The Fallible Synthetic Study Bible — 2 Chronicles 25:5

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

2 Chronicles 25:5–13 — Amaziah’s Victories. 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

Charles EllicottCommentary for English Readers1878

All these high numbers are no doubt suspicious; but a certain relative propriety is observable in the present instance, inasmuch as the country had suffered great losses by the disastrous wars of Jehoram, Ahaziah, Joash.

Ellicott doubts the transmitted figures on principle, yet argues this one is relatively plausible because Judah had recently lost so much. We keep both halves of his judgment.

source ↗

Jamieson, Fausset & BrownCommentary Critical and Explanatory1871

As all who were capable of bearing arms were liable to serve, it was quite natural in making up the muster-roll to class them according to their respective families and to appoint the officers of each corps from the same quarter; so that all the soldiers who formed a regiment were brothers, relatives, friends. Thus the Hebrew troops were closely linked together, and had strong inducements to keep steady in their ranks.

source ↗

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges—1880s

These were spearmen and correspond in number with Asa’s spearmen

source ↗

Then Amaziah gathered the people of Judah and assigned them according to their families to commanders of thousands and of hundreds. And he numbered those twenty years of age or older throughout Judah and Benjamin and found 300,000 chosen men able to serve in the army, bearing the spear and shield.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

’ă·maṣ·yā·hū ’eṯ- way·yiq·bōṣ yə·hū·ḏāh way·ya·‘ă·mî·ḏêm ’ā·ḇō·wṯ lə·ḇêṯ- lə·śā·rê hā·’ă·lā·p̄îm ū·lə·śā·rê ham·mê·’ō·wṯ way·yip̄·qə·ḏêm ‘eś·rîm lə·mib·ben šā·nāh wā·ma‘·lāh lə·ḵāl yə·hū·ḏāh ū·ḇin·yā·min way·yim·ṣā·’êm šə·lōš- mê·’ō·wṯ ’e·lep̄ bā·ḥūr yō·w·ṣê ṣā·ḇā ’ō·ḥêz rō·maḥ wə·ṣin·nāh

Word by word29 · parsed

אֲמַצְיָ֙הוּ֙’ă·maṣ·yā·hūThen AmaziahH558

√ ʼĂmatsyâh — Amatsjah, the name of four IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

אֶת־’eṯ-H853

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

ʼêth: object marker Untranslatable particle marking Judah as the definite object of the gathering.

וַיִּקְבֹּ֤ץway·yiq·bōṣgatheredH6908

√ qâbats — to grasp, iConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular

qâbats: to grasp, to collect The verb of sweeping scattered things into one hand. It is the standard word for God gathering a dispersed Israel, and here a king uses it on his own people for war. JFB observes the social logic of what follows: the muster roll is kept by family, so that “all the soldiers who formed a regiment were brothers, relatives, friends,” which made the ranks hold.

יְהוּדָ֔הyə·hū·ḏāh[the people of] JudahH3063

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

וַיַּֽעֲמִידֵ֣םway·ya·‘ă·mî·ḏêm. . .H5975

√ ʻâmad — to stand, in various relations (literal and figurative, intransitive and transitive)Conjunctive wawVerbHifilConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singularthird person masculine plural

ʻâmad: to stand, to set up (Hifil) Causative: he made them stand. K&D and Ellicott both hear the Numbers muster behind it, men placed by father houses under captains. Chronicles reaches for the wilderness pattern of Israel arranged around a tent, but the arranger here is Amaziah and the object is a campaign against Edom.

אָב֗וֹת’ā·ḇō·wṯand assigned them according to their familiesH1

√ ʼâb — father, in a literal and immediate, or figurative and remote applicationNounmasculine plural

לְבֵית־lə·ḇêṯ-. . .H1004

√ bayith — a house (in the greatest variation of applications, especially family, etcPreposition-lNounmasculine singular construct

לְשָׂרֵ֤יlə·śā·rêto commandersH8269

√ sar — a head person (of any rank or class)Preposition-lNounmasculine plural construct

הָאֲלָפִים֙hā·’ă·lā·p̄îmof thousandsH505

√ ʼeleph — hence (the ox's head being the first letter of the alphabet, and this eventually used as a numeral) a thousandArticleNumbermasculine plural

וּלְשָׂרֵ֣יū·lə·śā·rê[and]H8269

√ sar — a head person (of any rank or class)Conjunctive waw, Preposition-lNounmasculine plural construct

הַמֵּא֔וֹתham·mê·’ō·wṯof hundredsH3967

√ mêʼâh — a hundredArticleNumberfeminine plural

וַֽיִּפְקְדֵ֗םway·yip̄·qə·ḏêmAnd he numberedH6485

√ pâqad — to visit (with friendly or hostile intent)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singularthird person masculine plural

pâqad: to visit, to muster Perfect bureaucratic language for a census of the war-liable. The Chronicler has already told us what David's census cost, so a muster in this book is never a neutral count; it is a king measuring his own strength.

עֶשְׂרִ֤ים‘eś·rîmthose twentyH6242

√ ʻesrîym — twentyNumbercommon plural

לְמִבֶּ֨ןlə·mib·benyears of ageH1121

√ 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, etcPreposition-l, Preposition-mNounmasculine singular construct

bên: son (from son of twenty years) The idiom is “from son of twenty years and upward.” Ellicott and Pulpit both name the fixed military age of Numbers 1:2-3 and 1 Chronicles 27:23. Age, not enthusiasm, defines who may stand in the host.

שָׁנָה֙šā·nāh. . .H8141

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

וָמַ֔עְלָהwā·ma‘·lāhor olderH4605

√ maʻal — properly, the upper part, used only adverbially with prefix upward, above, overhead, from the top, etcConjunctive wawAdverbthird person feminine singular

לְכָל־lə·ḵālthroughoutH3605

√ kôl — properly, the wholePreposition-lNounmasculine singular construct

יְהוּדָ֖הyə·hū·ḏāhJudahH3063

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

וּבִנְיָמִ֑ןū·ḇin·yā·minand BenjaminH1144

√ Binyâmîyn — Binjamin, youngest son of JacobConjunctive wawNounpropermasculine singular

וַיִּמְצָאֵ֗םway·yim·ṣā·’êmand foundH4672

√ mâtsâʼ — properly, to come forth to, iConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singularthird person masculine plural

שְׁלֹשׁ־šə·lōš-300,000 {}H7969

√ shâlôwsh — threeNumberfeminine singular construct

shâlôwsh mêʼâh ʼeleph: three hundred thousand The number is the interpretive crux of the verse. Ellicott, Barnes, JFB, Pulpit and K&D all read it as small: a fraction of Jehoshaphat's levy and about half of Asa's, the arithmetic of a kingdom bled by the wars of Jehoram, Ahaziah and Joash. Ellicott adds the honest caveat that all such high numbers are suspicious, and Gill records Vulgate copies reading 30,000. The verse therefore opens with a king counting a diminished nation.

מֵא֨וֹתmê·’ō·wṯ. . .H3967

√ mêʼâh — a hundredNumberfeminine plural

אֶ֤לֶף’e·lep̄. . .H505

√ ʼeleph — hence (the ox's head being the first letter of the alphabet, and this eventually used as a numeral) a thousandNumbermasculine singular

בָּחוּר֙bā·ḥūrchosen [men]H977

√ bâchar — properly, to try, iVerbQalQalPassParticiplemasculine singular

bâchar: to try, to choose (passive participle) The sifted men. Because the root is Israel's own election vocabulary, the word quietly asks whose choosing finally matters: Amaziah picks 300,000 and then buys 100,000 more, while the next verses turn on whom the LORD is with.

יוֹצֵ֣אyō·w·ṣê[able] to serveH3318

√ yâtsâʼ — to go (causatively, bring) out, in a great variety of applications, literally and figuratively, direct and proximVerbQalParticiplemasculine singular

צָבָ֔אṣā·ḇāin the armyH6635

√ tsâbâʼ — a mass of persons (or figuratively, things), especially regNouncommon singular

tsâbâʼ: host, mass of persons The participle phrase is literally “going out in the host,” the same idiom that names the LORD of hosts. Judah's army is a tsâbâʼ only in the derivative sense; the title belongs to another.

אֹחֵ֖ז’ō·ḥêzbearingH270

√ ʼâchaz — to seize (often with the accessory idea of holding in possession)VerbQalParticiplemasculine singular

רֹ֥מַחrō·maḥthe spearH7420

√ rômach — a lance (as thrown)Nounmasculine singular

rômach: a lance (as thrown) A rare word, and with tsinnâh it forms the Chronicler's stock description of heavy infantry (1 Chronicles 12:8; 2 Chronicles 11:12; 14:8). Cambridge notes that the 300,000 spearmen correspond in number to Asa's spearmen.

וְצִנָּֽה׃wə·ṣin·nāhand shieldH6793

√ tsinnâh — a hook (as pointed)Conjunctive wawNounfeminine singular

tsinnâh: large shield, target Properly something pointed or hooked, then the full body shield carried by the front rank. The equipment list is the last thing the verse says about Judah's strength, just before verse 6 adds silver to it.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-gathered Amaziah Judah, and-he-made-them-stand by-house-of fathers, for-captains-of the-thousands and-for-captains-of the-hundreds, for-all Judah and-Benjamin; and-he-mustered them from-son-of twenty years and-upward, and-he-found-them three hundred thousand chosen, going-out-in host, grasping lance and-target.

Where the English smooths the original

וַיַּֽעֲמִידֵ֣ם וַיַּֽעֲמִידֵ֣ם (way·ya·‘ă·mî·ḏêm, Hifil of ʻâmad, H5975) is not “assigned” but caused them to stand. Ellicott corrects the older English: “Rather, And made them stand (marshalled them) according to father houses.” K&D reads the same causative: he “set them up (ordered them).” The picture is a parade ground, men placed in ranks by kinship, and the English verb “assigned” loses the bodily image of standing where you are put.
וַֽיִּפְקְדֵ֗ם וַֽיִּפְקְדֵ֗ם (pâqad, H6485) is glossed “numbered,” but the root means to visit, to attend to, to inspect, with friendly or hostile intent. Ellicott renders it “Mustered.” A census here is an act of official visitation, the king laying eyes on every man of fighting age, and the flat English “numbered” hides that the same verb elsewhere names God visiting a people for good or for judgment.
בָּחוּר֙ בָּחוּר֙ (bā·ḥūr, H977) is a Qal passive participle: not “chosen men” as a compliment but men who have been tried and picked out. Cambridge notes the revision from “choice men” to “chosen men.” The root is the ordinary verb of election, so the muster roll of Judah is a list of the sifted, and the word carries the grammar of being selected rather than of selecting oneself.
רֹ֥מַח וְצִנָּֽה רֹ֥מַח (rômach, H7420, a thrown lance) with צִנָּֽה (tsinnâh, H6793, the large body shield) is a technical pair the English flattens to “spear and shield.” Ellicott: “Grasping lance and target, i.e., heavy-armed warriors.” The participle אֹחֵ֖ז (ʼâchaz, H270) means to seize and hold in possession, so these are not men who own weapons but men whose hands are closed on them.

The Voices✦ 3 public domain

Joseph BensonCommentary on the Old and New Testaments1810s

If he had advised with any of his prophets before he did this, or had but considered how little any of his ancestors had got by their alliances with Israel, he would not have thus done what he had soon to undo again. But rashness makes work for repentance.

source ↗

John GillExposition of the Entire Bible1746–63

which amounted to 35,300 pounds sterling, and according to Beckius (e) were about five florins and a half to each soldier.

