2 Kings 12:21

For Jozachar the son of Shimeath, and Jehozabad the son of Shomer, his servants, smote him, and he died; and they buried him with his fathers in the city of David: and Amaziah his son reigned in his stead.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(21) For Jozachar . . . smote him.—Rather, And Jozachar . . . it was that smote him. The names are different in Chronicles. (See the Note on 2Chronicles 24:26.) Thenius notices the curious coincidence of the names as given here with the last words of the murdered Zechariah, “Jehovah see, and avenge!” The prophet was avenged by Jozachar (“Jehovah remembers”), the son of shimeath (“hearing”), and Jehozabad (“Jehovah bestows”), the son of Shomer (“watcher”).

With his fathers—i.e., in the city of David; but “not in the sepulchres of the kings 2)” Chron. 24:25).

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

12:17-21 Let us review the character of Jehoash, and consider what we may learn from it. When we see what a sad conclusion there was to so promising a beginning, it ought to make us seek into our spiritual declinings. If we know any thing of Christ as the foundation of our faith and hope, let us desire to know nothing but Christ. May the work of the blessed Spirit on our souls be manifest; may we see, feel, and be earnest, in seeking after Jesus in all his fulness, suitableness, and grace, that our souls may be brought over from dead works to serve the living and true God.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

A conspiracy - Compare the marginal reference Joash, either from a suspicion of intended treason, or from some other unknown cause, took up his abode in the fortress of Millo 1 Kings 9:24. This conspiracy was connected with religion. Soon after the death of Jehoiada, Joash had apostatised; had renewed the worship of Baal; and, despite of many prophetic warnings, had persisted in his evil courses, even commanding Zechariah to be slain when he rebuked them 2 Chronicles 24:18-27. The conspirators, who wished to avenge Zechariah, no doubt wished also to put down the Baal worship. In this it appears that they succeeded. For, though Amaziah punished the actual murderers after a while 2 Kings 14:5, yet he appears not to have been a Baal-worshipper. The only idolatries laid to his charge are the maintenance of the high places 2 Kings 14:4, and a worship of the gods of Edom 2 Chronicles 25:14-20.

Silla - This place is quite unknown.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

20. his servants arose … and slew Joash in the house of Millo—(See on [339]2Ch 24:25).

Matthew Poole's Commentary

Jozachar, called also Zabad, 2 Chronicles 24:26. Silomer, called Shimrith, 2 Chronicles 24:26; except Shomer be the father’s name, and Shimrith the mother’s.

With his fathers, i.e. in the same city, but not in the same royal sepulchre, 2 Chronicles 24:25.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

For Jozachar the son of Shimeath,.... Said to be an Ammonitess, and this man's name Zabad, 2 Chronicles 24:26,

and Jehozabad the son of Shomer, his servants; who is said in the same place to be the son of Shimrith a Moabitess:

these smote him, and he died; justly did he fall by the hands of such persons for his idolatry:

and they buried him with his fathers in the city of David; but not in the sepulchres of the kings, because of his idolatry and murder of a priest of the Lord:

and Amaziah his son reigned in his stead; the conspirators not seeking the kingdom, but vengeance on him for his sins, which, whether right in them to do, was suffered by the Lord.

Geneva Study Bible

For Jozachar the son of Shimeath, and Jehozabad the son of Shomer, his servants, smote him, and he died; and they buried him with his fathers in the city of David: and Amaziah his son reigned in his stead.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

21. For Jozachar [R.V. Jozacar] the son of Shimeath, and Jehozabad the son of Shomer] In 2 Chron. the names of the conspirators are given as ‘Zabad the son of Shimeath an Ammonitess, and Jehozabad the son of Shemrith a Moabitess’. Between זבד Zabad and זכר Zacar, the abbreviated form of Jozacar, it is easy to see how a mistake might arise from the similarity of the Hebrew letters. The Chronicler who mentions the nationality of the mothers gives their names both in the feminine form. In Kings the last two letters from שׁמרית (Shemrith) have fallen out and so the name has become שׁמר (Shomer). Although these names are without doubt historical it is very remarkable (as Thenius points out) how when they are translated they recall Zechariah’s last words ‘The Lord look upon it and require it’. For they signify ‘Jehovah-remembers’, the son of ‘Hearer;’ and ‘Jehovah-gives’, the son of ‘Watcher’.

