الكتاب المقدس

Expositor's Bible Commentary 2 Chronicles 24:1 Joash was seven years old when he began to reign, and he reigned forty years in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Zibiah of Beersheba. JOASH AND AMAZIAH 2 Chronicles 24:1-27 ; 2 Chronicles 25:1-28 FOR Chronicles, as for the book of Kings, the main interest of the reign of Joash is the repairing of the Temple; but the later narrative introduces modifications which give a somewhat different complexion to the story. Both authorities tell us that Joash did that. which was right in the eyes of Jehovah all the days of Jehoiada, but the book of Kings immediately adds that "the high places were not taken away: the people still sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places." Seeing that Jehoiada exercised the royal authority during the minority of Joash, this toleration of the high places must have had the sanction of the high-priest. Now the chronicler and his contemporaries had been educated in the belief that the Pentateuch was the ecclesiastical code of the monarchy; they found it impossible to credit a statement that the high-priest had sanctioned any other sanctuary besides the temple of Zion; accordingly they omitted the verse in question. In the earlier narrative of the repairing of the Temple the priests are ordered by Joash to use certain sacred dues and offerings to repair the breaches of the house; but after some time had elapsed it was found that the breaches had not been repaired, and when Joash remonstrated with the priests, they flatly, refused to have anything to do with the repairs or with receiving funds for the purpose. Their objections were, however, overruled; and Jehoiada placed beside the altar a chest with a hole in the lid, into which "the priests put all the money that was brought into the house of Jehovah." { 2 Kings 12:9 } When it was sufficiently full, the king’s scribe and the high-priest counted the money, and put it up in bags. There were several points in this earlier narrative which would have furnished very inconvenient precedents, and were so much out of keeping with the ideas and practices of the second Temple that, by the time the chronicler wrote, a new and more intelligible version of the story was current among the ministers of the Temple. To begin with, there was an omission which would have grated very unpleasantly on the feelings of the chronicler. In this long narrative, wholly taken up with the affairs of the Temple, nothing is said about the Levites. The collecting and receiving of money might well be supposed to belong to them; and accordingly in Chronicles the Levites are first associated with the priests in this matter, and then the priests drop out of the narrative, and the Levites alone carry out the financial arrangements. Again, it might be understood from the book of Kings that sacred dues and offerings, which formed the revenue of the priests and Levites, were diverted by the king’s orders to the repair of the fabric. The chronicler was naturally anxious that there should be no mistake on this point; the ambiguous phrases are omitted, and it is plainly indicated that funds were raised for the repairs by means of a special tax ordained by Moses. Joash "assembled the priests and the Levites, and said to them, Go out into the cities of Judah, and gather of all Israel money to repair the house of your God from year to year, and see that ye hasten the matter. Howbeit the Levites hastened it not." The remissness of the priests in the original narrative is here very faithfully and candidly transferred to the Levites. Then, as in the book of Kings, Joash remonstrates with Jehoiada, but the terms of his remonstrance are altogether different: here he complains because the Levites have not been required "to bring in out of Judah and out of Jerusalem the tax appointed by Moses the servant of Jehovah and by the congregation of Israel for the tent of the testimony," i.e. , the Tabernacle, containing the Ark and the tables of the Law. The reference apparently is to the law, { Exodus 30:11-16 } that when a census was taken a poll-tax of a half-shekel a head should be paid for the service of the Tabernacle. As one of the main uses of a census was to facilitate the raising of taxes, this law might not unfairly be interpreted to mean that when occasion arose, or perhaps even every year, a census should be taken in order that this poll-tax might be levied. Nehemiah arranged for a yearly poll-tax of a third of a shekel for the incidental expenses of the Temple. { Nehemiah 10:32 } Here, however, the half-shekel prescribed in Exodus is intended; and it should be observed that this poll-tax was to be levied, not once only, but "from year to year." The chronicler then inserts a note to explain why these repairs were necessary: "The sons of Athaliah, that wicked woman, had broken up the house of God: and also all the dedicated things of the house of Jehovah they bestowed upon the Baals." Here we are confronted with a further difficulty. All Jehoram’s sons except Ahaziah were murdered by the Arabs in their father’s life-time. Who are these "sons of Athaliah" who broke up the Temple? Jehoram was about thirty-seven when his sons were massacred, so that some of them may have been old enough to break up the Temple. One would think that "the dedicated things" might have been recovered for Jehovah when Athaliah was overthrown; but possibly, when the people retaliated by breaking into the house of Baal, there were Achans among them, who appropriated the plunder. Having remonstrated with Jehoiada, the king took matters into his own hands; and he, not Jehoiada, had a chest made and placed, not beside the altar-such an arrangement savored of profanity-but without at the gate of the Temple. This little touch is very suggestive. The noise and bustle of paying over money, receiving it, and putting it into the chest, would have mingled distractingly with the solemn ritual of sacrifice. In modern times the tinkle of three penny pieces often tends to mar the effect of an impressive appeal and to disturb the quiet influences of a communion service. The Scotch arrangement, by which a plate covered with a fair white cloth is placed in the porch of a church and guarded by two modern Levites or elders, is much more in accordance with Chronicles. Then, instead of sending out Levites to collect the tax, proclamation was made that the people themselves should bring their offerings. Obedience apparently was made a matter of conscience, not of solicitation. Perhaps it was because the Levites felt that sacred dues should be given freely that they were not forward to make yearly tax-collecting expeditions. At any rate, the new method was signally successful. Day after day the princes and people gladly brought their offerings, and money was gathered in abundance. Other passages suggest that the chronicler was not always inclined to trust to the spontaneous generosity of the people for the support of the priests and Levites; but he plainly recognized that free-will offerings are more excellent than the donations which are painfully extracted by the yearly visits of official collectors. He would probably have sympathized with the abolition of pew-rents. As in the book of Kings, the chest was emptied at suitable intervals; but instead of the high-priest being associated with the king’s scribe, as if they were