2 Chronicles 15:3

Now for a long season Israel hath been without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without law.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(3) Now for a long season Israel hath been.—Literally, And many days to Israel, without true God, and without teaching priest, and without teaching. This is clearly an illustration of the general truth asserted in last verse. “Many a time hath Israel been without true God,” etc. Periods of religious decline, such as those recorded in the Book of Judges, as well as those of later times, especially since the division of the kingdom, are adduced as historical proof of the statement that the Lord was with Israel while they were with him. (Comp. Judges 2:11-19; Judges 3:7-10; also Hosea 3:4-5.)

Without.—Lĕlō’, only here in this sense.

The true God.—Jeremiah 10:9 : “Jehovah is true God” (’elohîm ’emeth).

Teaching priest.—Kôhēn môreh. (See Leviticus 10:11; Deuteronomy 17:9; Deuteronomy 33:10; Deuteronomy 24:8; Ezekiel 44:23; Jeremiah 18:18; Malachi 2:6-7.) The priests instructed the people in the Torah, or divine Law (literally, teaching).

Benson Commentary

2 Chronicles 15:3-4. For a long season Israel hath been, &c. — Hebrew, many days have been to Israel without the true God, &c. — The prophet’s design here is evidently to set before them the miserable consequences of forsaking God and his ordinances, and that if they should forsake him, there would be no way of having their grievances redressed, but by repenting and returning to him. In proof of this point he argues from facts, and observes, that in time past, when Israel forsook their duty, they were overrun with a deluge of atheism, impiety, irreligion, and all irregularities; and were continually embarrassed with vexations, and destructive wars, foreign and domestic. But when their troubles drove them to God, they found it not in vain to seek him. He seems to refer especially to the times of the judges. For then they were frequently, though not wholly and universally, yet in a very great measure, without God and his law, and teaching priests: and then, indeed, they were brought to suffer all the exigencies and calamities here mentioned. They were harassed by grievous wars, both foreign and domestic, and frequently oppressed by one enemy or other, as by the Moabites, Midianites, Ammonites, and other neighbouring nations, and were vexed with all adversity, 2 Chronicles 15:6; yet when, in their perplexity, they turned to God by repentance, prayer, and reformation, he raised up deliverers for them. Thus that maxim, that God is with us, while we are with him, was often verified in those times. This seems to be the most obvious sense of the passage, taking Israel for the whole nation, and not for the ten tribes merely, who had revolted under Jeroboam, to whom part of the prophet’s speech is not at all applicable; for it could not with truth be said of them, that when they were in trouble they turned unto the Lord, and sought him, and he was found of them. Some think, among whom is Houbigant, that the whole passage is prophetical, and looks forward to future times; and that it ought to be read in the future tense, thus: Now, for a long season, Israel shall be without the true God, &c. But when, in their trouble, they shall turn unto the Lord God of Israel, and seek him, he will be found of them: see Hosea 3:4. But the former explication seems to be more agreeable, both to the Hebrew text, and to the context preceding and following, and to be much more suitable to the design of the prophet, as stated above.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

15:1-19 The people make a solemn covenant with God. - The work of complete reformation appeared so difficult, that Asa had not courage to attempt it, till assured of Divine assistance and acceptance. He and his people offered sacrifices to God; thanksgiving for the favours they had received, and supplication for further favours. Prayers and praises are now our spiritual sacrifices. The people, of their own will, covenanted to seek the Lord, each for himself, with earnestness. What is religion but seeking God, inquiring after him, applying to him upon all occasions? We make nothing of our religion, if we do not make heart-work of it; God will have all the heart, or none. Our devotedness to God our Saviour, should be avowed and shown in the most solemn and public manner. What is done in hypocrisy is a mere drudgery.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

"Israel" here is used generally for the whole people of God; and the reference is especially to the many apostasies in the days of the Judges, which were followed by repentance and deliverance.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

3-6. Now for a long season Israel hath been without the true God, &c.—Some think that Azariah was referring to the sad and disastrous condition to which superstition and idolatry had brought the neighboring kingdom of Israel. His words should rather be taken in a wider sense, for it seems manifest that the prophet had his eye upon many periods in the national history, when the people were in the state described—a state of spiritual destitution and ignorance—and exhibited its natural result as widespread anarchy, mutual dissension among the tribes, and general suffering (Jud 9:23; 12:4; 20:21; 2Ch 13:17). These calamities God permitted to befall them as the punishment of their apostasy. Azariah's object in these remarks was to establish the truth of his counsel (2Ch 15:2), threatening, in case of neglecting it by describing the uniform course of the divine procedure towards Israel, as shown in all periods of their history. Then after this appeal to national experience, he concluded with an earnest exhortation to the king to prosecute the work of reformation so well begun [2Ch 15:7].