Gill's conversion (and the per-soldier figure he takes from Beckius) is eighteenth-century arithmetic on an uncertain talent weight; Ellicott and JFB give materially different totals.

source ↗

Geneva Study BibleMarginal Notes1599

That is, out of the ten tribes who had separated themselves before both from God and their true king.

The Geneva annotator reads the northern kingdom as doubly separated, from God and from the Davidic throne, which is the theological ground the man of God will assume in v. 7.

source ↗

He also hired 100,000 mighty men of valor from Israel for a hundred talents of silver.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

way·yiś·kōr bə·mê·’āh ’e·lep̄ gib·bō·wr ḥā·yil mî·yiś·rā·’êl mê·’āh ḵik·kar- kā·sep̄

Word by word9 · parsed

וַיִּשְׂכֹּ֣רway·yiś·kōrHe also hiredH7936

√ sâkar — to hireConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular

sâkar: to hire One consecutive imperfect turns a muster into a purchase. Benson's judgment is that the act was rash rather than wicked: Amaziah did not consult a prophet first, and so did what he soon had to undo. The verse is the hinge of the whole unit, because everything from verse 7 to verse 13 is the unwinding of this single transaction.

בְּמֵאָ֥הbə·mê·’āh100,000 {}H3967

√ mêʼâh — a hundredPreposition-bNumberfeminine singular

אֶ֛לֶף’e·lep̄. . .H505

√ ʼeleph — hence (the ox's head being the first letter of the alphabet, and this eventually used as a numeral) a thousandNumbermasculine singular

גִּבּ֥וֹרgib·bō·wrmighty menH1368

√ gibbôwr — powerfulAdjectivemasculine singular construct

gibbôwr: powerful, mighty The noun of the hero, used of David's champions. Chronicles hands the title to mercenaries from a kingdom the next verse says the LORD has left, which sets strength and blessing visibly apart.

חָ֖יִלḥā·yilof valorH2428

√ chayil — probably a force, whether of men, means or other resourcesNounmasculine singular

chayil: force, means, resources The word covers armies, wealth and ability without distinguishing them. That breadth is the point here: Amaziah converts silver into chayil, and the man of God will answer with a different noun, kôach (v. 8), which belongs to God alone.

מִיִּשְׂרָאֵ֗לmî·yiś·rā·’êlfrom IsraelH3478

√ Yisrâʼêl — Jisrael, a symbolical name of JacobPreposition-mNounpropermasculine singular

Yisrâʼêl: Israel Here the northern kingdom, not the covenant people as a whole. Poole and Geneva both pin the sense down: the ten tribes.

מֵ֥אָהmê·’āhfor a hundredH3967

√ mêʼâh — a hundredNumberfeminine singular

כִכַּר־ḵik·kar-talentsH3603

√ kikkâr — a circle, iNounfeminine singular construct

kikkâr: a round weight, talent Bullion by weight, the currency of treaties and tribute.

כָּֽסֶף׃kā·sep̄of silverH3701

√ keçeph — silver (from its pale color)Nounmasculine singular

keçeph: silver The same silver that will become Amaziah's objection in verse 9. The narrative gives the sum twice so that the reader can feel the size of what obedience is about to cost.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-he-hired with-a-hundred thousand mighty-of-valor from-Israel for-a-hundred talent of-silver.

Where the English smooths the original

וַיִּשְׂכֹּ֣ר וַיִּשְׂכֹּ֣ר (sâkar, H7936) is the ordinary verb to hire for wages, the word used of day laborers. The BSB “hired” is accurate, but the flatness of the English hides how odd the object is: the king of Judah puts a hundred thousand men of the northern kingdom on the payroll. The construction is literally “he hired with a hundred thousand,” the preposition bᵉ on the number, which reads as hiring at the price or rate of that force.
גִּבּ֥וֹר חָ֖יִל גִּבּ֥וֹר חָ֖יִל (gibbôwr chayil, H1368 with H2428) is singular in the Hebrew, a collective: “mighty man of force.” Chayil (H2428) means a force, whether of men, means or other resources, so the phrase praises capacity, not character. The English “mighty men of valor” imports a moral warmth the Hebrew does not spend; verse 7 will say what these men actually lack.
כִכַּר־כָּֽסֶף כִכַּר (kikkâr, H3603) is properly a circle or round thing, hence a round weight of bullion; כָּֽסֶף (keçeph, H3701) is silver named from its pale color. “A hundred talents of silver” is a weight, not a coinage. Ellicott reckons it at roughly forty thousand pounds of his own money, JFB at about fifty thousand, and Gill at 35,300 pounds sterling; the three disagree, which is itself the honest state of the question.

But a man of God came to him and said, “O king, do not let the army of Israel go with you, for the LORD is not with Israel—not with any of the Ephraimites.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

wə·’îš hā·’ĕ·lō·hîm bā ’ê·lāw lê·mōr ham·me·leḵ ’al- ṣə·ḇā yiś·rā·’êl yā·ḇō ‘im·mə·ḵā kî Yah·weh ’ên ‘im- yiś·rā·’êl kōl bə·nê ’ep̄·rā·yim

Word by word19 · parsed

וְאִ֣ישׁwə·’îšBut a manH376

√ ʼîysh — a man as an individual or a male personConjunctive wawNounmasculine singular construct

ʼîysh: a man, an individual The unnamed prophet is the only person in the unit who speaks for God, and he is given no genealogy, no city and no title beyond this. Chronicles is content to let the word be identified by its source rather than its speaker.

הָאֱלֹהִ֗יםhā·’ĕ·lō·hîmof GodH430

√ ʼĕlôhîym — gods in the ordinary senseArticleNounmasculine plural

ʼĕlôhîym: God Plural in form, singular in reference, with the article: the God. The unit uses ʼĕlôhîym for the one who can overthrow (v. 8) and the covenant name YHWH for the one who can repay (v. 9), and both mouths are the same prophet's.

בָּ֤אbācameH935

√ bôwʼ — to go or come (in a wide variety of applications)VerbQalPerfectthird person masculine singular

אֵלָיו֙’ê·lāwto himH413

√ ʼêl — near, with or amongPrepositionthird person masculine singular

לֵאמֹ֔רlê·mōrand saidH559

√ ʼâmar — to say (used with great latitude)Preposition-lVerbQalInfinitive construct

הַמֶּ֕לֶךְham·me·leḵO kingH4428

√ melek — a kingArticleNounmasculine singular

אַל־’al-do not letH408

√ ʼal — not (the qualified negation, used as a deprecative)Adverb

ʼal: not (deprecative) The prohibition particle of entreaty rather than of law.

צְבָ֣אṣə·ḇāthe armyH6635

√ tsâbâʼ — a mass of persons (or figuratively, things), especially regNouncommon singular construct

יִשְׂרָאֵ֑לyiś·rā·’êlof IsraelH3478

√ Yisrâʼêl — Jisrael, a symbolical name of JacobNounpropermasculine singular

יָבֹ֥אyā·ḇōgoH935

√ bôwʼ — to go or come (in a wide variety of applications)VerbQalImperfect Jussivethird person masculine singular

עִמְּךָ֖‘im·mə·ḵāwith youH5973

√ ʻim — adverb or preposition, with (iPrepositionsecond person masculine singular

כִּ֣יkîforH3588

√ kîy — (by implication) very widely used as a relative conjunction or adverb (as below)Conjunction

kîy: for, because The conjunction that turns the whole speech into an argument: the ban rests on a reason, and the reason is a fact about God's presence, not about Israelite competence.

יְהוָה֙Yah·wehthe LORDH3068

√ Yᵉhôvâh — Jehovah, Jewish national name of GodNounpropermasculine singular

אֵ֤ין’ênis notH369

√ ʼayin — a non-entityAdverb

ʼayin: a non-entity The flat negation of presence. Ellicott lines this up with 2 Chronicles 19:2, 20:37 and 16:7, the Chronicler's standing verdict on Judah's alliances; Cambridge sends the reader to 2 Chronicles 13:8-12. Poole draws the sharpest inference: God has forsaken them, and for their sakes will curse the forces of anyone who joins himself to them. The hired men are not weak, they are unaccompanied.

עִם־‘im-withH5973

√ ʻim — adverb or preposition, with (iPreposition

יִשְׂרָאֵ֔לyiś·rā·’êlIsraelH3478

√ Yisrâʼêl — Jisrael, a symbolical name of JacobNounpropermasculine singular

כֹּ֖לkōl[not with] anyH3605

√ kôl — properly, the wholeNounmasculine singular construct

בְּנֵ֥יbə·nêof the EphraimitesH1121

√ 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 plural construct

bên: sons (of Ephraim) Ephraim as the name of the whole northern kingdom. Pulpit traces the usage through Isaiah and Hosea, and JFB explains why the specification was needed: idolatry had long been the prevailing religion there, and Ephraim was its headquarters.

אֶפְרָֽיִם׃’ep̄·rā·yim. . .H669

√ ʼEphrayim — Ephrajim, a son of JosephNounpropermasculine singular

ʼEphrayim: Ephraim Joseph's younger son, whose tribal name became shorthand for the ten tribes and for calf worship.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-a-man of-the-God came to-him, saying: O-king, let-not-go the-host-of Israel with-thee, for YHWH is-not with-Israel, all-the-sons-of Ephraim.

Where the English smooths the original

וְאִ֣ישׁ הָאֱלֹהִ֗ים וְאִ֣ישׁ הָאֱלֹהִ֗ים (ʼîysh hâʼĕlôhîym, H376 with H430) is “a man of the God,” with the article. The title, not a name, is all we are given; Pulpit states plainly that “The name of this man of God does not transpire,” and Gill records a rabbinic guess that he was Amos the father of Isaiah, adding that it is “without foundation.” The English keeps the phrase but cannot show that Hebrew leaves the office standing where a person would be.
אַל־ ... יָבֹ֥א אַל־ (ʼal, H408) with the jussive יָבֹ֥א (bôwʼ, H935) is not a command to the king but a wish against the army: “let not the host of Israel go with you.” Hebrew has two negatives for prohibition, and this is the softer, deprecative one. The BSB “do not let the army of Israel go with you” reads as an order to Amaziah; the Hebrew form leaves him room to consent, which is exactly what verses 9 and 10 record him doing.
אֵ֤ין אֵ֤ין (ʼayin, H369) is not a verb but a noun of non-existence, a non-entity. The clause is verbless and absolute: “for YHWH, there is no being-with Israel.” The English “the LORD is not with Israel” supplies a copula the Hebrew never uses, and softens a statement that in the original simply cancels the presence.
כֹּ֖ל בְּנֵ֥י אֶפְרָֽיִם כֹּ֖ל בְּנֵ֥י אֶפְרָֽיִם is an appositional tag with no preposition of its own: “all the sons of Ephraim.” The BSB dash and the older “to wit, with” are both editorial. Pulpit argues those supplied words are better dropped entirely, and JFB reads the phrase as the historian's own later gloss explaining which Israel is meant.

The Voices✦ 4 public domain

Albert BarnesNotes on the Bible1834

If the present text is regarded as sound, this passage must be taken ironically. But most recent commentators supply a second negative, and render it: "But go thou alone, act, be strong for the battle - God shall then not make thee to fall.

source ↗

Keil & DelitzschBiblical Commentary on the Old Testament1860s

Amaziah is to go alone, and show himself valiant in war, and the Lord will help him to conquer. This is without doubt the thought in 2 Chronicles 25:8 , which, however, does not seem to be contained in the traditional Masoretic text.

Keil states the conclusion first and the textual problem second; readers should notice that his preferred sense requires a negative that no manuscript supplies.

source ↗

Charles EllicottCommentary for English Readers1878

Before these words, the expression wĕlō’, “and not,” must have dropped out of the text.