on a level and both of them officials of the royal court, the chief-priest’s officer assists the king’s scribe, so that the chief-priest is placed on a level with the king himself. The details of the repairs in the two narratives differ considerably in form, but for the most part agree in substance; the only striking point is that they are apparently at variance as to whether vessels of silver or gold were or were not made for the renovated Temple. Then follows the account of the ingratitude and apostasy of Joash and his people. As long as Jehoiada lived, the services of the Temple were regularly performed, and Judah remained faithful to its God; but at last he died, full of days: a hundred and thirty years old. In his life-time he had exercised royal authority, and when he died he was buried like a king: "They buried him in the city of David among the kings, because he had done good in Israel and toward God and His house." Like Nero when he shook off the control of Seneca and Burrhus, Joash changed his policy as soon as Jehoiada was dead. Apparently he was a weak character, always following some one’s leading. His freedom from the influence that had made his early reign decent and honorable was not, as in Nero’s case, his own act. The change of policy was adopted at the suggestion of the princes of Judah. King, princes, and people fell back into the old wickedness; they forsook the Temple and served idols. Yet Jehovah did not readily give them up to their own folly, nor hastily inflict punishment; He sent, not one prophet, but many, to bring them back to Himself, but they would not hearken. At last Jehovah made one last effort to win Joash back; this time He chose for His messenger a priest who had special personal claims on the favorable attention of the king. The prophet was Zechariah the son of Jehoiada, to whom Joash owed his life and his throne. The name was a favorite one in Israel, and was borne by two other prophets besides the son of Jehoiada. Its very etymology constituted an appeal to the conscience of Joash: it is compounded of the sacred name and a root meaning "to remember." The Jews were adepts at extracting from such a combination all its possible applications. The most obvious was that Jehovah would remember the sin of Judah, but the recent prophets sent to recall the sinners to their God showed that Jehovah also remembered their former righteousness and desired to recall it to them and them to it; they should remember Jehovah. Moreover, Joash should remember the teaching of Jehoiada and his obligations to the father of the man now addressing him. Probably Joash did remember all this when, in the striking Hebrew idiom, "the spirit of God clothed itself with Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, and he stood above the people and said unto them, Thus saith God: Why transgress ye the commandments of Jehovah, to your hurt? Because ye have forsaken Jehovah, He hath also forsaken you." This is the burden of the prophetic utterances in Chronicles; { 1 Chronicles 28:9 2 Chronicles 7:19 ; 2 Chronicles 12:5 ; 2 Chronicles 13:10 ; 2 Chronicles 15:2 ; 2 Chronicles 21:10 ; 2 Chronicles 28:6 ; 2 Chronicles 29:6 ; 2 Chronicles 34:25 } the converse is stated by Irenaeus when he says that to follow the Savior is to partake of salvation. Though the truth of this teaching had been enforced again and again by the misfortunes that had befallen Judah under apostate kings, Joash paid no heed to it, nor did he remember the kindness which Jehoiada had done him; that is to say, he showed no gratitude towards the house of Jehoiada. Perhaps an uncomfortable sense of obligation to the father only embittered him the more against his son. But the son of the high-priest could not be dealt with as summarily as Asa dealt with Hanani when he put him in prison. The king might have been indifferent to the wrath of Jehovah, but the son of the man who had for years ruled Judah and Jerusalem must have had a strong party at his back. Accordingly the king and his adherents conspired against Zechariah, and they stoned him with stones by the king’s command. This Old Testament martyr died in a very different spirit from that of Stephen; his prayer was not, "Lord, lay not this sin to their charge," but "‘ Jehovah, look upon it and require it." His prayer did not long remain unanswered. Within a year the Syrians came against Joash; he had a very great host, but he was powerless against a small company of the Divinely commissioned avengers of Zechariah. The tempters who had seduced the king into apostasy were a special mark for the wrath of Jehovah: the Syrians destroyed all the princes, and sent their spoil to the king of Damascus. Like Asa and Jehoram, Joash suffered personal punishment in the shape of "great diseases," but his end was even more tragic than theirs. One conspiracy avenged another: in his own household there were adherents of the family of Jehoiada: "Two of his own servants conspired against him for the blood of Zechariah, and slew him on his bed; and they buried him in the city of David, and not in the sepulchers of the kings." The chronicler’s biography of Joash might have been specially designed to remind his readers that the most careful education must sometimes fail of its purpose. Joash had been trained from his earliest years in the Temple itself, under the care of Jehoiada and of his aunt Jehosha-beath, the high-priest’s wife. He had no doubt been carefully instructed in the religion and sacred history of Israel, and had been continually surrounded by the best religious influences of his age. For Judah, in the chronicler’s estimation, was even then the one home of the true faith. These holy influences had been continued after Joash had attained to manhood, and Jehoiada was careful to provide that the young king’s harem should be enlisted in the cause of piety and good government. We may be sure that the two wives whom Jehoiada selected for his pupil were consistent worshippers of Jehovah and loyal to the Law and the Temple. No daughter of the house of Ahab, no "strange wife" from Egypt, Ammon, or Moab, would be allowed the opportunity of undoing the good effects of early training. Moreover, we might have expected the character developed by education to be strengthened by exercise. The early years of his reign were occupied by zealous activity in the service of the Temple. The pupil outstripped his master, and the enthusiasm of the youthful king found occasion to rebuke the tardy zeal of the venerable high-priest. And yet all this fair promise was blighted in a day. The piety carefully fostered for half a life-time gave way before the first assaults of temptation, and never even attempted to reassert itself. Possibly the brief and fragmentary records from which the chronicler had to make his selection unduly emphasize the contrast between the earlier and later years of the reign of Joash; but the picture he draws of the failure of the best of tutors and governors is unfortunately only too typical. Julian the Apostate was educated by a distinguished Christian prelate, Eusebius of Nicomedia, and was trained in a strict routine of religious observances; yet he repudiated Christianity at the earliest safe opportunity. His apostasy, like that of Joash, was probably characterized by base ingratitude. At Constantine’s death the troops in Constantinople massacred nearly all the princes of the