الكتاب المقدس

Expositor's Bible Commentary 2 Chronicles 25:1 Amaziah was twenty and five years old when he began to reign, and he reigned twenty and nine years in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Jehoaddan of Jerusalem. 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 he did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, but not with a perfect heart . 2 Chronicles 25:2 Half-hearted, and therefore a failure J. T. Davidson, D.D. It was not because Amaziah was not sinless that his life proved such a failure, but because he was not thorough going in his principle and piety. English life at present seems to be afflicted with a plague of levity. There is so much hollowness and unreality, so much veneer in character and work, that it behoves us to preach aloud the gospel of thoroughness. A short time ago some workmen were engaged in trying to remove a piece of old London wall. They tried with hammers, then with pick-axes, but to no purpose, the wall seemed to smile at all their efforts; at last they were obliged to have recourse to boring, and blowing it up like a piece of solid rock. That is hardly the way they build nowadays, for a man might almost push over some of our brick walls with his hand. Now, this is just an illustration of what I mean, the want of thoroughness in every branch of industry and in every walk of life. When a man's own character is not solid, permeated through and through with Christian principle, you cannot have any guarantee of the genuineness of his work. Shams abound everywhere. Gilt and paint carry the day. Ours is an age of tinsel. And the worst of it is that this unrealness characterises much of the religion amongst us. I sometimes meet with a horrible form of Antinomianism, which virtually says, "Anything will do for me — I am a disciple of Christ"; and so the work is actually more slovenly and imperfect because the individual claims to be "not under the law, but under grace." Why, it is almost as monstrous as the proposal a good young man made to his landlady, that his own excellent Christian example should serve in lieu of weekly payment for his lodgings! A men — I don't care who he is — dishonours Christ when any other person is put to disadvantage by his piety. If you imagine you are more free to do slipshod work because you are a Christian, I say, it is precisely the reverse. It is just because you claim to be the Lord's that any sort of work will not do. Bearing His name, you are responsible to Him for every detail of your daily life. If your secular duties are more imperfectly discharged because you are a believer, you do great wrong to the Redeemer. If you snatch a little of your employer's time to scatter tracts, or prepare for a Sabbath class, or even to read your Bible; or if, in business hours, your thoughts are so given to spiritual themes that you cannot do justice to your work, in any of these cases you do real harm to religion. ( J. T. Davidson, D.D. ) The character of Amaziah T. W. Thompson, B.A. This history is adduced to lead to self-scrutiny. I. THE ACT OF ASSEMBLING is in accordance with God's revealed wishes; and therefore the act of assembling is a right act. But am I able to believe that every men and woman joins the assembly from such motives as would stand the test of Heaven? Not with a perfect heart. II. Again, in THE MATTER OF LISTENING TO GOD'S WORD PREACHED. Some listen from the desire of passing away a dull hour — as a sort of religious entertainment. Alas for the perfect heart! III. As to your CONDUCT OUTSIDE THE WALLS OF THE SANCTUARY. You are upright and honourable in trade. But why? It is a sad thing when a man's actions are right because he wishes to be aggrandised, or because he wishes a high place in human estimation, and knows not the only right motive — a desire to please Him "who hath loved us, and given Himself for us." ( T. W. Thompson, B.A. ) Not with a perfect heart Mark Guy Pearse. Off Cape Horn we witnessed a singular sight. For some miles there was a narrow strip of water, where the great waves flew in broken spray and dashed high over the ship. On either side the sea was comparatively calm, whilst this boiled with fury, rolling and surging. Yet there was no rock about which the sea surged, nor was there any such fierce wind as to account for it. Overhead the air was thick with sea-fowl. Thousands of the birds dived into this troubled water. The smaller fish were, I suppose, flung up by the toss, and thus fell a prey to the birds. I asked, naturally, what was the reason of this strange sight, and found it was the point at which the tide met the strong current of the sea, and here they raged together. Within, the tide only ran, and it was calm. Without, the current prevailed, and there, too, was calm. On this troubled bit they met, and neither prevailed. It is the picture of those who are at once too religious to belong to the world — too worldly to belong to religion; torn by both and satisfied by neither. ( Mark Guy Pearse. ) Whole-hearted religion required A. Plummet, D.D. At one of the conferences between the Northern and Southern States of America during the war of 1861-1866 the representatives of the Southern States stated what cession of territory they were prepared to make, provided that the independence of the portion that was not ceded to the Federal Government was secured. More and more attractive criers were made, the portions to be ceded being increased, and those to be retained in a state of independence being proportionately diminished. All the offers were met by a steadfast refusal. At last President Lincoln placed his hand on the map so as to cover all the Southern States, and in these emphatic words delivered his ultimatum: "Gentlemen, this Government must have the whole." God cannot share us with the world. ( A. Plummet, D.D. ) And Amarish said to the man of God, But what shall we do for the hundred talents which I have given to the army of Israel? 