Ellicott adds, importantly against his own conjecture, that no ancient version inserts the required negative, so the omission is at least as old as the Septuagint.

source ↗

The Pulpit CommentarySpence & Exell, eds.1880s

The sum, then, of the matter of our vers. 7, 8 may amount to this: "Under no circumstances take Israel, and if thou go thyself with all best preparations, yet know that God shall destroy thee.

source ↗

Even if you go and fight bravely in battle, God will overthrow you before the enemy, for God has power to help and power to overthrow.”

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

kî ’im- ’at·tāh bō ‘ă·śêh ḥă·zaq lam·mil·ḥā·māh hā·’ĕ·lō·hîm yaḵ·šî·lə·ḵā lip̄·nê ’ō·w·yêḇ kî bê·lō·hîm yeš- kō·aḥ la‘·zō·wr ū·lə·haḵ·šîl

Word by word17 · parsed

כִּ֚יkîEvenH3588

√ kîy — (by implication) very widely used as a relative conjunction or adverb (as below)Conjunction

kîy: for, even, that With ʼim it forms a conditional whose force is disputed; the whole exegetical difficulty of the verse sits on these two particles.

אִם־’im-ifH518

√ ʼim — used very widely as demonstrative, lo!Conjunction

ʼim: if K&D insist that kî ʼim can never mean “if not,” which is why the ironical reading cannot be got out of the particles alone.

אַתָּ֔ה’at·tāhyouH859

√ ʼattâh — thou and thee, or (plural) ye and youPronounsecond person masculine singular

בֹּ֣אbōgoH935

√ bôwʼ — to go or come (in a wide variety of applications)VerbQalImperativemasculine singular

עֲשֵׂ֖ה‘ă·śêhand fightH6213

√ ʻâsâh — to do or make, in the broadest sense and widest applicationVerbQalImperativemasculine singular

ʻâsâh: to do, to make An absolute imperative with no object at all: simply “act.” The verb is the broadest word for doing in Hebrew, and its emptiness here is what allows both the ironical and the encouraging constructions of the verse.

חֲזַ֣קḥă·zaqbravelyH2388

√ châzaq — to fasten uponVerbQalImperativemasculine singular

châzaq: to fasten upon, to be strong This imperative is the seed of verse 11, where Amaziah hitchazzaq, strengthens himself, in the reflexive of the same root. K&D make the connection explicit: he showed himself strong according to the word of the prophet. Whether the reflexive is obedience or self-reliance is the unit's open question.

לַמִּלְחָמָ֑הlam·mil·ḥā·māhin battleH4421

√ milchâmâh — a battle (iPreposition-l, ArticleNounfeminine singular

הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙hā·’ĕ·lō·hîmGodH430

√ ʼĕlôhîym — gods in the ordinary senseArticleNounmasculine plural

יַכְשִֽׁילְךָ֤yaḵ·šî·lə·ḵāwill overthrow youH3782

√ kâshal — to totter or waver (through weakness of the legs, especially the ankle)VerbHifilImperfectthird person masculine singularsecond person masculine singular

kâshal: to totter, to waver (Hifil) The textual crux of the unit. As the Masoretic text stands, the prophet tells Amaziah to be strong and then says God will trip him, which Barnes and Gill read as irony and Poole compares to Micaiah's mocking permission to Ahab. Ellicott, JFB, K&D and Barnes all report the alternative: a negative particle has dropped out, so that the promise is “God will not let thee stumble.” K&D call the traditional text clearly erroneous and supply the negative with Ewald and Bertheau. We cannot decide it from the consonants we have, and the ancient versions did not either.

לִפְנֵ֣יlip̄·nêbeforeH6440

√ pânîym — the face (as the part that turns)Preposition-lNouncommon plural construct

אוֹיֵ֔ב’ō·w·yêḇthe enemyH341

√ ʼôyêb — hatingVerbQalParticiplemasculine singular

ʼôyêb: hating, an enemy A participle: the one who hates. Indefinite here, because the threat is not a named nation but whoever God permits.

כִּ֥יkîforH3588

√ kîy — (by implication) very widely used as a relative conjunction or adverb (as below)Conjunction

בֵּאלֹהִ֖יםbê·lō·hîmGodH430

√ ʼĕlôhîym — gods in the ordinary sensePreposition-bNounmasculine plural

יֶשׁ־yeš-hasH3426

√ yêsh — there is or are (or any other form of the verb to be, as may suit the connection)Adverb

yêsh: there is The particle of bare existence, answering the ʼayin of verse 7. God is not with Israel; there is power in God. The two verbless clauses are a matched pair, and verse 9 will use yêsh a third time.

כֹּ֛חַkō·aḥpowerH3581

√ kôach — vigor, literally (force, in a good or a bad sense) or figuratively (capacity, means, produce)Nounmasculine singular

kôach: vigor, force, capacity The word can mean physical strength, means, or even the produce of the ground. Set against Amaziah's hundred talents and hundred thousand men, it says that capacity itself has an owner.

לַעְז֥וֹרla‘·zō·wrto helpH5826

√ ʻâzar — to surround, iPreposition-lVerbQalInfinitive construct

ʻâzar: to surround, to help Help pictured as encirclement, the opposite of a man's legs failing under him. Ellicott sends the reader to 2 Chronicles 20:6 and 1 Chronicles 29:12 for the same confession that strength is God's to lend.

וּלְהַכְשִֽׁיל׃ū·lə·haḵ·šîland [power] to overthrowH3782

√ kâshal — to totter or waver (through weakness of the legs, especially the ankle)Conjunctive waw, Preposition-lVerbHifilInfinitive construct

kâshal: to cause to stumble (Hifil infinitive) The verb returns as God's own prerogative, closing the verse on the note that the outcome of any battle is a divine act and not a sum of forces.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

For if thou go, do, be-strong for-the-battle: the-God will-make-thee-stumble before an-enemy, for in-God there-is power to-help and-to-make-stumble.

Where the English smooths the original

בֹּ֣א עֲשֵׂ֖ה חֲזַ֣ק Three bare Qal imperatives stand in a row: בֹּ֣א (bôwʼ, go), עֲשֵׂ֖ה (ʻâsâh, do, act), חֲזַ֣ק (châzaq, be strong, literally fasten upon). The BSB smooths them into “Even if you go and fight bravely in battle.” Ellicott compares the same clipped idiom at 1 Chronicles 22:16, “Arise! act!”, and Cambridge notes that the Revised Version reads “do valiantly” and marks it ironical. Whichever way the verse is finally construed, English subordination hides that Hebrew here is barking orders.
יַכְשִֽׁילְךָ֤ יַכְשִֽׁילְךָ֤ (kâshal, H3782, Hifil) is not “overthrow” in the sense of conquest but cause to totter. The root describes legs giving way, an ankle failing under a man. God does not need to defeat Amaziah; he needs only to let his footing go. Cambridge prefers “shall cast thee down” for the older “make thee fall,” but the image underneath is weakness at the joint.
בֵּאלֹהִ֖ים יֶשׁ־כֹּ֛חַ בֵּאלֹהִ֖ים יֶשׁ־כֹּ֛חַ is verbless and word-order emphatic: “in God there is power.” The BSB “God has power” makes God the possessor of an attribute; the Hebrew locates power in him as the place where it exists. kôach (H3581) is raw vigor, force or capacity, the very thing Amaziah has just tried to buy with silver in verse 6.
לַעְז֥וֹר וּלְהַכְשִֽׁיל The two infinitives לַעְז֥וֹר (ʻâzar, H5826, to help, properly to surround) and וּלְהַכְשִֽׁיל (kâshal again, Hifil) are a deliberate pair, and the second repeats the verb used of Amaziah a clause earlier. English prints “to help and power to overthrow” and loses the repetition; the Hebrew says that the hand which can surround a man is the same hand that can take his footing away.

The Voices✦ 4 public domain

Alexander MaclarenExpositions of Holy Scripturec. 1905

The character of this Amaziah, one of the Kings of Judah, is summed up by the chronicler in a damning epigram: ‘He did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, but not with a perfect heart.’ He was one of your half-and-half people, or, as Hosea says, ‘a cake not turned,’ burnt black on one side, and raw dough on the other.

Maclaren is quoting the Chronicler's own verdict at 2 Chronicles 25:2 and then Hosea's figure of the half-baked cake; the application of Hosea's image to Amaziah is Maclaren's, not Hosea's.

source ↗

Matthew HenryConcise Commentary on the Whole Bible1706

They are like Amaziah; they say, But what shall we do for the hundred talents? What shall we do if by keeping the sabbath holy we lose so many good customers? What shall we do without this gain? What shall we do if we lose the friendship of the world? Many endeavour to quiet their consciences by the pretence that forbidden practices are necessary. The answer is, as here, The Lord is able to give thee much more than this. He makes up, even in this world, for all that is given up for his sake.

source ↗

Joseph BensonCommentary on the Old and New Testaments1810s

This king lost one hundred talents of silver by his obedience; and we find just that sum given to his grandson Jotham, as a present, 2 Chronicles 27:5 . Then the principal was repaid, and for interest, ten thousand measures of wheat, and as many of barley, were given him.

Benson's balance sheet (and his calling Jotham a grandson) is his own providential arithmetic across two chapters; the text of 2 Chronicles 27:5 does not present that tribute as repayment.

source ↗

The Pulpit CommentarySpence & Exell, eds.1880s

This verse is consummate in the two touches by which it sets forth the phase of earth's calculatingness respecting the perishable, and Heaven's swift disposal of any such trifling difficulty.

source ↗

Amaziah asked the man of God, “What should I do about the hundred talents I have given to the troops of Israel?” And the man of God replied, “The LORD is able to give you much more than this.”

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

’ă·maṣ·yā·hū way·yō·mer lə·’îš hā·’ĕ·lō·hîm ū·mah- la·‘ă·śō·wṯ lim·’aṯ hak·kik·kār ’ă·šer nā·ṯat·tî liḡ·ḏūḏ yiś·rā·’êl ’îš hā·’ĕ·lō·hîm yêš way·yō·mer Yah·weh lā·ṯeṯ lə·ḵā har·bêh miz·zeh

Word by word21 · parsed

אֲמַצְיָ֙הוּ֙’ă·maṣ·yā·hūAmaziahH558

√ ʼĂmatsyâh — Amatsjah, the name of four IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

וַיֹּ֤אמֶרway·yō·meraskedH559

√ ʼâmar — to say (used with great latitude)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular

לְאִ֣ישׁlə·’îšthe manH376

√ ʼîysh — a man as an individual or a male personPreposition-lNounmasculine singular construct

הָאֱלֹהִ֔יםhā·’ĕ·lō·hîmof GodH430

√ ʼĕlôhîym — gods in the ordinary senseArticleNounmasculine plural

וּמַֽה־ū·mah-WhatH4100

√ mâh — properly, interrogative what? (including how? why? when?)Conjunctive wawInterrogative

mâh: what? The interrogative that Maclaren calls a misplaced question: not wrong in itself, but asked before the question of duty.

לַּעֲשׂוֹת֙la·‘ă·śō·wṯshould I doH6213

√ ʻâsâh — to do or make, in the broadest sense and widest applicationPreposition-lVerbQalInfinitive construct

לִמְאַ֣תlim·’aṯabout the hundredH3967

√ mêʼâh — a hundredPreposition-lNumberfeminine singular construct

הַכִּכָּ֔רhak·kik·kārtalentsH3603

√ kikkâr — a circle, iArticleNounfeminine singular

kikkâr: talent The hundred talents are named a third time in the unit. Chronicles lets the sum sit in the king's mouth so that the reader hears the obedience being priced.