Matthew Poole's Commentary

Heb. For many days have been to Israel

without the true God, & c, i.e. they have long lived without the sound knowledge and worship of the true God. The prophet confirms his foregoing exhortation, and the threatening annexed to it, that if they forsook God, he would forsake them, from the usual manner of God’s dealing with Israel formerly, and therefore in the same case they may expect the same usage. Israel, here mentioned and propounded as an example, is here understood, either,

1. Specially of the ten tribes, distinguished by that name from the kingdom of Judah; whose condition had been, since Jeroboam’s revolt, and now was such in some measure, as is here described, they having been, and still being, without God and his true worship, and therefore exposed to many vexations, and wars, and miseries. But these had not as yet turned unto God, or sought him, nor was God yet found of them, as is said of this Israel, 2 Chronicles 15:4. Nor had they as yet been exercised with those grievous and continual vexations, and wars, and mutual destructions of which he here speaks, 2 Chronicles 15:5,6, and which in succeeding times they felt; for except that one blow which they had from Abijah, 2 Chronicles 13, we read of none other great mischiefs which befell them. Or rather,

2. Generally of the whole nation of Israel in former times, and especially in the times of the judges; to which all that follows suits very well; for then many times they were, though not wholly and universally, yet in a very great measure, and for the generality of them, without God, and his law, and teaching priests, as plainly appears from divers passages in the Book of the Judges; and then indeed they were brought to all the exigencies and calamities here following; then they had grievous wars, both foreign and domestic; and then they did sometimes turn to the Lord and sought him, and he was found of them, and did raise up judges and saviours to them; of which see Judges 2 at large, and Judges 3:9, Judges 3:15 10:10, &c.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Now for a long season Israel hath been without the true God,.... The fear, worship, and service of him being greatly neglected by them for a long time; what period of time is referred to is not expressed, whether past, present, or to come, but left to be supplied; the Targum refers this to the time of the separation of the ten tribes, and the days of Jeroboam, when the calves were worshipped, and not the true God, and the teaching priests of the Lord were cast out, and the law of the Lord, especially with respect to worship, was not regarded, in which it is followed by many interpreters; others think it refers to time to come, and to what would be the case, should they forsake the Lord; and was fulfilled in the Babylonish captivity, see Hosea 3:4 and the Jews (k) say, that"Oded prophesied that the days should come, when Israel would be "without the true God", since judgment should not be done in the world: and "without a teaching priest"; since the high priesthood should cease, (see Hebrews 7:12) "and without the law"; since the sanhedrim should cease;''but according to our supplement, and which seems most correct, it refers to time past; not to the case of the ten tribes from the times of Jeroboam; nor to the case of Judah from the times of Rehoboam; but to times more remote, even the times of the judges, when they worshipped Baal and Ashtaroth, and not the true God, Judges 2:10, yet at the same time suggesting, that should the present inhabitants of Judah go into the same practices, their case would be like theirs, described in the following verses:

and without a teaching priest: as they were under the judges, from the times of Phinehas to those of Eli, which was a long space of time:

and without law; every man doing as he pleased, there being no king in Israel, nor any regard paid to the law of God, moral or ceremonial, Judges 17:6.

(k) Vajikra Rabba, sect. 19. fol. 160. 4.

Geneva Study Bible

Now for a long season Israel hath been without the {b} true God, and without a teaching priest, and without law.

(b) For the space of twelve years under Rehoboam, and three years under Abijah, religion was neglected, and idolatry planted.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

3. for a long season] R.V. for long seasons. 2 Chronicles 15:3-6 contain the reflections of the Chronicler himself on the whole previous course of Israelite history. Azariah’s own exhortation is continued in 2 Chronicles 15:7.