2 Chronicles 25:9 Self-made difficulties Charles Garrett. I. THE PATH OF DUTY WAS CLEARLY BEFORE AMAZIAH. "Send the army of Israel away." II. HE HESITATED TO TREAD IT BECAUSE THERE WAS A SELF-MADE DIFFICULTY IN THE WAY. So with many to-day. 1. Worldly pleasure. 2. Worldly interests. (1) A bad business, one you cannot ask God to bless. (2) A legitimate business that is not conducted on Christian principles. 3. Worldly companions. 4. Bad habits. III. GOD RECOGNISES THE DIFFICULTY. "The Lord is able to give thee much more than this." When our first missionaries went to India, Dr. Cope died on the voyage. Some letters of introduction to English gentlemen in India had been written. When his friends arrived they went on shore and told how Dr. Cope had died and been buried in the deep sea. As they knew nothing of the language of India they asked advice, and the advice given was, "Take the first vessel that sails for England and go home again." One of the young men of the party said, "That is out of the question. I came here to preach the gospel, and, God helping me, I mean to do it." They said, "If you bring God into the matter, that alters it altogether." Bring God into your pleasure and into your business, and that will alter them altogether. ( Charles Garrett. ) God able to remunerate fidelity Charles Garrett. I know a widow whose husband died and left her with a little family to struggle for. She opened a little shop in the suburbs of the city, when one of the agents of a wine-merchant waited upon her to ask her to be an agent for the sale of strong drink. She said, "Never a drop shall enter my house." He said "It will help you so much." She said, "If it helps me some, it will harm me more. I have children around me, and whether I prosper or not, I will not gain anything to the injury of my fellow-creatures." She has done wonderfully. An intimate friend of mine went to see her, and said, "I cannot understand how you get on, and why so many come to your shop, for they pass a number of good shops to come to yours." She said to her boy, "George, you are fond of ciphering; get down your slate and put down how far off a man must live from my shop that God cannot bring him there." That settled it. "God is able to give more than this." ( Charles Garrett. ) Rigid integrity may stand in the way Charles Garrett. There can be no doubt that a certain flexibility and elasticity of soul and conscience may make a man get on, as concerns this world, when rigid integrity would stand in his way. Nothing would be easier than to mention striking instances in which men threw away their chance of the highest places by an act of injudicious honesty. A trader who never puffs his wares as better than they really are may not drive such a business as the brazen individual who never spares the trumpet. A preacher who sets forth sound doctrine to people who have not been accustomed to it, and who do not want it, may make himself for a time obnoxious enough. But let us speak the truth and live the truth, no matter what we may lose by it. ( Charles Garrett. ) What shall we do for the hundred talents? F. Storr, M.A. I. THE COMMAND GIVEN. "Let not the army of Israel go with thee." 1. It shows us God's disapproval of union with the enemies of the truth. The children of Ephraim had departed from the Lord, His favour was withdrawn from them: Judah, if he hope for success, must send such helpers away. Yes, truly "the friendship of the world is enmity with God." To join affinity with such, as Amaziah did, is to run into temptation and a snare. 2. But the command of God thus given leads us to notice, further, that His disappointment of our hopes is in mercy, not in wrath. Perhaps to the mind of Amaziah this only was wanting to ensure victory: his army was strong, and could he but procure this aid from Israel all would be secure; and yet no sooner are they come than the command is given. It is often thus in God's dealings with our souls. "Not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts." "Could I but be placed in such circumstances," saith one, "Were but this diffficulty removed." is the thought of another, "then should I grow in grace, and prosper in my soul." But it cannot be, and you are discouraged. And yet it is in mercy, not in wrath, that your wishes are crossed. 3. Observe that the command calls for immediate compliance. Not after aid received in the battle, but now in the face of danger, at the risk of injury from those sent away, injury, too, that was not feared without cause (ver. 13). God's command will not bear delay. II. THE DIFFICULTY STARTED. "And Amaziah said to the man of God, But what shall we do for the hundred talents that I have given to the army of Israel?" With some awe upon his mind, a conviction of the necessity of obedience, Amaziah liked not the cost. This is the difficulty proposed, "What shall we do for he hundred talents?" There was the divided mind On the one side was his fear of the displeasure of the Lord, without whose help he well knew he could not prosper; on the other side the hundred talents weighed down his purpose — he could not brook the loss of so large a sum. Ah! who would not obey God if he might do it without cost? Who would not be the servant of Christ, if he might be so without pains? Sin must be parted with. "What shall we do for the hundred talents?" We go to the man that has long yielded to his evil habits. We tell him of the door of mercy yet open. The sigh breaks forth as we speak. He owns it "too true." He is "almost persuaded to be a Christian." But, no, "What shall we do for the hundred talents?" III. THE UNANSWERABLE REPLY. "And the man