אֲשֶׁ֥ר’ă·šerH834

√ ʼăsher — who, which, what, thatPronounrelative

נָתַ֖תִּיnā·ṯat·tîI have givenH5414

√ nâthan — to give, used with greatest latitude of application (put, make, etcVerbQalPerfectfirst person common singular

nâthan: to give Qal perfect, first person: the money is already gone. This is why the objection has force, and why the prophet's answer uses the same root nâthan back at him: what Amaziah has given, God is able to give.

לִגְד֣וּדliḡ·ḏūḏto the troopsH1416

√ gᵉdûwd — a crowd (especially of soldiers)Preposition-lNounmasculine singular construct

gᵉdûwd: a band, a troop of raiders The word chosen here is the same one Hosea uses of marauders, and the same noun that names these men again in verses 10 and 13, where they behave exactly as the noun suggests. The narrative's vocabulary passes judgment before the plot does.

יִשְׂרָאֵ֑לyiś·rā·’êlof IsraelH3478

√ Yisrâʼêl — Jisrael, a symbolical name of JacobNounpropermasculine singular

אִ֣ישׁ’îšAnd the manH376

√ ʼîysh — a man as an individual or a male personNounmasculine singular construct

הָֽאֱלֹהִ֔יםhā·’ĕ·lō·hîmof GodH430

√ ʼĕlôhîym — gods in the ordinary senseArticleNounmasculine plural

יֵ֚שׁyêš. . .H3426

√ yêsh — there is or are (or any other form of the verb to be, as may suit the connection)Adverb

yêsh: there is Placed emphatically at the head of the prophet's reply. The answer to a question about loss is an assertion of existence: there is, with YHWH, the giving.

וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙way·yō·merrepliedH559

√ ʼâmar — to say (used with great latitude)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular

לַֽיהוָ֔הYah·wehThe LORDH3068

√ Yᵉhôvâh — Jehovah, Jewish national name of GodPreposition-lNounpropermasculine singular

Yᵉhôvâh: the LORD The covenant name, used for the promise of repayment, where verse 8 used ʼĕlôhîym for the threat of stumbling. The same prophet holds both names together.

לָ֥תֶתlā·ṯeṯis able to giveH5414

√ nâthan — to give, used with greatest latitude of application (put, make, etcPreposition-lVerbQalInfinitive construct

לְךָ֖lə·ḵāyou

Prepositionsecond person masculine singular

הַרְבֵּ֥הhar·bêhmuch moreH7235

√ râbâh — to increase (in whatever respect)VerbHifilInfinitive absolute

râbâh: to increase (Hifil infinitive absolute) Henry builds his whole exposition on this clause, generalizing it to every case where obedience costs money, and Benson pushes it into ledger arithmetic by noting that a hundred talents were paid to Amaziah's descendant Jotham at 2 Chronicles 27:5. That is a devotional inference, not a claim the text makes.

מִזֶּֽה׃miz·zehthan thisH2088

√ zeh — the masculine demonstrative pronoun, this or thatPreposition-mPronounmasculine singular

zeh: this The demonstrative points back at the silver, the only thing Amaziah has actually weighed.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-said Amaziah to-the-man-of the-God: And-what to-do for-the-hundred of-the-talent which I-have-given to-the-troop-of Israel? And-said the-man-of the-God: There-is to-YHWH to-give to-thee much-more than-this.

Where the English smooths the original

וּמַֽה־לַּעֲשׂוֹת֙ וּמַֽה־לַּעֲשׂוֹת֙ is an impersonal infinitive construction, literally “and what to do?” Ellicott renders it exactly: “Literally, What to do? i.e., What is to be done? what must we do?” The BSB “What should I do about” supplies a subject the Hebrew withholds. The king does not even say “I”; he asks after the accounting, and the grammar keeps him at one remove from the decision.
לִגְד֣וּד לִגְד֣וּד (gᵉdûwd, H1416) is not the ordinary word for an army but a crowd, a band, especially of soldiers, and it is the standard Hebrew term for a raiding party. Ellicott glosses “The troop (gĕdûd) of mercenaries” and Cambridge records the Revised Version marginal “the troop,” adding that “The men in question were freebooters to judge from their conduct.” Calling them “the troops of Israel” in English makes them regulars; the Hebrew has already called them a war band.
יֵ֚שׁ לַֽיהוָ֔ה לָ֥תֶת יֵ֚שׁ לַֽיהוָ֔ה לָ֥תֶת is verbless: “there is to YHWH the giving.” The BSB “The LORD is able to give you” is a fair sense, but the Hebrew makes ability a possession rather than a capacity, the third of the unit's existential clauses after ʼayin in verse 7 and yêsh in verse 8. The prophet answers an accounting question with a statement about who owns the ledger.
הַרְבֵּ֥ה הַרְבֵּ֥ה (râbâh, H7235) is a Hifil infinitive absolute used adverbially, to make much, hence “abundantly, much more.” “Much more than this” is right, but the form is a verb of multiplying, not a comparative adjective; the answer is not a bigger number but an action God is able to perform.

The Voices✦ 3 public domain

Albert BarnesNotes on the Bible1834

Such a dismissal could not fail to arouse great indignation. The Israelites would suppose themselves dismissed because their good faith was suspected.

source ↗

Jamieson, Fausset & BrownCommentary Critical and Explanatory1871

Exasperated at this treatment, they resolved to indemnify themselves for the loss of their expected booty, and so on their return home they plundered all the towns in their way, committing great havoc both of life and property

JFB places the raid on the mercenaries' homeward march; K&D argues from the phrase 'from Samaria' in v. 13 that it happened later, while Amaziah was in Edom. The brief preserves both reconstructions.

source ↗

The Pulpit CommentarySpence & Exell, eds.1880s

It may well be that they asked why they were discharged; and whether the right answer were given them, that the Lord dwelt not among them, or some wrong answer, it evidently did not improve matters, but rankled in their hearts till it found relief (vers. 13, 22), as they concluded that either their ability or fidelity, or both, were called in question.

source ↗

So Amaziah dismissed the troops who had come to him from Ephraim and sent them home. And they were furious with Judah and returned home in great anger.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

’ă·maṣ·yā·hū way·yaḇ·dî·lêm lə·hag·gə·ḏūḏ ’ă·šer- bā ’ê·lāw mê·’ep̄·ra·yim lā·le·ḵeṯ lim·qō·w·mām way·yi·ḥar ’ap·pām mə·’ōḏ bî·hū·ḏāh way·yā·šū·ḇū lim·qō·w·mām bā·ḥo·rî- ’āp̄

Word by word17 · parsed

אֲמַצְיָ֗הוּ’ă·maṣ·yā·hūSo AmaziahH558

√ ʼĂmatsyâh — Amatsjah, the name of four IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

וַיַּבְדִּילֵ֣םway·yaḇ·dî·lêmdismissedH914

√ bâdal — to divide (in variation senses literally or figuratively, separate, distinguish, differ, select, etcConjunctive wawVerbHifilConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singularthird person masculine plural

bâdal: to divide, to separate (Hifil) The creation-week verb of division, and also the priestly verb for separating clean from unclean. Used of an army, it makes Amaziah's act a ritual distinction as much as a military one: these men are set on the other side of a line. K&D explains the odd grammar, the lᵉ before gᵉdûwd standing as the object marker in apposition to the pronoun suffix.

לְהַגְּדוּד֙lə·hag·gə·ḏūḏthe troopsH1416

√ gᵉdûwd — a crowd (especially of soldiers)Preposition-l, ArticleNounmasculine singular

gᵉdûwd: a troop, a band The raiding-band noun again, in the emphatic appositional slot.

אֲשֶׁר־’ă·šer-whoH834

√ ʼăsher — who, which, what, thatPronounrelative

בָּ֤אbāhad comeH935

√ bôwʼ — to go or come (in a wide variety of applications)VerbQalPerfectthird person masculine singular

אֵלָיו֙’ê·lāwto himH413

√ ʼêl — near, with or amongPrepositionthird person masculine singular

מֵֽאֶפְרַ֔יִםmê·’ep̄·ra·yimfrom EphraimH669

√ ʼEphrayim — Ephrajim, a son of JosephPreposition-mNounpropermasculine singular

לָלֶ֖כֶתlā·le·ḵeṯand sent themH1980

√ hâlak — to walk (in a great variety of applications, literally and figuratively)Preposition-lVerbQalInfinitive construct

לִמְקוֹמָ֑םlim·qō·w·māmhomeH4725

√ mâqôwm — properly, a standing, iPreposition-lNounmasculine singular constructthird person masculine plural

mâqôwm: a place, a standing Twice in this verse, the second time after the anger, so that the sentence closes on men in motion toward a place rather than at rest in it.

וַיִּ֨חַרway·yi·ḥarAnd they were furiousH2734

√ chârâh — to glow or grow warmConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular

chârâh: to glow, to grow warm Physical heat used for rage. Barnes and Poole agree on the cause and divide the reasons: dismissal implied that their good faith was suspected, and it robbed them of plunder they had counted on. Poole adds the practical detail that the hundred talents were probably paid to their officers for recruiting, so the rank and file went away with nothing.

אַפָּ֤ם’ap·pām. . .H639

√ ʼaph — properly, the nose or nostrilNounmasculine singular constructthird person masculine plural

ʼaph: nose, nostril The organ that stands for anger in Hebrew because anger is visible there. Chronicles uses it twice in one verse, and it will appear again at 2 Chronicles 25:15 when the LORD's own anger is kindled against Amaziah.

מְאֹד֙mə·’ōḏ. . .H3966

√ mᵉʼôd — properly, vehemence, iAdverb

mᵉʼôd: vehemence, exceedingly A one-word intensifier, doing here what the doubled nouns do elsewhere.

בִּֽיהוּדָ֔הbî·hū·ḏāhwith JudahH3063

√ Yᵉhûwdâh — Jehudah (or Judah), the name of five IsraelitesPreposition-bNounpropermasculine singular

וַיָּשׁ֥וּבוּway·yā·šū·ḇūand returnedH7725

√ shûwb — to turn back (hence, away) transitively or intransitively, literally or figuratively (not necessarily with the idea of return to the starting point)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine plural

לִמְקוֹמָ֖םlim·qō·w·māmhomeH4725

√ mâqôwm — properly, a standing, iPreposition-lNounmasculine singular constructthird person masculine plural

בָּחֳרִי־bā·ḥo·rî-in greatH2750

√ chŏrîy — a burning (iPreposition-bNounmasculine singular construct

chŏrîy: a burning A genuinely rare noun, standing in only six verses of the canon, and always in this idiom of burning anger. Its rarity makes the phrase a marked quotation of a fixed expression rather than ordinary narration: Ellicott hears Isaiah 7:4 in it, and it is also the anger of Moses leaving Pharaoh and of Jonathan leaving Saul's table.

אָֽף׃פ’āp̄angerH639

√ ʼaph — properly, the nose or nostrilNounmasculine singular

ʼaph: anger The same noun closing the verse, now translated as the emotion it names.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-Amaziah separated them, the-troop that had-come to-him from-Ephraim, to-go to-their-place; and-burned their-nose exceedingly against-Judah, and-they-returned to-their-place in-heat-of-anger.