imperial family, and Julian, then only six years old, is said to have been saved and concealed in a church by Mark, Bishop of Arethusa. When Julian became emperor, he repaid this obligation by subjecting his benefactor to cruel tortures because he had destroyed a heathen temple and refused to make any compensation. Imagine Joash requiring Jehoiada to make compensation for pulling down, a high place! The parallel of Julian may suggest a partial explanation of the fall of Joash. The tutelage of Jehoiada may have been too strict, monotonous, and prolonged: in choosing wives for the young king, the aged priest may not have made an altogether happy selection; Jehoiada may have kept Joash under control until he was incapable of independence and could only pass from one dominant influence to another. When the high-priest’s death gave the king an opportunity of changing his masters, a reaction from the too urgent insistence upon his duty to the Temple may have inclined Joash to listen favorably to the solicitations of the princes. But perhaps the sins of Joash are sufficiently accounted for by his ancestry. His mother was Zibiah of Beersheba, and therefore probably a Jewess. Of her we know nothing further, good or bad. Otherwise his ancestors for two generations had been uniformly bad. His father and grandfather were the wicked kings Jehoram and Ahaziah; his grandmother was Athaliah; and he was descended from Ahab, and possibly from Jezebel. When we recollect that his mother Zibiah was a wife of Ahaziah and had probably been selected by Athaliah, we cannot suppose that the element she contributed to his character would do much to counteract the evil he inherited from his father. The chronicler’s account of his successor Amaziah is equally disappointing; he also began well and ended miserably. In the opening formulae of the history of the new reign and in the account of the punishment of the assassins of Joash, the chronicler closely follows the earlier narrative, omitting, as usual, the statement that this good king did not take away the high places. Like his pious predecessors, Amaziah in his earlier and better years was rewarded with a great army and military success; and yet the muster-roll of his forces shows how the sins and calamities of the recent wicked reigns had told on the resources of Judah. Jehoshaphat could command more than eleven hundred and sixty thousand soldiers; Amaziah has only three hundred thousand. These were not sufficient for the king’s ambition; by the Divine grace, he had already amassed wealth, in spite of the Syrian ravages at the close of the preceding reign: and he laid out a hundred talents of silver in purchasing the services of as many thousand Israelites, thus falling into the sin for which Jehoshaphat had twice been reproved and punished. Jehovah, however, arrested Amaziah’s employment of unholy allies at the outset. A man of God came to him and exhorted him not to let the army of Israel go with him, because "Jehovah is not with Israel"; if he had courage and faith to go with only his three hundred thousand Jews, all would be well, otherwise God would cast him down, as He had done Ahaziah. The statement that Jehovah was not with Israel might have been understood in a sense that would seem almost blasphemous to the chronicler’s contemporaries; he is careful therefore to explain that here "Israel" simply means "the children of Ephraim." Amaziah obeyed the prophet, but was naturally distressed at the thought that he had spent a hundred talents for nothing: "What shall we do for the hundred talents which I have given to the army of Israel?" He did not realize that the Divine alliance would be worth more to him than many hundred talents of silver; or perhaps he reflected that Divine grace is free, and that he might have saved his money. One would like to believe that he was anxious to recover this silver in order to devote it to the service of the sanctuary; but he was evidently one of those sordid souls who like, as the phrase goes, "to get their religion for nothing." No wonder Amaziah went astray! We can scarcely be wrong in detecting a vein of contempt in the prophet’s answer: "Jehovah can give thee much more than this." This little episode carries with it a great principle. Every crusade against an established abuse is met with the cry, "What shall we do for the hundred talents?"-for the capital invested in slaves or in gin-shops; for English revenues from alcohol or Indian revenues from opium? Few have faith to believe that the Lord can provide for financial deficits, or, if we may venture to indicate the method in which the Lord provides, that a nation will ever be able to pay its way by honest finance. Let us note, however, that Amaziah was asked to sacrifice his own talents, and not other people’s. Accordingly Amaziah sent the mercenaries home; and they returned in great dudgeon, offended by the slight put upon them and disappointed at the loss of prospective plunder. The king’s sin in hiring Israelite mercenaries was to suffer a severer punishment than the loss of money. While he was away at war, his rejected allies returned, and attacked the border cities, killed three thousand Jews, and took much plunder. Meanwhile Amaziah and his army were reaping direct fruits of their obedience in Edom, where they gained a great victory, and followed it up by a massacre of ten thousand captives, whom they killed by throwing down from the top of a precipice. Yet, after all, Amaziah’s victory over Edom was of small profit to him, for he was thereby seduced into idolatry. Amongst his other prisoners, he had brought away the gods of Edom; and instead of throwing them over a precipice, as a pious king should have done, "he set them up to be his gods, and bowed down himself before them, and burned incense unto them." Then Jehovah, in His anger, sent a prophet to demand, "Why hast thou sought after, foreign gods, which have not delivered their own people out of thine hand?" According to current ideas outside of Israel, a nation might very reasonably seek after the gods of their conquerors. Such conquest could only be attributed to the superior power and grace of the gods of the victors: the gods of the defeated were vanquished along with their worshippers, and were obviously incompetent and unworthy of further confidence. But to act like Amaziah-to go out to battle in the name of Jehovah, directed and encouraged by His prophet, to conquer by the grace of the God of Israel, and then to desert Jehovah of hosts, the Giver of victory, for the paltry and discredited idols of the conquered Edomites-this was sheer madness. And yet as Greece enslaved her Roman conquerors, so the victor has often been won to the faith of the vanquished. The Church subdued the barbarians who had overwhelmed the empire, and the heathen Saxons adopted at last the religion of the conquered Britons. Henry IV of France is scarcely a parallel to Amaziah: he went to Mass that he might hold his scepter with a firmer grasp, while the king of Judah merely adopted foreign idols in order to gratify his superstition and love of novelty. Apparently Amaziah was at first inclined to discuss the question: he and the prophet talked together; but the king soon became irritated, and broke off the interview with abrupt discourtesy: "Have we made thee of the king’s counsel? Forbear; why shouldest thou be smitten?" Prosperity