous verses "dismiss delicately" the fact that Joash left the beaten king in his own capital "with a present of his life, though less his honour and much wealth." Ellicott, for his part, spends no words at all, noting only that the verse is "Identical with 2Kings 14:17." ⚙ Set those three together and the verse reads as a loan: the throne is technically retained, the years are counted from another king's death, and the one Hebrew verb used of Amaziah is the verb for breathing.

ii. The formula, the lost scroll, and a faulty line — 25:26

⚙ The closing formula turns a life into an archive: "the rest of the words of Amaziah" (H1697 dâbâr), "the former ones and the latter ones," stand written (H3789 kâthab, Qal passive participle) upon a scroll (H5612 çêpher). Ellicott catches the seam in the Hebrew itself: "The Hebrew is faulty here," the Chronicles idiom "Behold, they are written" having been blended with the Kings idiom "are they not written," and he reports that some manuscripts with the Syriac, Vulgate and Arabic read the smoother form. The Pulpit Commentary argues from the density of resemblance between Kings and Chronicles that the two differently titled source books are one and the same work; Keil and Delitzsch will not argue it here and refer the reader to their Introduction. ⚙ The honest result is that the verse points confidently at a document no one now has. What we hold is the selection; the fuller record is exactly what yether (H3499), the overhanging remainder, names and withholds.

iii. From the time that he turned — 25:27

⚙ This is the chronicler's own sentence, and everyone in the brief says so. Ellicott: the clause is added "not so much with the aim of assigning a date, as of asserting the real connection between Amaziah's defection from Jehovah, and the calamities that overtook him." Cambridge: "The Chronicler characteristically connects the conspiracy with Amaziah's apostasy; in Kings the fact only of the conspiracy is stated." The Pulpit editors go further and call the clause "a strong anachronism sui generis," "intrinsically true, but none the less misleading in its form," since it is missing from the parallel. Barnes holds the tension without breaking it: the violent death followed the apostasy "not closely in point of time," at least fifteen years later, and not by ordinary human causation, "but, in the way of a divine judgment." Matthew Henry compresses all of it into a maxim: "A man's pride shall bring him low; his ruin may be dated from his turning from the Lord." ⚙ The Hebrew backs the reading with its verbs. סָ֤ר (H5493) is a perfect, a finished turning aside; וַיִּקְשְׁר֨וּ with קֶ֛שֶׁר (H7194 with H7195) binds a binding against him; then flight (H5127), pursuit, and a Hiphil, "they caused him to die." Note who is never named: the conspirators. The chronicler gives the cause and withholds the culprits.

iv. Lifted upon the horses, buried in a city with the wrong name — 25:28

⚙ The last verse of the reign has three verbs and no speech. They lifted him (H5375 nâsâʼ), they buried him (H6912 qâbar) with his fathers. Cambridge reads the definite article as a taunt: "upon the horses of some of his pursuers," so that the transport "announced the complete success of their conspiracy." The Pulpit editors read the same article as restraint, "those same royal horses presumably with which he had fled to Lachish," indicating that "they visited him with no additional gratuitous disrespect." ⚙ We do not adjudicate; the Hebrew article carries both. The text critical point is firmer. Keil and Delitzsch call "in the city of Judah" surprising and take יהוּדה to be "an orthographical error for דויד, occasioned by the immediately following" word; Ellicott calls it "A transcriber's mistake for city of David, as it is in Kings and all the old versions, as well as some Heb. MSS." ⚙ So the chapter ends with a king in the family tomb and a scribe's hand showing in the line that names it, and the chronicler moves on to Uzziah without a word of eulogy.