Where the English smooths the original

וַיַּבְדִּילֵ֣ם וַיַּבְדִּילֵ֣ם (bâdal, H914, Hifil) is not “dismissed” but divided, separated off. Pulpit notes that this is the verb “occurring several times in the first verses of Genesis 1,” the word for dividing light from darkness. K&D reads it as separating them out of a host already drawn up for battle. English “dismissed” describes a discharge; Hebrew describes a line drawn between two kinds of men.
וַיִּ֨חַר אַפָּ֤ם וַיִּ֨חַר אַפָּ֤ם (chârâh, H2734, with ʼaph, H639) is an idiom of the body, not of the emotions: “their nose grew hot.” ʼaph is properly the nostril. “They were furious” gives the sense and loses the picture of flared, heated breathing, which the Hebrew then reinforces by adding the abstract noun chŏrîy in the same verse.
בָּחֳרִי־אָֽף בָּחֳרִי־אָֽף (chŏrîy, H2750, with ʼaph again) is literally “in a burning of nose.” Ellicott renders it “in a heat of anger” and compares Isaiah 7:4; Cambridge prefers “in fierce anger.” The clause repeats the verse's own verb as a noun, so the Hebrew says the heat twice: once as something that happened to them, once as the state they travelled home in.
לִמְקוֹמָ֑ם לִמְקוֹמָ֑ם (mâqôwm, H4725) is “to their place,” and it stands twice in the verse, framing the anger. The BSB uses “home” both times, which reads more warmly than the Hebrew; mâqôwm is properly a standing, a spot, the neutral word for where a thing belongs. They are put back where they came from, and verse 13 shows what they do on the way.

The Voices✦ 4 public domain

The Pulpit CommentarySpence & Exell, eds.1880s

it was not a healthy strengthening, and this may be considered denoted in the fact that the work was all his own, and that he wrought himself up.

Pulpit reads the Hitpael against Keil, who takes the same form as obedience to the prophet's word. The grammar allows both; the outcome in vv. 14 to 16 is what tilts it.

source ↗

John GillExposition of the Entire Bible1746–63

not discouraged by the dismission of the hired troops, but trusting in the promise and power of God, he went forth with boldness and intrepidity

source ↗

Joseph BensonCommentary on the Old and New Testaments1810s

Other ten thousand did the children of Judah cast down from the rock — A most cruel execution, which can no way be justified, unless the children of Seir had been used to serve in that manner all they took captive of Judah.

Benson comments here on v. 12 as well as v. 11, and his refusal to justify the massacre except as retaliation is the most candid moral note any of these commentators offers.

source ↗

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges—1880s

The Edomites were so called because “Mount Seir” was part of their territory; Deuteronomy 2:5

source ↗

Amaziah, however, summoned his strength and led his troops to the Valley of Salt, where he struck down 10,000 men of Seir,

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

wa·’ă·maṣ·yā·hū hiṯ·ḥaz·zaq way·yin·haḡ ’eṯ- ‘am·mōw way·yê·leḵ gê ham·me·laḥ way·yaḵ ’eṯ- ‘ă·śe·reṯ ’ă·lā·p̄îm bə·nê- śê·‘îr

Word by word14 · parsed

וַאֲמַצְיָ֙הוּ֙wa·’ă·maṣ·yā·hūAmaziah, howeverH558

√ ʼĂmatsyâh — Amatsjah, the name of four IsraelitesConjunctive wawNounpropermasculine singular

הִתְחַזַּ֔קhiṯ·ḥaz·zaqsummoned his strengthH2388

√ châzaq — to fasten uponVerbHitpaelPerfectthird person masculine singular

châzaq: to fasten upon, to be strong (Hitpael) The reflexive of the prophet's imperative in verse 8, and the unit's most delicate word. Read with K&D, it is faith acting on a promise. Read with Pulpit, it is a man winding himself up, and the reading is supported by the sequel: the same Amaziah who strengthens himself here will bow to Edom's gods four verses later (2 Chronicles 25:14).

וַיִּנְהַג֙way·yin·haḡand ledH5090

√ nâhag — to drive forth (a person, an animal or chariot), iConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular

nâhag: to drive forth Driving rather than shepherding. The verb belongs to herds and chariots, and Chronicles chooses it for a king moving his own people toward a ravine.

אֶת־’eṯ-H853

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

עַמּ֔וֹ‘am·mōwhis troopsH5971

√ ʻam — a people (as a congregated unit)Nounmasculine singular constructthird person masculine singular

ʻam: a people Not soldiers but the people. After the mercenaries are gone, Judah goes to war as itself.

וַיֵּ֖לֶךְway·yê·leḵ. . .H1980

√ hâlak — to walk (in a great variety of applications, literally and figuratively)Conjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular

גֵּ֣יאgêto the Valley of SaltH1516

√ gayʼ — a gorge (from its lofty sidesNounproperfeminine singular

gayʼ: a gorge A cleft with lofty sides, the same kind of landscape that supplies the cliff in verse 12.

הַמֶּ֑לַחham·me·laḥ. . .H4417

√ melach — properly, powder, iNounmasculine singular

melach: salt The place name that fixes this as Edomite country, south of the Dead Sea on the common reckoning.

וַיַּ֥ךְway·yaḵwhere he struck downH5221

√ nâkâh — to strike (lightly or severely, literally or figuratively)Conjunctive wawVerbHifilConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine singular

nâkâh: to strike The verb of battle, and the pivot of the unit's irony, since it will be used against Judah in verse 13 by the very men Amaziah sent away.

אֶת־’eṯ-H853

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

עֲשֶׂ֥רֶת‘ă·śe·reṯ10,000 {}H6235

√ ʻeser — ten (as an accumulation to the extent of the digits)Numbermasculine singular construct

ʻeser ʼeleph: ten thousand The figure matches 2 Kings 14:7 exactly, which is the strongest argument that Chronicles and Kings are reporting the same battle. Benson observes that we are told only of the dead and not of the wounded.

אֲלָפִֽים׃’ă·lā·p̄îm. . .H505

√ ʼeleph — hence (the ox's head being the first letter of the alphabet, and this eventually used as a numeral) a thousandNumbermasculine plural

בְּנֵי־bə·nê-menH1121

שֵׂעִ֖ירśê·‘îrof SeirH8165

√ Sêʻîyr — Seir, a mountain of Idumaea and its aboriginal occupants, also one in PalestineNounproperfeminine singular

Sêʻîyr: Seir The mountain of Edom standing for its people. Cambridge and Geneva explain the usage, and Geneva adds the political history: the Edomites whom David subdued had rebelled under Jehoram, which is what makes this a war of reconquest rather than aggression.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-Amaziah strengthened-himself and-drove his-people, and-he-went to-the-Valley-of-Salt, and-he-struck ten thousand of-the-sons-of Seir.

Where the English smooths the original

הִתְחַזַּ֔ק הִתְחַזַּ֔ק (châzaq, H2388) is Hitpael, the reflexive: he made himself strong. Cambridge renders it “took courage,” K&D reads it as obedience, “he showed himself strong, according to the word of the prophet” at verse 8. Pulpit hears something less healthy in the reflexive, because “the work was all his own.” The BSB “summoned his strength” is defensible, but only Hebrew grammar shows that the strength is applied by the man to himself.
וַיִּנְהַג֙ וַיִּנְהַג֙ (nâhag, H5090) means to drive forth, and it is used of driving animals and chariots. “Led his troops” is gentler than the Hebrew, which pictures a man pushing a body of people ahead of him. The object is עַמּ֔וֹ (ʻam, H5971), “his people,” not a technical word for an army at all.
גֵּ֣יא הַמֶּ֑לַח גֵּ֣יא הַמֶּ֑לַח is “Gorge of the Salt,” gayʼ (H1516) being a ravine named from its steep sides and melach (H4417) properly powder, hence salt. The English “Valley of Salt” flattens the terrain. Ellicott and JFB place it south or southeast of the Dead Sea; Cambridge notes it was the scene of one of David's victories (1 Chronicles 18:12); Pulpit reports Stanley's alternative, a ravine near Petra. The location is not settled.
וַיַּ֥ךְ וַיַּ֥ךְ (nâkâh, H5221, Hifil) means to strike, lightly or fatally. It is the same verb used of the mercenaries striking Judah's towns in verse 13, and the parallel at 2 Kings 14:7 uses it of Amaziah too. “Struck down 10,000 men” is accurate; what English cannot show is that the identical verb frames both halves of the unit, Amaziah's victory and Amaziah's loss.

The Voices✦ 3 public domain

Charles EllicottCommentary for English Readers1878

This savage massacre of prisoners is not mentioned in Kings; but it is quite credible, in view of the well-known atrocities of ancient warfare.

source ↗

John GillExposition of the Entire Bible1746–63

but to use captives taken in war after this manner seems cruel and barbarous; and what should be the reason of such treatment of them is not easy to say.

Gill's refusal to supply a justification is worth more than the parallels he collects; he leaves the act unexplained.

source ↗

Jamieson, Fausset & BrownCommentary Critical and Explanatory1871

The savage cruelty dealt out to them was either in retaliation for similar barbarities inflicted on the Hebrews, or to strike terror into so rebellious a people for the future.

JFB offers retaliation or deterrence as motives. Both are historical explanations, not approvals, and the text itself gives neither.

source ↗

and the army of Judah also captured 10,000 men alive. They took them to the top of a cliff and threw them down so that all were dashed to pieces.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

bə·nê yə·hū·ḏāh šā·ḇū wa·‘ă·śe·reṯ ’ă·lā·p̄îm ḥay·yîm way·ḇî·’ūm lə·rōš has·sā·la‘ mê·rōš- has·se·la‘ way·yaš·lî·ḵūm wə·ḵul·lām niḇ·qā·‘ū

Word by word14 · parsed

בְּנֵ֣יbə·nêand the armyH1121

יְהוּדָ֔הyə·hū·ḏāhof JudahH3063

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

שָׁבוּ֙šā·ḇūalso capturedH7617

√ shâbâh — to transport into captivityVerbQalPerfectthird person common plural

shâbâh: to carry into captivity Qal perfect, plural: the sons of Judah did this, not the king. Chronicles distributes the agency of the massacre across the army.

וַעֲשֶׂ֨רֶתwa·‘ă·śe·reṯ10,000 [men]H6235

√ ʻeser — ten (as an accumulation to the extent of the digits)Conjunctive wawNumbermasculine singular construct

אֲלָפִ֜ים’ă·lā·p̄îm. . .H505

√ ʼeleph — hence (the ox's head being the first letter of the alphabet, and this eventually used as a numeral) a thousandNumbermasculine plural

חַיִּ֗יםḥay·yîmaliveH2416

√ chay — aliveAdjectivemasculine plural

chay: alive The word that makes verse 12 a war crime rather than a casualty report. Cambridge argues from the Kings parallel that these were probably the garrison of Sela, captured after the battle in the Valley of Salt, which would mean the killing was done at leisure.

וַיְבִיא֖וּםway·ḇî·’ūmThey took themH935

√ bôwʼ — to go or come (in a wide variety of applications)Conjunctive wawVerbHifilConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine pluralthird person masculine plural

לְרֹ֣אשׁlə·rōšto the topH7218

√ rôʼsh — the head (as most easily shaken), whether literal or figurative (in many applications, of place, time, rank, itcPreposition-lNounmasculine singular construct

rôʼsh: the head, the top Repeated in the same verse, up to the head of the crag and then from the head of the crag. The doubling slows the sentence down at exactly the point where the reader would prefer it to hurry.

הַסָּ֑לַעhas·sā·la‘of a cliffH5553

√ çelaʻ — a craggy rock, literally or figuratively (a fortress)ArticleNounmasculine singular

çelaʻ: a craggy rock, a fortress Both the rock and the city named for it. K&D reasons that the famous cliff must lie near Sela, since the war ended with that city's capture, and notes that Kings reports the capture where Chronicles reports the killing.

מֵֽרֹאשׁ־mê·rōš-. . .H7218

√ rôʼsh — the head (as most easily shaken), whether literal or figurative (in many applications, of place, time, rank, itcPreposition-mNounmasculine singular construct

הַסֶּ֖לַעhas·se·la‘. . .H5553

√ çelaʻ — a craggy rock, literally or figuratively (a fortress)ArticleNounmasculine singular

וַיַּשְׁלִיכ֛וּםway·yaš·lî·ḵūmand threw them downH7993

√ shâlak — to throw out, down or away (literally or figuratively)Conjunctive wawVerbHifilConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine pluralthird person masculine plural

shâlak: to throw out, down or away A verb of casting off refuse as well as of hurling. Hifil, plural: a deliberate, repeated act by many hands.