seems to have been invariably fatal to the Jewish kings who began to reign well; the success that rewarded, at the same time destroyed, their virtue. Before his victory Amaziah had been courteous and submissive to the messenger of Jehovah; now he defied Him and treated His prophet roughly. The latter disappeared, but not before he had declared the Divine condemnation of the stubborn king. The rest of the history of Amaziah-his presumptuous war with Joash, king of Israel, his defeat and degradation, and his assassination-is taken verbatim from the book of Kings, with a few modifications and editorial notes by the chronicler to harmonies these sections with the rest of his narrative. For instance, in the book of Kings the account of the war with Joash begins somewhat abruptly: Amaziah sends his defiance before any reason has been given for his action. The chronicler inserts a phrase which connects his new paragraph very suggestively with the one that goes before. The former concluded with the king’s taunt that the prophet was not of his counsel, to which the prophet replied that the king should be destroyed because he had not hearkened to the Divine counsel proffered to him. Then Amaziah "took advice"; i.e. , he consulted those who were of his counsel, and the sequel showed their incompetence. The chronicler also explains that Amaziah’s rash persistence in his challenge to Joash "was of God, that He might deliver them into the hand of their enemies, because they had sought after the gods of Edom."’ He also tells us that the name of the custodian of the sacred vessels of the Temple was Obed-edom. As the chronicler mentions five Levites of the name of Obed-edom, four of whom occur nowhere else, the name was probably common in some family still surviving in his own time. But, in view of the fondness of the Jews for significant etymology, it is probable that the name is recorded here because it was exceedingly appropriate. "The servant of Edom" suits the official who has to surrender his sacred charge to a conqueror because his own king has worshipped the gods of Edom. Lastly, an additional note explains that Amaziah’s apostasy had promptly deprived him of the confidence and loyalty of his subjects; the conspiracy which led to his assassination was formed from the time that he turned away from following Jehovah, so that when he sent his proud challenge to Joash his authority was already undermined, and there were traitors in the army which he led against Israel. We are shown one of the means used by Jehovah to bring about his defeat. The Expositor's Bible Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com . Used by Permission.

And Joash did that which was right in the sight of the Lord an the days of Jehoiada the priest. 2 Chronicles 24:2 Goodness as a morning cloud There are certain characters that are great curiosities. There are also other characters that are great monstrosities. The ease of Joash is s very extraordinary one. From his history learn — I. THAT IT IS A GREAT BLESSING WHEN PEOPLE YIELD TO GODLY INFLUENCES. 1. The first six years of Joash's life were spent in the temple. 2. He was started in life's business in a very admirable way. 3. He was outwardly obedient to the law of the Lord in the days of Jehoiada. 4. He was zealous for the externals of religion. 5. He influenced others for good. II. GOOD AS ALL THIS IS, IT IS NOT ALL THAT IS NEEDED. 1. This is not yielding the heart to God. 2. All this yielding to godly influences may exist without any personal, vital godliness whatever. 3. An externally pious character may even prevent men from being saved at all. It may lead a man to take for granted that he is saved. 4. To be under godly influences year after year, without any great trial or temptation, may leave the personal character altogether undeveloped.We must have some kind of test, or else we cannot be sure of the character. You cannot be sure about principle being in any young man if he has been kept under a glass case, and if his principles have never been tried. The real character of Joash had never come out at all, because Jehoiada, as it were, covered him. His own disposition was only waiting the opportunity of developing itself. I have heard of an officer in India who had brought up a young leopard. It was apparently as tame as a cat. One afternoon, while asleep in his chair, the leopard licked his hand in all tenderness as a cat might have done; but after licking awhile it licked too hard and a little blood began to flow. It no sooner tasted blood than the old leopard spirit was up, and his master was his master no more. So does it happen to many that being shut in, and tamed, as it were, but not changed, subdued but not renewed, kept in check but not converted, there has come a time afterwards when the taste of blood has called out the old nature, and away the man has gone. III. THIS YIELDING CHARACTER MAY EVEN PROVE A SOURCE OF MISCHIEF. The princes of Judah came and "made obeisance to the king." What followed? 1. Joash went off to sin. 2. He refused reproof. 3. He slew his friend's son. 4. Having no faith in God, he robbed the temple, and gave all the gold and treasures unto Hazael the Syrian. ( C. H. Spurgeon . ) The goodness of King Joash James Randall, M.A. 1. The history of Joash enforces the duty of training ourselves, and those who are under our guidance, to stand alone, and not to rest upon the support of others. 2. Not that we should make small account of the counsel of wise and religious friends. The perfect use of a wise adviser is not to determine for us what we shall do in every particular case that day by day arises; but to help us to store our minds with sound principles, such as we may call up for our own direction when any emergency requires them. 3. There is a great difference in the natural constitution of men's minds. Some are like the creeping plant that grows up rapidly, but must always hang for support upon some external prop. Others are like the oak, slowly developing itself from among the meaner underwood, until it rears its head alone above the trees of the forest. When the trellis or pole decays, the creeper must fall to the ground; the oak abides seemingly unmovable in its own strength. All the culture that man could bestow would never give to the creeper the sturdiness of the oak. 4. But though man cannot change nature God can. He can impart strength to the weakest character. Therefore the way to be firm in what is good, is to take God for your guide and support, and not man ( Galatians 6:4, 5 ; Philippians 2:12, 13 ). 