Read under Sola Scriptura — this tool’s own fallible reading (⚙)

⚙ Fallible synthesis, offered to be tested. The unit is held together by one Hebrew family the English scatters: H310 ʼachar and its adjective H314. Amaziah lives fifteen years after the death of Joash (v. 25); his acts are the former ones and the latter ones (v. 26); he turned aside from after YHWH, and they sent after him to Lachish (v. 27). One preposition governs the whole obituary, and it asks in each instance what a man is walking behind. Amaziah stepped out of the line that follows YHWH, and thereafter something else was always coming up behind him. ⚙ Notice next what the chronicler tells us and what he refuses. He tells us the cause: "from the time that Amaziah turned." He refuses the names of the conspirators, any account of their motive, and any verdict on their deed, which is the reverse of how a court would report a regicide. The point is not that the assassins were righteous; 2 Kings 14:5 has Amaziah executing his own father's killers, and this text offers no approval of theirs. The point is that the chronicler thinks the decisive event in the story happened fifteen years before anyone drew a knife. Barnes guards this rightly: the death was not, "humanly speaking," caused by the apostasy, but stands as "a divine judgment." ⚙ Then the grammar finishes him. In v. 25 Amaziah is the subject of a verb of living; in v. 27 he is the suffix on a causative verb of dying; in v. 28 he is the object lifted onto horses. A reign narrated in shrinking syntax. And yet he is buried with his fathers, in the city that the versions insist is David's. The covenant line holds a man who left the covenant God, because the promise to David was never resting on Amaziah's faithfulness. The following line is our own synthesis and not Scripture: no verse says it.

The chronicler dates a king's death not from the day of the knife but from the day of the turning.

⚙

Canonical Threads — out to the whole of Scripture

cross-refs · verify

AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.

The Kings account carried over: 2 Kings 14:17 to 20 verbal / quotation: confirmed

These four verses are the Chronicler's rendering of the close of 2 Kings 14, and the commentators treat them as such without hesitation: Ellicott heads the section "END OF THE REIGN" and says v. 25 is "Identical with 2Kings 14:17"; Keil and Delitzsch, Cambridge ("25 to 28 = 2 Kings 14:17-20") and the Pulpit Commentary all set the two texts side by side. The Verifier supplies the lexical basis: 2 Kings 14:17 shares H2568 châmêsh, H2421 châyâh and H558 ʼĂmatsyâh with our v. 25, and 2 Kings 14:19 shares the far rarer H7195 qesher and H3923 Lâkîysh along with H5127 nûwç. ⚙ The one substantive difference is the clause the Chronicler adds in v. 27 ("from the time that Amaziah turned"), which Kings does not have, and the burial place, where Kings reads "city of David."

2 Kings 14:17 · 2 Kings 14:19

basis: Verifier: 2 Kings 14:17 shares H2568 châmêsh (in 272 vv), H2421 châyâh (in 257 vv), H558 ʼĂmatsyâh (in 39 vv); 2 Kings 14:19 shares H3923 Lâkîysh (in 22 vv), H7195 qesher (in 13 vv), H5127 nûwç (in 141 vv). Hebrew to Hebrew, with two rare lexemes (qesher 13 vv, Lâkîysh 22 vv) in a clause by clause parallel that Ellicott calls 'Identical with 2Kings 14:17'.

Three kings, three conspiracies: the rare noun qesher structural / thematic: confirmed

The noun קֶ֛שֶׁר (H7195, "an unlawful alliance") occurs in only 13 verses, and the Verifier finds it with its cognate verb H7194 qâshar at 2 Kings 12:20, where Amaziah's own father Joash is killed by his servants, and at 2 Kings 15:30, where Pekah conspires against Hoshea. Cambridge states the pattern for the house of David: "Athaliah, Joash, Amaziah each fell one after the other before a conspiracy. Jehoiada's example had far-reaching results." ⚙ Amaziah dies the way his father died, at the hands of his own men, in the city his father had ruled. The shared lexeme is real; the claim here is pattern rather than citation, so we tier it structural.

2 Kings 12:20 · 2 Kings 15:30

basis: Verifier: 2 Kings 12:20 shares H7195 qesher (in 13 vv), H7194 qâshar (in 44 vv), H3101 Yôwʼâsh (in 41 vv); 2 Kings 15:30 shares H7195 qesher (in 13 vv) and H7194 qâshar (in 44 vv). Rare noun, real Hebrew to Hebrew lexeme link, but no quotation is claimed: these are separate events sharing a motif and a vocabulary.