וְכֻלָּ֥םwə·ḵul·lāmso that allH3605

√ kôl — properly, the wholeConjunctive wawNounmasculine singular constructthird person masculine plural

kôl: all, the whole The totality is stated, which is why no commentator here can soften the verse.

נִבְקָֽעוּ׃סniḇ·qā·‘ūwere dashed to piecesH1234

√ bâqaʻ — to cleaveVerbNifalPerfectthird person common plural

bâqaʻ: to cleave, to split The Nifal makes the men the subjects of what was done to them. JFB notes that execution by dashing against stones was common among ancient nations and points to Psalm 137:9, and Ellicott adds a list of comparable atrocities in Edomite and Israelite warfare. Gill, having described the manner exactly, says plainly that to treat captives so “seems cruel and barbarous” and that the reason for it is “not easy to say.” Chronicles reports it without a word of approval or of blame, immediately before Amaziah turns to Edom's gods.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-ten thousand alive captured the-sons-of Judah, and-they-brought-them to-the-head-of the-crag, and-from-the-head-of the-crag they-threw-them-down, and-all-of-them were-split-open.

Where the English smooths the original

שָׁבוּ֙ שָׁבוּ֙ (shâbâh, H7617) does not mean simply “captured” but to carry off into captivity. Ellicott corrects the older English word order: “Rather, And ten thousand the sons of Judah took alive,” and Cambridge notes that the Authorized Version's “left alive” misleads, because it suggests survivors of the same battle. The Hebrew verb already implies deportation, which makes what follows a breach of the captors' own act.
חַיִּ֗ים חַיִּ֗ים (chay, H2416) is “alive,” placed for weight: ten thousand living men were taken. The adjective is the hinge of the atrocity, since it establishes that these were prisoners and not casualties. English keeps the word but not its position at the end of the clause, where Hebrew leaves it hanging before the cliff appears.
רֹ֣אשׁ הַסָּ֑לַע רֹ֣אשׁ הַסָּ֑לַע is “the head of the crag,” and çelaʻ (H5553) is both a common noun for a craggy rock and the proper name Sela. Ellicott: “Sela, ‘the crag,’ was the Edomite capital, known to after ages as Petra, ‘the rock.’” Pulpit and Cambridge note the parallel at 2 Kings 14:7 leaves it untranslated as a place name, and Cambridge warns that the identification with Petra “is by no means certain.” The BSB “a cliff” silently chooses the common noun.
נִבְקָֽעוּ נִבְקָֽעוּ (bâqaʻ, H1234, Nifal) means to be cleft, split open, the verb used of the sea dividing and of the ground opening. “Were dashed to pieces” conveys the result; the Hebrew names the action done to bodies as the same action done to rock and water. Gill spells out what it pictures: “burst asunder, bones broken, and limb from limb separated.”

The Voices✦ 4 public domain

Albert BarnesNotes on the Bible1834

the troops of Joash proceeded southward and ravaged all the Jewish towns and villages between the Israelite frontier and Bethboron. This invasion probably took place while Amaziah was still in Edom.

source ↗

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges—1880s

This phrase is strange, for we expect the two names given to be names of cities belonging to the Southern Kingdom. Perhaps we should read for Samaria either Zemaraim ( 2 Chronicles 13:4 ; Joshua 18:22 ) or Ephrain ( Ephron ; 2 Chronicles 13:19 ; cp. Joshua 15:9 ). Both Zemaraim and Ephrain were border cities.

Cambridge's emendation is a conjecture offered to relieve a geographical difficulty; no manuscript evidence is cited for it in the brief.

source ↗

Joseph BensonCommentary on the Old and New Testaments1810s

Thus God chastised those cities of Judah for their idolatries, which were found most in the parts next to Israel. The men of Israel had corrupted them, and now are a plague to them.

Benson assigns a providential cause (the idolatry of Judah's border towns) that the Chronicler does not state here. We record it as his reading.

source ↗

Keil & DelitzschBiblical Commentary on the Old Testament1860s

It is more probable that the dismissal of this auxiliary corps, which Amaziah had certainly obtained on hire from King Joash, happened after they had been gathered together in Samaria, and had advanced to the frontier of Judah. Then, roused to anger by their dismissal, they did not at once separate and return home; but, Amaziah having meanwhile taken the field against the Edomites with his army, made an attack upon the northern frontier cities of Judah as far as Bethhoron, plundering as they went, and only after this plundering did they return home.

source ↗

Meanwhile the troops that Amaziah had dismissed from battle raided the cities of Judah, from Samaria to Beth-horon. They struck down 3,000 people and carried off a great deal of plunder.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

ū·ḇə·nê hag·gə·ḏūḏ ’ă·šer ’ă·maṣ·yā·hū hê·šîḇ mil·le·ḵeṯ ‘im·mōw lam·mil·ḥā·māh way·yip̄·šə·ṭū bə·‘ā·rê yə·hū·ḏāh miš·šō·mə·rō·wn wə·‘aḏ- bêṯ ḥō·w·rō·wn way·yak·kū mê·hem šə·lō·šeṯ ’ă·lā·p̄îm way·yā·ḇōz·zū rab·bāh biz·zāh

Word by word22 · parsed

וּבְנֵ֣יū·ḇə·nêMeanwhileH1121

√ 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, etcConjunctive wawNounmasculine plural construct

הַגְּד֗וּדhag·gə·ḏūḏthe troopsH1416

√ gᵉdûwd — a crowd (especially of soldiers)ArticleNounmasculine singular

gᵉdûwd: a troop, a raiding band The third and last use of the noun. What verse 9 called them, verse 13 lets them be: Cambridge's judgment that they were freebooters rests precisely on this verse.

אֲשֶׁ֨ר’ă·šerthatH834

√ ʼăsher — who, which, what, thatPronounrelative

אֲמַצְיָ֙הוּ֙’ă·maṣ·yā·hūAmaziahH558

√ ʼĂmatsyâh — Amatsjah, the name of four IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular

הֵשִׁ֤יבhê·šîḇhad dismissedH7725

√ shûwb — to turn back (hence, away) transitively or intransitively, literally or figuratively (not necessarily with the idea of return to the starting point)VerbHifilPerfectthird person masculine singular

shûwb: to turn back (Hifil) Amaziah's obedience, stated in the causative. The grammar makes his one act of compliance the direct antecedent of the raid, which is the hardest fact in the unit: the cities burn because the king did what the prophet said.

מִלֶּ֤כֶתmil·le·ḵeṯvvvH1980

√ hâlak — to walk (in a great variety of applications, literally and figuratively)Preposition-mVerbQalInfinitive construct

עִמּוֹ֙‘im·mōwvvvH5973

√ ʻim — adverb or preposition, with (iPrepositionthird person masculine singular

לַמִּלְחָמָ֔הlam·mil·ḥā·māhfrom battleH4421

√ milchâmâh — a battle (iPreposition-l, ArticleNounfeminine singular

milchâmâh: a battle The same noun as in verse 8, closing the frame on the battle they were forbidden to join.

וַֽיִּפְשְׁטוּ֙way·yip̄·šə·ṭūraidedH6584

√ pâshaṭ — to spread out (iConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine plural

pâshaṭ: to spread out, to strip A verb of dispersal turned to pillage.

בְּעָרֵ֣יbə·‘ā·rêthe citiesH5892

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

יְהוּדָ֔הyə·hū·ḏāhof JudahH3063

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

מִשֹּׁמְר֖וֹןmiš·šō·mə·rō·wnfrom SamariaH8111

√ Shômᵉrôwn — Shomeron, a place in PalestinePreposition-mNounproperfeminine singular

Shômᵉrôwn: Samaria The geographical crux. Ellicott judges the name “probably corrupt”; Cambridge proposes reading Zemaraim or Ephrain, both border towns, since we expect two towns of Judah; Poole allows either the city or the kingdom; Pulpit and K&D instead take Samaria as the starting point of the raid, which for K&D means the mercenaries struck while Amaziah was already in Edom. The manuscripts give us Samaria, and the difficulty is real.

וְעַד־wə·‘aḏ-toH5704

√ ʻad — as far (or long, or much) as, whether of space (even unto) or time (during, while, until) or degree (equally with)Conjunctive wawPreposition

בֵּ֣יתbêṯvvvH1032

√ Bêyth Chôwrôwn — Beth-Choron, the name of two adjoining places in PalestinePreposition

חוֹר֑וֹןḥō·w·rō·wnBeth-horonH1032

√ Bêyth Chôwrôwn — Beth-Choron, the name of two adjoining places in PalestineNounproperfeminine singular

Bêyth Chôwrôwn: Beth-horon The pass on the road up from the coastal plain, on the Ephraim and Benjamin frontier.

וַיַּכּ֤וּway·yak·kūThey struck downH5221

√ nâkâh — to strike (lightly or severely, literally or figuratively)Conjunctive wawVerbHifilConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine plural

nâkâh: to strike The verb of Amaziah's victory in verse 11, now aimed at his own towns. Three thousand of Judah die because a hundred thousand men were paid and sent home.

מֵהֶם֙mê·hem. . .

Prepositionthird person masculine plural

שְׁלֹ֣שֶׁתšə·lō·šeṯ3,000 [people]H7969

√ shâlôwsh — threeNumbermasculine singular construct

shâlôwsh ʼeleph: three thousand Poole insists the number counts people and not cities, and supposes they were those who resisted the looting.

אֲלָפִ֔ים’ă·lā·p̄îm. . .H505

√ ʼeleph — hence (the ox's head being the first letter of the alphabet, and this eventually used as a numeral) a thousandNumbermasculine plural

וַיָּבֹ֖זּוּway·yā·ḇōz·zūand carried offH962

√ bâzaz — to plunderConjunctive wawVerbQalConsecutive imperfectthird person masculine plural

bâzaz: to plunder The action the hired band was denied at Sela and takes instead from Judah.

רַבָּֽה׃סrab·bāha great deal ofH7227

√ rab — abundant (in quantity, size, age, number, rank, quality)Adjectivefeminine singular

בִּזָּ֥הbiz·zāhplunderH961

√ bizzâh — bootyNounfeminine singular

bizzâh: booty The cognate noun. The unit that opened with a muster of 300,000 men closes with a wagon train of stolen goods.

Literal — word-for-word from the original

And-the-sons-of the-troop whom Amaziah had-turned-back from-going with-him to-the-battle, and-they-spread-out against-the-cities-of Judah, from-Samaria and-unto Beth-horon, and-they-struck of-them three thousand, and-they-plundered much plunder.

Where the English smooths the original

בְּנֵ֣י הַגְּד֗וּד בְּנֵ֣י הַגְּד֗וּד is “the sons of the troop,” as Ellicott and Cambridge both note against the smoother English “the soldiers of the army.” gᵉdûwd (H1416) is the raiding band, and the idiom “sons of” makes membership in it their identity. The BSB “the troops that Amaziah had dismissed” is clear, but it drops the noun that has quietly labelled these men since verse 9.
הֵשִׁ֤יב הֵשִׁ֤יב (shûwb, H7725, Hifil) is “caused to return,” the causative of the same verb used in verse 10 when they “returned” to their place. English uses “dismissed” in both places and hides the pairing: they returned, because he turned them back. Ellicott's literal rendering keeps it: “whom Amaziah had caused to return from marching with him to the war.”
וַֽיִּפְשְׁטוּ֙ וַֽיִּפְשְׁטוּ֙ (pâshaṭ, H6584) properly means to spread out, and also to strip off a garment. Ellicott identifies it as the verb of 1 Chronicles 14:9 and 14:13, “Spread themselves,” and says that here “it means attacked with a view to plunder,” comparing Job 1:17. “Raided” is right in effect; the Hebrew picture is of a force fanning across open country, and the second sense of stripping is not far off.
וַיָּבֹ֖זּוּ ... בִּזָּ֥ה וַיָּבֹ֖זּוּ (bâzaz, H962) with בִּזָּ֥ה (bizzâh, H961) is a cognate accusative: “they plundered plunder, much.” Hebrew doubles the root for emphasis where English must write “carried off a great deal of plunder.” The verse ends on the word the mercenaries wanted all along, and which their dismissal had denied them.