5. There is no contradiction between the duty of seeking and in due measure following the counsel of our good instructors and the duty of standing fast for ourselves in the counsel of God. Just as the office of the moon is to transmit the reflected light of the sun to the dark side of the earth; but if the moon comes between the earth and the sun, it does but darken the earth, by intercepting from it the rays that beam from that great light which is the source of light and heat to both; so the parent, the teacher, or the priest, is to stand for God towards the child, the pupil, or the private Christian, so far as their imperfect knowledge or their spiritual needs require; but not so as to eclipse God, or to make them forget that to God and not to man they are answerable in the last resort for their deeds. ( James Randall, M.A. ) Joash C. J. Phipps Eyre, M.A. Men may constrain us to a temporary amendment, but God alone can control us to a lasting change of character and heart. Circumstances can make any one of you religious for a time, and give you feelings and habits which will make you appear religious to others, and what is worse still, lead you to suppose that the outward appearance is the effect of inward principle. But nothing but the grace of God, and the love of His name and His truth, can produce that piety of heart which withstands temptation, and lives when all earthly agencies are gone which nursed it, because it lives in Him who was pleased to make those earthly agencies the means of grace to the soul. We have in this verse two characters for contemplation. I. JEHOIADA, AS AN EXAMPLE OF INFLUENCE EXERTED FOR GOOD. 1. He had three elements of success with which to work. (1) Power, arising from his priestly office and his marriage relationship. (2) Piety, which gave him the principles on which to discharge his mission. (3) Courage, arising from his faith in God. 2. Note here the relative influence of personal piety. "Joash did that which is right." The nation prospered in every sense through the faithfulness of one man. Clear and consistent personal piety is always a persuasive thing. No treatises upon religion can rival for persuasive power the "living epistles known and read of all men." Our calling as Christians is to win others, as Jehoiada did, to do that which is right in the sight of the Lord. We have received light that our faces may shine before men. The design of God in our salvation is not only our happiness but our usefulness. II. JOASH AS AN EXAMPLE FOR OUR WARNING. The religion which had its life and influence only from a man was soon forgotten when the source of that influence had passed away. There is a vital difference between the godliness which is the result of external circumstances and that which is the product of internal principle. It is the difference between the galvanised corpse and the living man; the star and the meteor; the flash of the lightning and the action of the sunbeam. There is a false godliness current among men. 1. With some piety is dependent upon policy. 2. With others it is a matter of periods. 3. With others it is a religion of place. 4. With others it is dependent upon the personal influence of some minister, or upon the advice and counsel of a friend. ( C. J. Phipps Eyre, M.A. ) Life and character of Joash J. Wolfendale. I. THE INSTABILITY OF HIS RELIGION. 1. He was zealous for God under restraint. 2. He degenerated when that restraint was taken away. II. THE HONOUR AND THE DISGRACE OF HIS REIGN. 1. Honourable reforms. 2. Disgraceful crimes. Like Nero after the death of his teacher Seneca, the philosopher, he was stained with crimes. III. THE DISASTROUS END OF HIS LIFE. Conclusion: Learn — 1. The responsibility of those to whom the care of young persons is entrusted. 2. Caution those yet under guardianship and tutors and friends. 3. The awful end of those who turn aside from hopeful beginnings. ( J. Wolfendale. ) The Jehoiadas of society J. Parker, D.D. It would seem to be about the last thing men do, to estimate properly the value of subtle and silent influences, the magic and wisardry of noble character. We may even be ashamed to do certain things in the presence of the Jehoiadas of society. We are not ashamed of the things themselves, nor are we unprepared to make experiments in regard to them; but whenever we would put forth our hand to begin the experiments we see the observing Jehoiada, and withdraw from the pernicious attempt. So it is that there are trustees of commercial and social honour, men who would never do the dishonourable deed, speak the calumnious word, or mislead the sentiment of the market-place in times of strong temptation and peril. We rely upon them as disinfectants, keeping the commercial atmosphere pure, and discouraging in the most positive and decisive manner the spirit and action of men who are low-minded and selfish. These Jehoiadas deliver no lectures upon commercial morality, nor do they in any manner that can be charged with conceit display their own virtues; they simply go on their straightforward course, doing justice, loving mercy, and walking humbly with God, and the result of their presence and character is that even the worst men are restrained, weak men are confirmed in good resolutions, and men whose character needs inspiration receive it from their example. ( J. Parker, D.D. ) That Joash was minded to repair the house of the Lord. 2 Chronicles 24:4-14 The temple repaired H. H. French. It is worthy of note that in the mere outline of a reign extending over twenty years, in very exciting times, space should have been taken to record so minutely the repairing of the temple. No less remarkable is it that the initiative in this great work was due to Joash and not to Jehoiada — the king, not the priest. There was need for some one to lift the standard for Jehovah and His worship. For since the accession of Jehoram, the wicked son of the good Jehoshaphat, there had been a steady decline toward idolatry. Spurred on by his wife, Athaliah, the worthy daughter of the monster Jezebel, Jehoram allowed "high places" to be built to the heathen deities. Dying after less than ten years of rule, of an agonising internal disease, the crown descended to his one surviving son, Ahaziah. After a reign of little more than a year, during which he was wholly under the power of his mother, Ahaziah was slain by Jehu while on a visit to Israel. Athaliah seized the throne and ruled for six years, fostering and encouraging heathenism to the utmost. To make her usurpation more secure, she had, at the beginning of her reign, as she supposed, compassed the death of all aspirants to the crown. But, through the cunning and daring of Jehoiada and his wife, one boy, Joash, a son of Ahaziah, was preserved. When the time was ripe the priest led a revolt against the queen, putting the young Joash, only eight years of age, upon the throne, and causing the death of Athaliah. A great opportunity opened up for the young prince. Jehoiada carefully instructed him during his childhood in the religion of Jehovah, that, when he came to the years of responsible reign, he might zealously foster the old faith. But, unfortunately, Joash was not strong enough for the task. As long as he was under the tuition of Jehoiada he did fairly well, though idolatry was suffered to extend itself; but after the death of the old priest the pressure from heathenism was too great for his weak nature to resist, and Joash followed the path of his immediate predecessors. True, the third verse of our lesson may not indicate anything more than a resemblance to heathen customs, inasmuch as they may have worshipped Jehovah in the "high places"; still, having adopted that mode of heathen worship, it became easier to introduce others, and thus the way was opened for that awful apostasy from God when incense was burned to strange gods "in every single city of Judah." Nevertheless, Joash should have full credit for the one luminous work of his whole reign — the repair of the temple. We shall find his plans of gathering and expending the money worthy of our careful study. I. THE PLANS OF COLLECTION. 