"The rest of the acts, are they not written": the annalist's closing formula structural / thematic: confirmed

Verse 26 is a formula, not a sentence composed for Amaziah, and the Verifier shows it: 2 Kings 15:15 and 1 Kings 16:20 share the same triad H3499 yether (the remainder), H3789 kâthab (written) and H5612 çêpher (scroll) with our verse. Ellicott notes the Chronicler's habitual form at 2 Chronicles 20:34 and 24:27. ⚙ The formula does two things at once: it admits that the narrative before us is a selection, and it names a source that no longer exists. The Pulpit Commentary argues the two differently titled books of Kings and Chronicles are a single work; Keil and Delitzsch refer the question to their Introduction. Neither can hand us the scroll.

2 Kings 15:15 · 1 Kings 16:20

basis: Verifier: both refs share H3789 kâthab (in 212 vv), H5612 çêpher (in 174 vv), H3499 yether (in 95 vv) with 25:26. All three lexemes are common, so the link is the shared formulaic pattern of the regnal closing notice, not a quotation.

Another Amaziah: the name at Amos 7:10 flagged: verify source

The Verifier returns Amos 7:10 on the strength of H558 ʼĂmatsyâh, and Strong's itself warns that the name belongs to "four Israelites." The Amaziah of Amos 7 is the priest of Bethel who reports Amos to Jeroboam and tells the prophet to stop speaking; the Amaziah here is a king of Judah who, in 25:16, told a prophet to stop speaking and was told his destruction was determined. ⚙ The resonance is suggestive and the lexeme match is genuine, but it is a match of name between two different men, which is the weakest kind of basis. We flag it rather than tier it, and no commentator in this brief draws the connection.

Amos 7:10

basis: Verifier: shared H558 ʼĂmatsyâh (in 39 vv), but the two bearers are different persons (a king of Judah here, the priest of Bethel at Amos 7:10). The lexeme match is a personal name, so the apparent link is homonymy; any thematic reading of it is our synthesis and is unsupported by the commentators in this brief.

A record of deeds, and a book no one can consult typological

⚙ Verse 26 sends the reader to a written record of a man's acts, first and last, which the reader cannot open. Scripture elsewhere speaks of writing that does survive: Malachi 3:16 has a book of remembrance written before YHWH for those who feared him, and Revelation 20:12 has the dead judged from books, by what was written in them. ⚙ We offer this as figural reading only. No shared Strong's number can be claimed between our Hebrew çêpher (H5612) and the Greek of Revelation, and this pair is not in the Verifier's candidate set for this unit; the basis is a motif, and the step from a royal chronicle to a divine ledger is ours, not the Chronicler's stated intent.

Malachi 3:16 · Revelation 20:12

basis: No computed lexeme basis: the pair is absent from the Verifier candidates for this unit, and a Hebrew to Greek link cannot rest on shared Strong's numbers in any case. Basis is the shared motif of a written record of human deeds, read figurally. Widely held as a devotional association; not attested by any commentator in this brief for 25:26.

⚙Christ in the Unittypology · verify

AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.

Buried with his fathers, and the Son whose tomb was empty ancient/widely-held

⚙ The unit's last clause is the dynastic formula: they buried him עִם־אֲבֹתָ֖יו (H5973 with H1 ʼâb), with his fathers, in what Ellicott and Keil and Delitzsch both judge should read the city of David. The formula is the Old Testament's ordinary full stop on a king of Judah: the throne passes, the man stays in the ground. Peter's Pentecost argument turns exactly on that fact, that David's own tomb remained among them and his flesh did see corruption, so that the promise of Psalm 16 must speak of another. This is the apostolic reading, not an invention of ours; it is the standard Christian handling of the royal burial notices. ⚙ What Amaziah's burial adds is the ordinariness of it: a king who left YHWH is still gathered to the covenant line, because the promise never rested on his faithfulness, and the line therefore runs on past him to the one whose grave could not keep the formula.