and they buried him with his fathers] i.e. In the city of David, but as the Chronicler records, not in the sepulchres of the kings. The words of the Chronicler about the ‘greatness of the burdens’ laid upon Jehoash refers to the many prophetic oracles which were uttered against him in consequence of his evil deeds. Cf. for that sense of the word ‘burden’ Isaiah 13:1, and many other passages of that prophet. On the margin R.V. in such cases, gives ‘oracle concerning’.

and Amaziah his son] The Chronicler (2 Chronicles 24:27) speaks of the ‘sons of Jehoash’; we know nothing however of any son but Amaziah, though it is said (2 Chronicles 24:3) ‘Jehoiada took for Jehoash two wives, and he begat sons and daughters’.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 21. - For Jozachar the son of Shimeath; called in Chronicles "Zabad," probably through a corruption of the text. His mother, Shimeath, was, according to Chronicles (2 Chronicles 24:26), an Ammonitess. And Jehozabad the son of Shomer. For "Shomer" we have in Chronicles "Shim-rith," which is the feminine form of "Shomer," and we are told that she was a Moabitess. The Jews were at all times fond of taking wives from Moab and Ammon (Ruth 1:4; 1 Kings 11:1; Ezra 9:1, 2; Nehemiah 13:23), despite the prohibition of mixed marriages in the Law (see Deuteronomy 7:3). His servants, smote him, and he died (for their motives, see the introductory paragraph), and they buried him with his fathers in the city of David. Some critics (as Thenius and Dean Stanley) see a contradiction between this statement and that of 2 Chronicles 24:25, that he was "not buried in the sepulchers of the kings;" but, as Bertheau, Keil, and Bahr observe. "the two statements are not irreconcilable," since he may have been regarded as "buried with his fathers," if his grave was anywhere in Jerusalem, even though he was excluded from the royal burying-place. And Amaziah his son reigned in his stead. (For the reign of Amaziah, see 2 Kings 14:1-20.)



2 Kings 12:21

Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

Conspiracy against Joash. - Not long after the departure of the Syrians, who had left Joash, according to 2 Chronicles 24:25, with many wounds, his servants formed a conspiracy against him and slew him upon his bed in the house Millo, which goeth down to Silla. This description of the locality is perfectly obscure for us. The conjecture that בּית־מלּא was the house in the castle of Millo which is so frequently mentioned (see at 1 Kings 9:15 and 2 Samuel 5:9), is precluded by the fact that this castle is always called המּלּא (with the article). סלּא is regarded by many as an abbreviation of מסלּה, "which goes down by the road;" and Thenius supposes that the reference is to the road which ran diagonally through the city from the Joppa gate to the Haram-area, corresponding to the present David's road. Others regard סלּא as the proper name of a place in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. It is impossible to get any certain meaning out of it, unless we alter the text according to arbitrary assumptions, as Thenius has done. The conspirators were Jozachar the son of Shimeath, and Jehozabad the son of Shomer, according to 2 Kings 12:21; but according to the Chronicles (v. 26), they were Zabad the son of Shimeath the Ammonitess, and Jehozabad the son of Shimrith the Moabitess. The identity of the first names is perfectly obvious. זבד is a copyist's error for זכר, and this is the contracted form of יוזכר. The difference in the second: son of Shomer according to our text, and son of the Shimrith according to the Chronicles, has probably also arisen from a slip of the pen, since שׁמר might easily be occasioned by the dropping out of the ת from the defectively written שׁמרת, although it is also possible that Shomer may be the name of the grandfather. Joash was buried with his father sin the city of David; but according to v. 25 of the Chronicles he was not buried in the graves of the kings. The two statements are not irreconcilable; and there may be good historical ground for the account in the Chronicles, as Bertheau acknowledges with perfect justice, in spite of the suspicion which has been cast upon it by Thenius.