1. The first one, undoubtedly the king's, shows him in a favourable light. He assumes no priestly prerogative or authority. He simply enjoins the priests to do their legitimate work — "go out into the cities of Judah and gather of all Israel money to repair the house of the Lord." The parallel account in 2 Kings 12:4 , gives the details of the plan. Three methods of collecting the money are there described. First, "The money of every one that passeth the account." Bahr considers these words an incorrect translation of the original, preferring "money which passes over" — that is, current money. It he is right, then no separate method is indicated. But the weight of authority is in favour of the old translation, and, following this, the half-shekel which was paid for every one that was numbered, from twenty years old and upward ( Exodus 30:13 , seq. ), seems to be meant. Second, "The money that every man is set at" — that is, the amount prescribed by the priests for those who made a "singular vow" according to the law in Leviticus 27:1-8 . The third was the free-will offering, and probably more dependence was placed on this than upon either or both of the other methods. Taken all in all, this plan was compulsive and judicious, and deserved to succeed. But it failed, and why? There appears to have been a combination of reasons. The words, "Howbeit the Levites hastened it not," furnish a hint that the appointed collectors, on whom the success of the plan largely depended, did not enter heartily into its prosecution. They were expected not only to take what the people brought in voluntarily, but actively to solicit "every man of his acquaintance" (parallel account in 2 Kings 12:5 ). Whether they did not relish moving, at the orders of the king, or were too lazy to "go out into the cities of Judah," we can only conjecture. We only know they did not hasten. No doubt, too, there was much inertia on the part of the people themselves. The general indifference to the old system of worship and the inevitable corruption which followed dabbling with heathen practices both contributed to a lethargy which could only be broken up by some extra-ordinary method. But the great reason lies deeper, much deeper. Soften the account as we will, there was wide-spread dissatisfaction with the course pursued by the priests. Whether they had good grounds for suspicion or not, the people believed the collectors had misappropriated the funds. And it is hard to clear them of this charge. Doubtless some money came in from loyal souls who longed to see God's temple shining with the olden glory. Indeed, we know that some did, because when the king called on the priests for a report he ordered them to "take no more money." Some, then, had been gathered. But what became of it? The priests never made any return thereof. True, it condones the fault somewhat to plead that the regular sacerdotal revenue had largely fallen off during the prevalence of idolatry, and that the priests found themselves hard pushed for funds for their subsistence and the temple-worship, and thus were forced to use what came into their hands for immediate needs. But to divert money given for a specific purpose to other channels, however proper, is practical embezzlement. And it is easy to see how this course would breed dissatisfaction and revolt among the people. Their joyful acceptance of the second plan, and the hearty liberality exhibited, show conclusively that we have not argued unjustly. And the taking of the whole matter out of the hands of the priests by the king confirms our position. It would appear that Joash gave ample time for the successful working of this first plan. Not until the twenty-third year of his reign did he call the priests to account. This does not mean, of course, that the collectors had been at work twenty three years, for we are not told in what year they received their commission. It certainly could not have been in the first years of Joash's reign, because he began to rule at the age of eight. 2. But having abandoned the first plan, the king quickly unfolded his second one. This was as simple u it was effective. A box or chest, securely locked, with a hole cut in the lid to admit pieces of money, was first prepared. It was placed at the entrance-gate to the priest's court on the right. Royal proclamation was then made of the new plan throughout the land, and the people exhorted to bring in their contributions in accordance with the law found in Exodus 30:12-16 , and see their money deposited in the chest. The part of the priests was the mere perfunctory duty of receiving the money and putting it into the receptacle in the presence of the donors. And now money fairly flowed in. Nor was it given grudgingly. "All the princes and all the people rejoiced." When the chest was full the priest sent his scribe and the king his secretary, and the two emptied it, weighed the money, bound it up in bags ( 2 Kings 5:23 ), and carried it back to its place. The process was repeated until an abundance was gathered for the purpose. The plan was a great success. And why? Doubtless the novelty of the plan accounts partly for it. The curiosity to look upon the first money-chest of this description would bring in many contributions that otherwise would not have been given. But, chiefly, every person saw his gift deposited in the receptacle which was inaccessible to any but the regularly appointed officers, and thus he could be reasonably sure that his money would be laid out for the purpose he intended. Herein lies the chief cause of the plan's success — every piece of money was strictly accounted for, and there was no possible chance for a misuse of the funds. II. THE EXPENDITURE WAS AS NOTEWORTHY AS THE GATHERING. The same clear-headed, far-seeing intelligence was behind it. Putting the two accounts together, it is plain that overseers were appointed who had general charge of the repairs. The words, "such as did the work of the service of the house of the Lord," in the twelfth verse, indicate that the overseers were Levites. They had authority to employ artisans of different kinds — masons and carpenters and workers in brass and iron — and also to purchase the needed materials. Into their hands went the immense sums which had been collected, and to them the workmen looked for their wages. And what seems strange — almost incomprehensible — in view of the careful scrutiny exercised over the collections, their overseers were not required to give account of their stewardship ( 2 Kings 12:15 ). That they were honest and "dealt faithfully" is apparent from the fact that, after finishing their task and paying all the bills, they brought back a remainder to the king and Jehoiada. With this unexpended balance they were enabled to furnish the temple anew with the vessels necessary for the ritual service ( 1 Kings 7:49, 50 ). The old ones had been devoted to Baalim (ver. 7). An apparent discrepancy exists at this point between our account and that in 2 Kings 12:13 , where the writer declares that vessels were not made of the "money that was brought into the house of the Lord." Rawlinson seems to explain the matter satisfactorily by showing that "all that the writer of Kings desires to impress on his readers is, that the repairs were not delayed by any deductions from the money that flowed in through the chest on account of vessels or ornaments of the house. What became of the surplus in the chest after the last repairs were completed he does not care to tell us. But it is exactly this, the application of which is mentioned by the writer of Chronicles." We may venture to add our opinion that the writer of Kings, in enumerating the special points of the overseers' responsibility, mentions, casually, that they were not responsible for the furnishing of the temple with the appropriate vessels. Their special business was to look after the repairs. So, after many years of dilapidation, the people saw their glorious sanctuary shine in all its former glory. The smoke of sacrifice again rose heavenward, calling the backsliding children of Israel to the faith of their fathers. III. PRACTICAL WORDS. 