Acts 2:29 · Psalm 16:10

The king who turned aside, and the King who did not novel

⚙ The hinge of the pericope is סָ֤ר (H5493 çûwr) with מֵאַחֲרֵ֣י (H310): Amaziah stepped out from behind YHWH, and Matthew Henry dates his whole ruin there, "his ruin may be dated from his turning from the Lord." Ellicott says the Chronicler added the clause precisely to assert "the real connection between Amaziah's defection from Jehovah, and the calamities that overtook him." ⚙ Read canonically, the contrast is with a Son who, when the hour came, set his face toward Jerusalem rather than fleeing it, and who is presented in Hebrews as the high priest without the defection that disqualifies. Amaziah turned aside from following and then fled to Lachish; the true King did not turn aside and would not flee. The contrast is ours and we mark it novel: no commentator in this brief draws it, and Chronicles is not making a messianic argument here.

Luke 9:51 · Hebrews 7:26

A conspiracy in Jerusalem against the anointed novel

⚙ In v. 27 anonymous men bind a binding (H7194 with H7195) against the Lord's anointed king in Jerusalem, and he is put to death outside the city. Cambridge sets it in a chain of such plots against David's house: "Athaliah, Joash, Amaziah each fell one after the other before a conspiracy." The apostolic church read the plot against Jesus through Psalm 2, as the gathering of rulers against the Lord and against his Anointed, and that reading is ancient and secure. ⚙ The step of hearing Amaziah's assassination as an anticipation of it is ours, and it must be made with the difference stated plainly: Amaziah dies under a declared divine judgment for his own apostasy, while the Anointed dies innocent. The type is broken at its centre, which is precisely why it is instructive. Marked novel.

Matthew 26:3 · Acts 4:27

Apparatus & Provenance

The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.

Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:

Albert Barnes, Notes on the Bible (1834)
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, — (1880s)
Charles Ellicott, Commentary for English Readers (1878)
Keil & Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1860s)
Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible (1706)
The Pulpit Commentary, Spence & Exell, eds. (1880s)

Text. The Hebrew of this unit has two acknowledged difficulties, and both are named by the commentators in the brief rather than by us. At 25:26 the interrogative הֲלֹא֙ stands with the interjection הִנָּ֣ם; Ellicott says flatly "The Hebrew is faulty here," the Chronicles idiom and the Kings idiom having been blended, and reports manuscript, Syriac, Vulgate and Arabic support for "Behold, they are written." At 25:28 the received text reads "in the city of Judah" where the Kings parallel, all the ancient versions and some Hebrew manuscripts read "the city of David"; Keil and Delitzsch explain it as an orthographic error for דויד triggered by the following word, and Ellicott calls it a transcriber's mistake. BSB prints the Hebrew as it stands, so the reader who compares 2 Kings 14:20 needs this note.

Sources. Ten authors are listed for this unit, but only six could be quoted honestly. The entries carried for Henry, Barnes, Gill and JFB are block comments keyed to earlier verses of the chapter: the Gill and JFB material in the brief comments on 25:17, not on 25:25 to 28, so Gill and JFB are not cited here at all, and Barnes and Henry are cited only from the parts of their blocks that speak directly to the apostasy and the death. Poole has no text on any of these four verses. Geneva's entries reproduce the verse text with the heading "EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)" and contain no gloss, so nothing could be quoted from them. Cambridge appears only on 25:27 and 25:28. Quoted authors: Ellicott, Henry, Barnes, Pulpit, Keil and Delitzsch, Cambridge.

What is uncertain. Whose horses carried the body is disputed: Cambridge says the pursuers', the Pulpit editors say Amaziah's own royal horses, and the Hebrew article settles neither. Cambridge's "Perhaps he was trying to reach Egypt" for the flight to Lachish is an inference, not a datum of the text. The identity of the cited "book of the kings of Judah and Israel" is argued by the Pulpit Commentary and left to an Introduction we have not read by Keil and Delitzsch; we report the argument and claim nothing. The Chronicler's causal clause in 25:27 is theological dating, not chronology, as Barnes and the Pulpit editors both stress, and our sola reading depends on that distinction. The Amos 7:10 thread is flagged because its basis is a shared personal name borne by two different men, and the Malachi and Revelation thread is typological with no computed lexeme basis at all. Interlinear word order at 25:27 follows the Berean alignment in the brief, which lists קֶ֛שֶׁר (index 6) before its cognate verb (index 7); the cognate accusative construction stands regardless of display order.

✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)