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. A king counts what he has — 25:5-6

The unit opens with three verbs of administration: Amaziah וַיִּקְבֹּ֤ץ (gathered), וַיַּֽעֲמִידֵ֣ם (made them stand), וַֽיִּפְקְדֵ֗ם (mustered). Ellicott insists the second is causative, “made them stand (marshalled them) according to father houses,” and K&D reads the same, a census of the war-liable from twenty years old and upward. JFB explains why kinship ordering mattered militarily: the regiments were built of brothers and relatives, so the ranks held. The arithmetic, however, is a lament. Ellicott calls 300,000 “A total immensely below that of the forces of Jehoshaphat,” Barnes reckons Asa's army at nearly twice the size and blames the wars and “the general decadence of the kingdom,” JFB counts it a fourth of Jehoshaphat's after eighty-two years of decline, and K&D names the specific bleedings: Joram's wars, Ahaziah's, and the Syrian defeat of Joash. Ellicott then does the honest thing and doubts his own figures, noting that all these high numbers are suspicious; Gill records Vulgate copies with 30,000. Then verse 6 adds one more transaction. וַיִּשְׂכֹּ֣ר (sâkar): he hired. Benson's verdict is that Amaziah never asked a prophet first and so did what he soon had to undo, and Geneva names what he bought into, help from the ten tribes “who had separated themselves before both from God and their true king.” The three commentators who price the hundred talents (Ellicott, JFB, Gill) disagree by a wide margin, which tells the reader that the sum's real size is unknown and its symbolic size is not.

ii. A word that will not be negotiated — 25:7-8

An unnamed אִ֣ישׁ הָאֱלֹהִ֗ים arrives. Pulpit states flatly that his name “does not transpire,” and Gill reports the rabbinic guess that he was the prophet Amos, father of Isaiah, only to call it “without foundation.” His argument is one verbless clause: אֵ֤ין, there is no being-with. Ellicott lines the verdict up with the Chronicler's other condemned alliances (2 Chronicles 19:2; 20:37; 16:7); Cambridge sends the reader to 2 Chronicles 13:8-12; JFB explains that Ephraim was named because idolatry had long been the prevailing religion of that kingdom. Poole draws the hardest conclusion: God has forsaken them, and “for their sakes will curse thy forces, if thou joinest thyself with them,” and Geneva presses the logic to its point, that to seek help from those the Lord does not favour “is to cast off the help of the Lord.” Verse 8 is then the most contested sentence in the unit. As the consonants stand, three imperatives (go, act, be strong) are followed by יַכְשִֽׁילְךָ֤, God will make you totter. Barnes says that if the text is sound the passage must be ironical, and Gill, Poole and Cambridge read it that way, Poole comparing Micaiah's mocking permission to Ahab. Ellicott, Barnes, JFB and K&D all report the alternative: a negative has fallen out, and the prophet promises that God will not let him stumble. K&D goes furthest, calling the traditional text clearly erroneous and supplying the particle with Ewald and Bertheau, while refuting Clericus on the ground that kî ʼim can never mean “if not.” Ellicott supplies the decisive caution against his own conjecture: no ancient version inserts the negative, so the omission is older than the Septuagint. Pulpit, for its part, would rather reconstruct the Hebrew and keep the warning. We are left with a verse whose sense the whole tradition argues and none of it can prove, and with the one thing the consonants do say twice: in God there is kôach both to help and to make a man's legs fail.

iii. The misplaced question — 25:9-10

Amaziah's reply is not a refusal but an accounting query, and the Hebrew is impersonal: Ellicott renders וּמַֽה־לַּעֲשׂוֹת֙ literally, “What to do?” Maclaren's exposition of this verse is the sharpest reading in the brief. He calls the Chronicler's summary of Amaziah “a damning epigram,” borrows Hosea's figure of the cake not turned, and then names the fault exactly: the fault “was, not that he took consequences into account, but that he took them into account at the wrong time. The question should have come second, not first.” The prophet answers with a third verbless clause, יֵ֚שׁ לַֽיהוָ֔ה, there is with YHWH the giving, and the Hifil הַרְבֵּ֥ה, to make much. Henry generalizes it into a catechism of excuses, ending where the text does: “The Lord is able to give thee much more than this.” Benson turns it into a ledger, noting that a hundred talents were later paid to Jotham (2 Chronicles 27:5) with interest in wheat and barley, which is his providential arithmetic and not the Chronicler's claim. Geneva, characteristically, makes it conditional on obedience. And then the king obeys. וַיַּבְדִּילֵ֣ם is the Genesis 1 verb of division, as Pulpit notices, and K&D describes the separation as made out of a host already drawn up. Obedience costs immediately and visibly: Barnes says the dismissal could not fail to arouse indignation because the men would think their good faith suspected, Poole adds that the silver had likely gone to their officers so the rank and file left empty-handed, and Pulpit imagines the rejection rankling in their hearts “till it found relief.” The verse ends with a rare idiom doubled, בָּחֳרִי־אָֽף, in a burning of the nose, which Ellicott matches to Isaiah 7:4.

iv. Victory, the crag, and the bill — 25:11-13

Amaziah הִתְחַזַּ֔ק, strengthened himself, in the reflexive of the very verb the prophet had used as an imperative. K&D takes it as obedience, “he showed himself strong, according to the word of the prophet”; Cambridge renders it “took courage”; Pulpit dissents, because the strengthening was “all his own” and he “wrought himself up”; Gill reads faith, a man “not discouraged by the dismission of the hired troops.” The battle is won in a ravine whose location Ellicott, JFB, Cambridge and Pulpit cannot agree on, and the victory count matches 2 Kings 14:7 exactly. Then verse 12, where Chronicles says what Kings does not. Ten thousand were taken חַיִּ֗ים, alive, carried to the head of the crag, thrown down, and נִבְקָֽעוּ, split open. Ellicott calls it a “savage massacre of prisoners” and judges it credible given ancient warfare; JFB proposes retaliation or deterrence and cites Psalm 137:9 for the method; Benson says it “can no way be justified” unless Edom had done the same to Judah's captives; Gill, after describing precisely what the verb means for a human body, admits that the reason for such treatment “is not easy to say.” Cambridge suspects these were the garrison of Sela, killed after the fighting was over. Chronicles itself offers no verdict, and the next verse in the chapter has this same king bowing to the gods of the people he has just destroyed. Verse 13 closes the account with the word the mercenaries wanted: וַיָּבֹ֖זּוּ ... בִּזָּ֥ה, they plundered plunder. Barnes has the troops of Joash ravaging southward while Amaziah was still in Edom; K&D reconstructs the same timing from the phrase “from Samaria,” which Ellicott judges “probably corrupt” and Cambridge would emend to Zemaraim or Ephrain; Pulpit reads between the lines that Joash himself ordered the raid, which would explain the challenge of verse 17. Benson alone asks why God allowed it, and answers that the border cities of Judah were being chastised for their own idolatry. Three thousand of Judah die as the direct consequence of the king's one act of obedience.

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

⚙ Our own fallible reading, offered to be tested. This unit is usually preached as a reward story: obey the prophet, lose a hundred talents, gain a victory and more besides. The text will not quite carry that. Amaziah does obey, and the obedience is real and costly. What follows is a victory he cannot handle morally, a massacre the narrator declines to excuse, and three thousand of his own people dead at the hands of men he obeyed God by dismissing. The prophet's promise (there is with YHWH the giving of much more than this) is never shown being kept in the chapter; what is shown is the bill arriving. We think Chronicles is doing something more careful than a transaction. The two verbless clauses hold the unit: God is not with Israel (v. 7) and there is power in God (v. 8). Everything else in the passage is a man trying to convert those two facts into resources he can count, first by mustering 300,000, then by buying 100,000, then by asking what happens to his silver, and finally by strengthening himself. The prophet's word never gives him a quantity. It gives him a person, and refuses to say when or how the giving will be seen. Amaziah's obedience is therefore genuine and merely commercial at once, which is exactly the epigram the Chronicler has already used of him and Maclaren so mercilessly unpacks: right in the sight of the LORD, but not with a whole heart. That is why the cliff at Sela follows the victory without comment, and why the next verses find him worshipping Edom's gods. A man who has obeyed for the sake of the return has not yet met the God who makes the promise. The one line below is our own interpretive summary, not a verse of Scripture.

He gave up the silver and kept the arithmetic, and the arithmetic is what bowed at Edom's altars.

⚙

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.

A burning of the nose: the rare idiom of rejected men verbal / quotation: confirmed

The phrase that ends verse 10, בָּחֳרִי־אָֽף (chŏrîy, H2750, with ʼaph, H639), is not ordinary narration but a fixed and uncommon expression: the Verifier finds chŏrîy in only six verses of the canon, and every one of them is this idiom. Ellicott himself reaches for one of them, glossing the clause “To their own place in a heat of anger ( Isaiah 7:4 ).” The company the word keeps is instructive. It belongs to Moses leaving Pharaoh's presence (Exodus 11:8), to Jonathan rising from Saul's table when his father has shamed him (1 Samuel 20:34), and to the nations asking why a land lies desolate (Deuteronomy 29:24). In two of them the heat is a man walking out of a room where he has just been refused or shamed, Moses from Pharaoh and Jonathan from Saul's table, which is close to the situation of the dismissed Ephraimite band: Barnes and Poole both diagnose their rage as wounded honour plus lost plunder. The verbal link is real; we claim nothing beyond it, since there is no quotation of any one of these verses here, only Hebrew's single idiom for that particular kind of anger.

Isaiah 7:4 · Exodus 11:8 · 1 Samuel 20:34 · Deuteronomy 29:24

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H2750 chŏrîy (in 6 vv, rare) together with H639 ʼaph (in 269 vv) in all four candidates; the rarity of chŏrîy makes this a genuine verbal link to a fixed idiom, not a citation of any one verse. Ellicott independently cites Isaiah 7:4 at this clause.

Lance and target: the Chronicler's own muster formula structural / thematic: confirmed

The equipment clause of verse 5, אֹחֵ֖ז רֹ֥מַח וְצִנָּֽה (grasping rômach, H7420, and tsinnâh, H6793), is a set phrase in this book. The Verifier pairs the verse with 1 Chronicles 12:8 (Benjamite and Gadite champions), 2 Chronicles 11:12 (Rehoboam arming his fortified cities) and 2 Chronicles 14:8 (Asa's shield-and-spear divisions). Ellicott makes the same connection by hand, rendering the phrase “Grasping lance and target, i.e., heavy-armed warriors,” and comparing 1 Chronicles 12:8; Cambridge and K&D both compare Asa's numbers at 2 Chronicles 14:8, Cambridge observing that Amaziah's 300,000 “correspond in number with Asa's spearmen.” Both lexemes are moderately uncommon (spear in fifteen verses, shield in twenty), and a verbal tier could be argued for their co-occurrence. We withhold it: what is shared is the Chronicler's stock way of describing a heavy-armed levy, and the point of the parallel is comparative strength across reigns, not a quotation.