1. One of the great problems which ever confront the Church is the financial one. Doors open on every hand, and consecrated workers wait to go through them, but the treasuries are empty. Settle this matter of finance, and the spiritual interests will progress correspondingly. 2. The contribution box is not a "Vandal in the house of God." It is the legitimate successor of Jehoiada's chest, and its regular use should be considered a part of worship. 3. The people who give the money have a right to know where it goes. And if it be diverted from its proper use, those who administer should not complain if there follow a falling off in contributions. Men will have honest dealing in Church finances. ( H. H. French. ) The temple repaired W. Landrum, D. D. The work of Joash was to repair the temple and restore the sacrificial worship. The bright side of Joash's rule divides itself into the man and his mission — his motive and his method. I. JOASH HAD TO CONQUER, SPIRITUALLY, HIS OWN HEART AS WELL AS THE HEART OF HIS PEOPLE. To know Joash you must understand — 1. His lineage. Heredity did little for, but much against, the formation in him of a pure character. Athaliah and Jezebel were his grandmother and great.grandmother. 2. His environment. This was Jehoiada. (1) He was a father to Joash. (2) He was the impersonation of piety. (3) His patriotism so blended with his piety that though separable in thought, they were scarcely distinguishable in action. (4) Jehoiada's philanthropy is seen in his self-restraint in the hour of triumph. Only two perished — Athaliah the usurper and the idolatrous priest. II. THE MISSION OF JOASH WAS TO EFFECT AMONG HIS PEOPLE A GENUINE REFORMATION. The reconstruction of the temple he viewed as the road to religious revival and reformation. Destruction and reconstruction are alternating or synchronous processes ever manifesting themselves in the efforts of God's people. Joash is the resultant and embodiment of both these forces. Destruction is easy, and to wicked men only too natural (ver..7). Construction, and still more reconstruction, is as difficult as destruction is easy. III. JOASH WAS UNSELFISH IN HIS MOTIVE. 1. The times called loudly for reform. 2. Joash aimed at a revival of religion. (1) Revivals take their rise in the individual heart. (2) Revivals of religion, if genuine, are contagious. (3) Revivals naturally induce co-operation. IV. THE METHOD OF JOASH FOR INCREASING MEN'S INTEREST IN RELIGION WAS THE RESTORATION OF THE LORD'S HOUSE. A dilapidated temple of God is painfully significant. The great collection under Joash for the temple is a model for Christian beneficence. Dimly shadowed in the people's offering under Joash, but distinctly taught in the letters of Paul, are eight rules of Christian giving. We should give — 1. By principle and habit. 2. In the spirit of stewardship. 3. According to ability. 4. Willingly and cheerfully. 5. Secretly as a general thing, as unto the Lord, and not unto men. 6. As an act of worship. 7. In faith, venturing on God, as did the widow with her two mites. 8. Intelligently, as to the object.Application: Mankind is "the house of the Lord" in ruins. We are under solemn obligation to reconstruct this broken and shattered temple. ( W. Landrum, D. D. ) Joash repairing the temple Monday Club Sermons. I. THAT THE PROVIDENCES OF GOD CONNECTED WITH THE HOUSE OF THE LORD CALL FOR GRATEFUL REMEMBRANCE. II. THE MORAL VALUE OF THE HOUSE OF GOD TO THE COMMUNITY AND THE COUNTRY IN WHICH IT STANDS DEMANDS HONOURED RECOGNITION. III. THE SPIRITUAL VALUE OF SACRED PLACES SHOULD BE FITLY ACKNOWLEDGED. I lately heard an eminent business man say, "Forty-six years ago yesterday noon the Holy Spirit came into my soul. Yesterday I walked to the place and adored the ground where He blessed me, and remembered that for forty-six years He had talked with me and kept me." IV. THE HOUSE OF GOD CAN BE PROPERLY CARED FOR ONLY BY REGULAR, SYSTEMATIC EFFORT. V. GOD HAS, TO A GREAT DEGREE, INTRUSTED THE BEAUTIFYING OF HIS HOUSE TO THE YOUNG. ( Monday Club Sermons. ) Repairing the temple F. W. P. Greenwood, D.D. 1. To each one among us there is a temple which should be far holier in his eyes than was even the temple at Jerusalem in the eyes of the children of Israel. 2. This holiest of temples, a man's own self, is exposed to injury and decay. 3. As year passes after year, let us be reminded to repair each one of us to that house of God which is built within him, and which has been dedicated to the worship of God by the Holy Spirit which dwells in it. 4. In repairing the spiritual temple, one of our main purposes should be to ascertain what in it needs to be stripped away and what demands preservation. 5. The things to be discarded are — (1) Old enmities; how they interfere with the pure worship and mar the quiet beauty of the house! (2) Old weaknesses and vanities. (3) Old habits of self-indulgence and self-degradation. (4) Old sins, presumptuous sins, secret sins. 6. The things which must be retained are — (1) Old friendships. (2) Old habits of order and punctualness, of truth, of kindness and prayer. (3) Old virtues. ( F. W. P. Greenwood, D.D. ) Howbeit the Levites hastened not Indifferences rebuked A. Maclaren, D.D. There is a distinct tinge of suspicion and "whipping up" in his injunction to "hasten the matter." Half-heartedness always means languid work, and that always means failure. The earnest people are fretted continually by the indifferent. Every good scheme is held back, like a ship with a foul bottom, by the barnacles that stick to its keel and bring down its speed. Eager zeal has in all ages to be yoked to torpid indifference, and to drag its unwilling companion along like two dogs in a leash. ( A. Maclaren, D.D. ) And cast into the chest until they had made an end. 2 Chronicles 24:10 Compulsory and free-will offerings Canon Tristram. The restoration of Solomon's temple by Jehoiada under Joash's authority is a remarkable instance of cheerful giving, of a truly voluntary offering. The money was not raised by a royal edict imposing a subsidy, nor were the workmen impressed for service for so many months in the year. By taxation and by forced labour, or levies, had Solomon's temple been erected. Such indeed was, and is, the almost invariable custom of Eastern monarchs in the construction of all great works, whether religious or secular. Though the prince might be lauded as a patron of religion or of art, a rankling sense of oppression and injustice remained in the breasts of the toilers. This Rehoboam had found to his cost, when his people demanded relief from the burdens which the glories of Solomon had entailed on them. We may illustrate this by an interesting inscription at Abilene. A splendid aqueduct and military road have been engineered along the face of the lofty cliff which bounds the deep valley. At the commencement of the aqueduct is the long inscription in honour of the Emperor Trajan, for whom the gratitude of posterity is claimed because of this great achievement. But below the inscription is chiseled deep on the face of the rock, in letters of a rather different shape, added, no doubt, after the emperor's departure, " Impensis Abilenorum — At the expense of the people of Abilene." ( Canon Tristram. ) Jehoiada waxed old. 2 Chronicles 24:15, 16 A message for the aged Fairfax Goodall, M.A. I. EXAMINE THE NAME OF THIS AGED PRIEST. "Jehoiada" — "one who has knowledge of Jehovah." 