without a teaching priest, and without law] The connexion between these two is closer than the English suggests. “Law” (Heb. torah) is properly “teaching, guidance.” A “teaching” (Heb. moreh) priest is one who gives “torah” or “guidance” on doubtful points of morality or ritual. Cp. Malachi 2:7.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 3. - Now for a long season. This translation is wrong; translate rather first, And many the days to Israel to not have true God, and to not have teaching priest, and to not have Law. So far no tense is limited, however naturally through the very drift of the passage it may seem that experience is being challenged, and so necessarily the past tense desiderated, not, however, in aorist shape, but in what some French grammarians call present perfect. For Azariah may well contemplate his illustration as good from long of old, to the very moment he was speaking. The unfortunate wealth of illustration to hand of his position may pardon the doubtfulness of commentators as to the source from which it may be supposed he would have drawn his most effective instances. It will not be the unlikeliest guide to follow the triple description of the alleged apostasy, misfortune, or iniquity "of Israel," e.g. (say) it happened to them to not have the true God; happened to them to not have teaching priest; happened to them to not have the Law (this meaning, to not have it authoritatively proclaimed, taught, ministered). When did these three things happen altogether most notoriously? They describe, not the transgressions of an individual king, but the state of the people and kingdom as a whole. If it were possible to conceive the description as a flagrant anachronism, a retrospective post-Captivity amplification, which the writer (in his glow of work and thought) was unconsciously and irresistibly betrayed into putting into the lips of the Prophet Azariah, all doubt would end; for the description would suit no state of things and no period better than that of the divided kingdoms, especially applying to the career of the separate kingdom of Israel. Our account, unfortunately, is unchecked just here by a parallel. It is, however, impossible to suppose this without any tittle of external authority for it, much less enough to proceed upon. Some so crave the illustration that they are prepared to suppose all the tenses of these verses present and future rather than past and "present perfect." But, in fact, no doubt the history of Israel since the death of Moses illustrated the language of Azariah passim to a degree beyond all "that is written" or that we know. And then we may certainly consider theft the expression chosen, "many days" (which some translate "many a day," "many a time "), even the word "years" not being employed, leaves it open to us to go to short episodes of an irreligious and disastrous character in the history of Israel. Lastly, the long stretch of fully three hundred years, extending throughout the Book of Judges (its last five chapters in right order or wrong)into the opening seven chapters of 1 Samuel, provides one running comment, superabundant almost to repetitiousness, for the illustration of our vers. 3-7; in many cases absolutely picking out the very colours to match (e.g. Judges 5:6; Judges 20:29, 31, compared with our ver. 5). To distinguish and separate the very numerous references that might be made is merely supererogatory, and spoils the unmatched mosaic work of the history (Judges 2:15, 18, 19; Judges 3:12-15; Judges 4:1-3; Judges 5:6, 19-21, 31: 6:1-5, 7-10; 9:32-37; 10:6-16; 11:19, 20; 12:5, 6; 17:5, 6, 13; 20:29, 31; 1 Samuel 2:30 -35; 1 Samuel 4:9-22; 1 Samuel 7:3, 8; 1 Samuel 13:19-22). It is a long-stretched-out history of a practically atheistic, priest-less, lawless life; divided into narratives of invasion, oppression, servitude (sevenfold, the Mesopotamian, Moabite, Canaanitish, Midianitish, Ammonitish, Philistine, and, it may be added, in order to comprehend all internal strife, Ishmaelitish larger and lesser, yet surprisingly general), smart, cry for help manifestly more the cry of pain and cowardice than of penitence and repentance, resolution and vow, and - for another trial and still another - of Divine pity, forbearance, and deliverance 2 Chronicles 15:3

Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

The prophet Azariah's exhortation to faithful cleaving to the Lord, and the solemn renewal of the covenant. - 2 Chronicles 15:1-7. The prophet's speech. The prophet Azariah, the son of Oded, is mentioned only here. The conjecture of some of the older theologians, that עודד was the same person as עדּו (2 Chronicles 12:15; 2 Chronicles 9:29), has no tenable foundation. Azariah went to meet the king and people returning from the war (לפני יצא, he went forth in the presence of Asa, i.e., coming before him; cf. 2 Chronicles 28:9; 1 Chronicles 12:17; 1 Chronicles 14:8). "Jahve was with you (has given you the victory), because ye were with Him (held to Him)." Hence the general lesson is drawn: If ye seek Him, He will be found of you (cf. Jeremiah 29:13); and if ye forsake Him, He will forsake you (cf. 2 Chronicles 24:20; 2 Chronicles 12:5). To impress the people deeply with this truth, Azariah draws a powerful picture of the times when a people is forsaken by God, when peace and security in social intercourse disappear, and the terrors of civil war prevail. Opinions as to the reference intended in this portrayal of the dreadful results of defection from God have been from antiquity very much divided. Tremell. and Grot., following the Targ., take the words to refer to the condition of the kingdom of the ten tribes at that time; others think they refer to the past, either to the immediately preceding period of the kingdom of Judah, to the times of the defection under Rehoboam and Abijah, before Asa had suppressed idolatry (Syr., Arab., Raschi), or to the more distant past, the anarchic period of the judges, from Joshua's death, and that of the high priest Phinehas, until Eli and Samuel's reformation (so especially Vitringa, de synag. vet. p. 335ff.). Finally, still others (Luther, Clericus, Budd., etc.) interpret the words as prophetic, as descriptive of the future, and make them refer either to the unquiet times under the later idolatrous kings, to the times of the Assyrian or Chaldean exile (Kimchi), or to the condition of the Jews since the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans up till the present day. Of these three views, the first, that which takes the reference to be to the present, i.e., the state of the kingdom of the ten tribes at that time, is decidedly erroneous; for during the first thirty years of the existence of that kingdom no such anarchic state of things existed as is portrayed in vv. 5 and 6, and still less could a return of the ten tribes to the Lord at that time be spoken of (2 Chronicles 15:4). It is more difficult to decide between the two other main views. The grounds which Vitr., Ramb., Berth. adduce in support of the reference to the times of the judges are not convincing; for the contents and form (2 Chronicles 15:4) do not prove that here something is asserted which has been confirmed by history, and still less is it manifest (2 Chronicles 15:5) that past times are pointed to. Whether the statement about the return to Jahve in the times of trouble (2 Chronicles 15:4) refers to the past or to the future, depends upon whether the past or future is spoken of in 2 Chronicles 15:3. But the unquiet condition of things portrayed in 2 Chronicles 15:5 corresponds partly to various times in the period of the judges; and if, with Vitr., we compare the general characteristics of the religious condition of the times of the judges (Judges 2:10.), we might certainly say that Israel in those times was without אמת אלהי, as it again and again forsook Jahve and served the Baals. And moreover, several examples of the oppression of Israel portrayed in 2 Chronicles 15:5 and 2 Chronicles 15:6 may be adduced from the time of the judges. Yet the words in 2 Chronicles 15:6, even when their rhetorical character is taken into account, are too strong for the anarchic state of things during the period of the judges, and the internal struggles of that time (Judges 12:1-6 and 2 Chronicles 20). And consequently, although Vitr. and Ramb. think that a reference to experiences already past, and oppressions already lived through, would have made a much deeper impression than pointing forward to future periods of oppression, yet Ramb. himself remarks, nihilominus tamen in saeculis Asae imperium antegressis vix ullum tempus post ingressum in terram Canaan et constitutam rempubl. Israel. posse ostendi, cui omnia criteria hujus orationis propheticae omni ex parte et secundum omnia pondera verbis insita conveniant. But, without doubt, the omission of any definite statement of the time in 2 Chronicles 15:3 is decisive against the exclusive reference of this speech to the past, and to the period of the judges. The verse contains no verb, so that the words may just as well refer to the past as to the future. The prophet has not stated the time definitely, because he was giving utterance to truths which have force at all times,

(Note: As Ramb. therefore rightly remarks, "Vatem videri consulto abstinuisse a determinatione temporis, ut vela sensui quam amplissime panderentur, verbaque omnibus temporum periodis adplicari possent, in quibus criteria hic recensita adpareant.")

and which Israel had had experience of already in the time of the judges, but would have much deeper experience of in the future.

We must take the words in this general sense, and supply neither a preterite nor a future in 2 Chronicles 15:3, neither fuerant nor erunt, but must express the first clause by the present in English: "Many days are for Israel (i.e., Israel lives many days) without the true God, and without teaching priests, and without law." רבּים ימים is not accus. of time (Berth.), but the subject of the sentence; and אלה ללא is not subject - "during many days there was to the people Israel no true God" (Berth.), - but predicate, while ל expresses the condition into which anything comes, and לא forms part of the following noun: Days for Israel for having not a true God. ללא differs from בּלא, "without," just as ל differs from בּ; the latter expressing the being in a condition, the former the coming into it. On אמת אלהי, cf. Jeremiah 10:10. אמת כּהן is not to be limited to the high priest, for it refers to the priests in general, whose office it was to teach the people law and justice (Leviticus 10:10; Deuteronomy 33:10). The accent is upon the predicates אמת and אמת. Israel had indeed Elohim, but not the true God, and also priests, but not priests who attended to their office, who watched over the fulfilment of the law; and so they had no תּורה, notwithstanding the book of the law composed by Moses.