1 Chronicles 12:8 · 2 Chronicles 11:12 · 2 Chronicles 14:8

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H6793 tsinnâh (in 20 vv) and H7420 rômach (in 15 vv), with H2428 chayil (in 228 vv) at 1 Chronicles 12:8 and H505 ʼeleph plus H7969 shâlôwsh at 2 Chronicles 14:8. Real verbal overlap inside a recurring muster formula; tiered structural because no quotation is claimed and the shared material is formulaic.

The gedud from Ephraim: a word that predicts their conduct structural / thematic: confirmed

From verse 9 onward Chronicles stops calling the hired men an army and calls them a גְּד֗וּד (gᵉdûwd, H1416), a band, and specifically the word Hebrew uses for a raiding party. Ellicott flags it (“The troop ( gĕdûd ) of mercenaries”), and Cambridge draws the inference from the end of the unit: “The men in question were freebooters to judge from their conduct ( 2 Chronicles 25:13 ).” The Verifier pairs the unit with Hosea 7:1, where the same noun stands alongside Ephraim in an indictment of the northern kingdom's thieving. The link is not a citation in either direction; it is the shared vocabulary of a prophetic assessment of Ephraim, and it matters here because the Chronicler's noun choice passes judgment on these men four verses before they act.

Hosea 7:1

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H1416 gᵉdûwd (in 29 vv) and H669 ʼEphrayim (in 164 vv) at Hosea 7:1; a real lexical overlap within a shared motif of Ephraimite banditry, with no quotation claimed in either direction.

The crag, and the verse Kings does not have flagged: verify source

Verse 12 has no counterpart in the parallel account. 2 Kings 14:7 reports the ten thousand killed in the Valley of Salt and then the capture of Sela renamed Joktheel; Chronicles reports the ten thousand killed and then ten thousand prisoners thrown from the head of the סֶּ֖לַע. Every commentator in the brief works from this parallel: Ellicott, JFB, Cambridge, Pulpit and K&D all cite 2 Kings 14:7, and Pulpit adds from it the detail of the renaming, with Gesenius's “subjugated of God.” The dispute is over direction of dependence. Ellicott reports Thenius's supposition that verse 12 “is really the result of an attempt to restore an illegible text of 2Kings 14:7,” and K&D records that conjecture and rejects it with Bertheau, noting that apart from the word çelaʻ the two texts have nothing in common. Cambridge meanwhile warns that identifying Sela with Petra “is by no means certain.” We flag rather than confirm: the pairing is a commentators' cross-reference and a contested reconstruction, not a Verifier-computed lexeme basis, and the provenance of the extra material is exactly what is in dispute.

2 Kings 14:7

basis: No Verifier-computed shared-lexeme basis was supplied for this pair; the link rests on the commentators' parallel (Ellicott, JFB, Cambridge, Pulpit, K&D all name 2 Kings 14:7) and its provenance is disputed: Thenius derives 2 Chronicles 25:12 from an illegible text of 2 Kings 14:7, and K&D with Bertheau rejects that derivation. Verify before relying on either direction.

There is power in God: the Chronicler's standing confession structural / thematic: confirmed

The reason clause of verse 8, בֵּאלֹהִ֖ים יֶשׁ־כֹּ֛חַ (in God there is kôach, H3581, to help and to make stumble), is the same confession this book puts in other royal mouths at moments of military weakness. Ellicott supplies the references himself at this verse: 2 Chronicles 20:6, where Jehoshaphat prays before a coalition he cannot fight, and 1 Chronicles 29:12, where David ascribes power and might to God over the assembled offering. The pattern in each case is the same shape as Amaziah's: a king with a countable force says out loud that force is not countable. What distinguishes this unit is that the confession is spoken to the king rather than by him, and is immediately met with a question about money. The link is Ellicott's, recorded as a motif parallel only.

2 Chronicles 20:6 · 1 Chronicles 29:12

basis: Ellicott's own cross-reference at 2 Chronicles 25:8 (he names 2 Chronicles 20:6, 1 Chronicles 29:12 and Psalm 9:3). No Verifier-computed shared lexeme was supplied for this pair, so the link is recorded as a shared motif (God as the location of kôach to help and to cast down) and not as a verbal tie.

Unequal alliance: an Old Testament ban and a New Testament principle structural / thematic: confirmed

Geneva reduces the prophet's argument to a rule: to look for help from those the Lord does not favour “is to cast off the help of the Lord,” and Poole warns that God will curse the forces of anyone who joins himself to them. Paul's warning against being yoked with unbelievers, and his appeal to the temple of God as the reason, is the same logic worked in a different register: presence determines partnership. We record this as a motif link only, and we cannot tier it verbal even in principle, because the link crosses Testaments and languages: a Greek text and a Hebrew text share no Strong's lexeme, and there is no citation of 2 Chronicles here in Paul. What they share is the premise that an alliance carries the other party's standing before God, which is Geneva's reading of verse 7 and the Chronicler's reason for recording verse 13.

2 Corinthians 6:14-16 · 2 Chronicles 19:2

basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew), so a shared Strong's lexeme is impossible and a verbal tier is excluded on principle; recorded as a motif link, grounded in Geneva's note at v. 7 and in Ellicott's citation of 2 Chronicles 19:2 as the Chronicler's standing verdict on alliances. No quotation is claimed.

⚙Christ in the Unittypology · verify

AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.

The hundred talents and a yoke that is easy ancient/widely-held

⚙ Henry's exposition of verse 9 slides, apparently without noticing, into the vocabulary of Christ: a firm belief in God's all-sufficiency to make up all loss sustained in his service “will make his yoke very easy, and his burden very light.” That is Jesus's own invitation, and Henry has reached for it because the prophet's answer has the same structure: a cost named honestly, and a person offered as the security for it. Benson makes the same move in the register of providence, tracing a hundred talents back into the family accounts at 2 Chronicles 27:5. We think the redemptive-historical line runs through the promise rather than the payment. What the man of God gives Amaziah is not a repayment schedule but the standing ability of YHWH to give, and in the Gospels that same promise is made specific and personal by the one who tells his followers what they will receive for what they leave. Amaziah's tragedy is that he took the promise as a receipt. The attestation here is honest and limited: the devotional reading is Henry's and Benson's, and the explicit allusion to Christ's yoke is Henry's own, but no commentator in this brief develops a Christological typology of the hundred talents.

Matthew 11:29-30 · Mark 10:29-30 · 2 Chronicles 27:5

Power to help and to make stumble, spent at a cross novel

⚙ The one thing the disputed text of verse 8 says beyond dispute is that kôach is located in God, and that the same hand which surrounds a man (ʻâzar, to help, properly to encircle) can take his footing away (kâshal, to make the ankle fail). Geneva's note draws the practical conclusion: depend on God only, and worldly things need not trouble us. Read forward, the confession gets a strange fulfilment. At Golgotha God's power to make stumble and his power to help fall on the same person: the one who is handed over, and the one through whom help comes to everyone else. A hundred thousand hired men are exactly the kind of security the New Testament says was refused there. We mark this novel: it is our own figural extension, grounded in the verse's own pairing of the two infinitives, and none of the commentators in this brief reads verse 8 Christologically.

Isaiah 53:10 · 1 Corinthians 1:25 · Matthew 26:53

Israel that God is not with, and the Shepherd who gathers it novel

⚙ Verse 7 contains one of the bleakest clauses in Chronicles: there is no being-with, for Israel. Geneva explains that the ten tribes had separated themselves from God and from their true king, and JFB that idolatry was the settled religion of Ephraim. The verse therefore describes a covenant people whom God is not accompanying, and a king of Judah forbidden to make them allies. The prophetic hope answers precisely this condition: one king over a reunited house, and a shepherd whose presence is the thing the divided nation lacks. The Gospels present Jesus gathering (the same verb Amaziah uses of Judah in verse 5, qâbats, is the standard Hebrew word for God gathering the scattered) and being the presence that verse 7 says is absent. We mark this novel, and the caution is specific: the commentators here (Ellicott, Cambridge, JFB) draw only the historical and political inference from verse 7, and the move from Ephraim's abandonment to Christ's ingathering is ours, offered to be tested against the prophets themselves.

Ezekiel 37:21-24 · John 11:52 · Matthew 23:37

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)
Alexander Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (c. 1905)
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, — (1880s)
Charles Ellicott, Commentary for English Readers (1878)
Geneva Study Bible, Marginal Notes (1599)
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory (1871)
John Gill, Exposition of the Entire Bible (1746–63)
Joseph Benson, Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1810s)
Keil & Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1860s)
Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible (1706)
Matthew Poole, Annotations upon the Holy Bible (1685)
The Pulpit Commentary, Spence & Exell, eds. (1880s)

⚙ Honesty notes for this unit. Text. Verse 8 is the crux: as the Masoretic consonants stand, three imperatives are followed by יַכְשִֽׁילְךָ֤, God will make you stumble. Barnes, Gill, Poole and Cambridge take it ironically; Ellicott, Barnes, JFB and K&D report the widely accepted conjecture that a negative particle dropped out, and K&D supplies it with Ewald and Bertheau while calling the received text clearly erroneous. Ellicott supplies the counterweight: no ancient version inserts the negative, so the omission is at least as old as the Septuagint, whose rendering he prints along with the Vulgate and Syriac to show that the ancient translators were themselves embarrassed. Pulpit proposes instead to restore the Hebrew by reading a negative with ʼim and repeating the imperative. We report the dispute and decide nothing. Numbers. Ellicott states the general caution that all such high figures are suspicious, and Pulpit says the same of Asa's and Jehoshaphat's totals; Gill records Vulgate copies (Sixtus V, Louvain) reading 30,000 rather than 300,000 at verse 5; JFB allows that the full muster may not be stated. The three valuations of a hundred talents given in the brief (Ellicott about forty thousand pounds, JFB about fifty thousand, Gill 35,300) are irreconcilable and all depend on an uncertain talent weight. Geography. The Valley of Salt is placed southeast of the Dead Sea by Ellicott and JFB, but Pulpit reports Stanley's preference for a ravine near Petra. Sela is identified with Petra by Ellicott, Gill, Pulpit and K&D, and Cambridge says the identification “is by no means certain.” At verse 13 the manuscripts read Samaria where two towns of Judah are expected: Ellicott judges the name probably corrupt, Cambridge conjectures Zemaraim or Ephrain, Poole allows city or kingdom, while Pulpit and K&D take Samaria as the raid's starting point and therefore date the raid to the period when Amaziah was in Edom. No manuscript support is cited in the brief for any emendation. Sources. The man of God is unnamed; Gill reports the rabbinic identification with Amos the father of Isaiah from Seder Olam Rabbah and dismisses it as baseless, and we agree that it is unsupported. Gill's classical and Ottoman parallels for execution by precipitation, and his citations of Josephus and Beckius, are eighteenth-century learning we have not verified. Benson's claim that Judah's border cities were chastised for their own idolatry, and his ledger connecting the hundred talents to the tribute of 2 Chronicles 27:5, are his inferences and not statements of this text. What is uncertain in our own layer. Whether הִתְחַזַּ֔ק in verse 11 is faith (K&D, Gill) or self-reliance (Pulpit) cannot be settled from the grammar; we lean on the sequel in 2 Chronicles 25:14 to 16, which lies just outside this unit, and we say so. Our reading of the unit as a study in partial obedience is an interpretation, not a datum. Two of the three Christ entries are marked novel deliberately. Chronicles reports the massacre at the crag with no verdict of its own; Ellicott, JFB, Benson and Gill supply moral comment from outside the text, and we have not smoothed their disagreement away.

✦ = 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)