1. He had been experimentally acquainted with Jehovah in His fatherly and merciful character. 2. He had as priest special opportunities of gaining acquaintance with God. II. CONSIDER HIS BENEFICENT INFLUENCE in — 1. Instructing the youthful king. 2. Acting as regent of the kingdom. 3. Patriotically serving his country and promoting the well-being of her people. 4. Doing good to, and in connection with, the house of God. III. CONTEMPLATE THE HONOURED CLOSE OF A LONG AND USEFUL LIFE. ( Fairfax Goodall, M.A. ) Religious instructors useful to civil society N. Emmons, D.D. Some have conjectured that these words were a part of an epitaph put upon Jehoiada's tomb. They express the high sense which the nation entertained of his eminent usefulness in his sacred profession. I. THE COMMON OPINION OF MANKIND RESPECTING THE USEFULNESS OF RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTORS IN CIVIL SOCIETY. The opinion of the world upon this subject is evidenced by their uniform and immemorial practice. Jews, Christians, and heathen have universally agreed to support religious teachers. II. THIS COMMON OPINION OF MANKIND RESPECTING RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTORS IS WELL FOUNDED. 1. The common opinion of the world is generally just. Men seldom form a wrong judgment of those things which come under their own observation and experience. 2. Another argument is drawn —(1) From the duties which the ministers of religion ought to teach. (a) The duties which rulers owe to their subjects. (b) The duties which subjects owe to their rulers. (c) Every private as well as public duty.(2) From the motives by which they ought to enforce all their religious instructions. (a) The being and presence of the all-seeing and heart-searching God. (b) The infinite authority of all His precepts and prohibitions. (c) The controlling influence of His universal providence. (d) Future and eternal rewards and punishments. III. SUGGESTIONS. 1. Since men in all ages have generally and justly agreed in the opinion that religious instructors are useful in civil society, it discovers no less ignorance than presumption in those who adopt and endeavour to propagate the opposite sentiment. (1) It betrays want of knowledge in the science of politics. (2) It betrays ignorance of the impotency of human laws. 2. None are fit for civil rulers who would exclude religious instructors from civil society. 3. A people ought to consider the gift of wise and faithful ministers as a great public blessing. 4. It is the wisdom and duty of civil rulers to favour the cause of religion and employ every proper method to promote the general diffusion of religious knowledge. 5. It argues a great degree of infatuation in those who govern to oppose or restrain religious instruction. 6. It is extremely difficult for civil rulers to subvert a good government while religious teachers faithfully discharge their duty. 7. Ministers of the gospel ought to exert all the power and influence which their sacred office gives them to prevent the ruin of the nation. 8. We have great reason to fear the displeasure of God for neglecting and abusing the ministrations of His Word. ( N. Emmons, D.D. ) Yet He sent prophets to them, to bring them again unto the Lord. 2 Chronicles 24:19-21 Judah's apostasy J. C. Geikie, D.D. I. PROPHETIC DENUNCIATION OF APOSTASY RESENTED. II. ZECHARIAH'S DEATH WAS PARALLEL WITH THAT OF ST. STEPHEN. 1. His offence was the denunciation of the sin of the leaders of Judah ( Acts 7:51-53 ). 2. Stoned as a blasphemer. III. CONTRAST IN THE SPIRIT OF JUDAISM AND CHRISTIANITY — 1. Zechariah's last words: "The Lord look on it and requite it." 2. Stephen's: "Lord lay not this sin to their charge." IV. REFLECTIONS. 1. The value of a wise and true friend. Jehoiada's influence on Joash. 2. The necessity of a moral reformation as well as a political to secure permanent results in religious changes. The reformation under Joash was merely outward conformity. V. THE CERTAINTY THAT A FAITHFUL MINISTRY IMPLIES THE UNPOPULARITY OF THOSE WHO EXERCISE IT. 1. All the prophets suffered under Judaism ( Matthew 23:35 ; Luke 11:51 ). 2. Christ, Stephen, the apostles, the early Christians. Reformers all through history. 3. Human nature always the same. It hates those who attack its sins. VI. THE SPIRIT THAT RESENTS FAITHFUL REPROOF ALWAYS ENTAILS RETRIBUTION ON ITSELF (ver. 23). To do wrong and refuse instruction is the greatest misfortune a man can suffer. VII. THE NECESSITY TO DO RIGHT FOR DUTY'S SAKE, WITHOUT EXPECTING GRATITUDE OR ACKNOWLEDGMENT. ( J. C. Geikie, D.D. ) The goodness of King Joash Henry Drury, M.A. 1. In ten years from the death of Jehoiada, Joash was so utterly another man that you cannot recognise in him one feature of that godly disposition which distinguished his earlier years. He is a sad illustration of the deceitfulness of the human heart; of the weakness of the natural man; and of the perishing nature of that impulsive goodness which rests solely for its permanence upon the constraining influences of others. 2. Joash still re

24:1-14 Joash is more zealous about the repair of the temple than Jehoiada himself. It is easier to build temples, than to be temples to God. But the repairing of places for public worship is a good work, which all should promote. And many a good work would be done that now lies undone, if active men would put it forward. 24:15-27 See what a great judgment on any prince or people, the death of godly, zealous, useful men is. See how necessary it is that we act in religion from inward principle. Then the loss of a parent, a minister, or a friend, will not be losing our religion. Often both princes and inferior people have been flattered to their ruin. True grace alone will enable a man to bring forth fruit unto the end. Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada, being filled with the Spirit of prophecy, stood up, and told the people of their sin. This is the work of ministers, by the word of God, as a lamp and a light, to discover the sin of men, and expound the providences of God. They stoned Zechariah to death in the court of the house of the Lord. Observe the dying martyr's words: The Lord look upon it, and require it! This came not from a spirit of revenge, but a spirit of prophecy. God smote Joash with great diseases, of body, or mind, or both, before the Syrians departed from him. If vengeance pursue men, the end of one trouble will be but the beginning of another. His own servants slew him. These judgments are called the burdens laid upon him, for the wrath of God is a heavy burden, too heavy for any man to bear. May God help us to take warning, to be upright in heart, and to persevere in his ways to the end.