of God answered, The Lord is able to give thee much more than this." 1. Observe — There is no promise of the restoration of the sum. The command of God was the solid ground on which the prophet claimed obedience of the king. And it is even here we too rest our appeal. "Thus saith the Lord." In urging on you to "yield yourselves unto God," we cannot — we may not — tell you that no difficulties are in the way. We have indeed that overwhelming motive to present, the safety of the soul. 2. Amaziah is referred to the almighty power of Him whose command he is called on to obey. "God is able to give thee much more than this." As though the prophet had said, "Thou art ready to sorrow for the hundred talents uselessly bestowed if now to be forfeited, but whose is the silver and the gold? Grudge not, then, this sum at His word, who bids thee yield it for thine own welfare." For is it dignity, the estimation of others, that you fear to give up? are these "the hundred talents" you are unwilling to part with? What dignity of earth can be compared to that high-sounding and real — not empty — title, "heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ"? — "Ye shall be My sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." Is it riches, or pleasures, the vanity of life, that seem not vain to you? God is able to give, yea, will give you much more than this. He will give you pardon, that blessed gift — pardon for all thy sins, thy multiplied, aggravated, fearful transgressions — "And in the world to come eternal life." ( F. Storr, M.A. ) Soul or silver Lansing Burrows. Amaziah seemed to be a soldier, and little else. He was devoured by military ambition and vainglory. He coveted the domains of his neighbors. He was greedy of conquest. He dared not attack Israel, but on the other side lay the lands of the Edomites. He wanted to fight. There was probably no reason why he should, for the children of Seir had evidently done nothing to provoke an attack, or we should have had an account of it. But Amaziah must have more territory, and impelled by such noble patriotism, he disciplined his people into a large army. Desiring to be on the safe side, he bargained for one hundred thousand men of Israel, and, in order to secure them, he laid down a bounty of one hundred talents of silver. With these men of Ephraim, hired with the silver talents, he possessed an army of about four hundred thousand men. All things are in readiness, and he is about to start out on his grand mission of punishing a people who held lands near him, when a prophet confronts with the intelligence that if he takes the troops of Israel with him he shall be defeated. Now comes a struggle in the king's mind. He was bent upon war, and could not brook the idea of defeat, but to insure victory he must send the Ephraimites home. Now, he had given these men a hundred talents of silver! What about them? The command of God had touched his pocket-nerve, and it had sent a sensitive thrill through his whole being. Amaziah is not the only man that has been compelled to choose between obedience and self-denial. I. Consider, then, the fact that MEN'S APPARENT INTERESTS ARE SOMETIMES OPPOSED BY THE COMMANDS OF GOD. Very frequently men's practices find such opposition; and their desires are fulfilled very often against the clamourings of their consciences. But I have affirmed something beyond this — that a man's wholesome interests, as they appear to his view, are sometimes in direct opposition to God's commands. I do not think that a man will be allowed to enter upon a course inimical to God's will who starts out by committing his way entirely to Divine guidance. God looks out for such a man, and orders his ways so that his interests and the Divine will conform. But a great many start out in the pursuit of business without any consideration of God. With the majority of men, when the time comes to meet the question, "What shall I do?" the answer is prompted more by expediency than by duty. One man argues, "I can make more money in dry goods than in groceries, so I'll deal in dry goods. But there's more money in whisky, so I think I'll open a saloon." He looks at trade from his own standpoint. I believe that some men really think that they are justified in such a course; they think that a man ought to look after his own interests; that that is the first thing to be consulted; and there never was a greater mistake made in this selfish world! The truth is, that when a man deliberately marks out a course in life, and determines to pursue it, without any consideration of God or his fellow-men, he is engaged in a very dangerous business. There are some other things to consider besides making money. Soul-culture, helpfulness of his fellows, influence for Christ, the increasing light of a pious life; these things are to be taken into the account, or he may look for some period of his life when the alternative will be between obedience and self-denial, or disobedience and defeat. II. WHERE THIS IS THE CASE APPARENT INTERESTS ARE TO BE SACRIFICED. God looks upon temporal matters as if they were subordinate to a higher good. Men look upon them as if they were the highest good attainable. God puts His service and the duties of religion above everything else. Men regard religion as a secondary consideration. Do you never hear men say, "I would engage in religious matters if I had time"? You mark a man's absence from the holy Sabbath worship; he complains, "I feel so tired when Sunday comes, I must rest." So you see men think more of their hundred talents of silver than of obedience to God. But they have Amaziah's protest: "What shall we do for the hundred talents of silver?" The answer is plain enough. Let them go. "What!" cries the overworked business man, "leave my store full of customers just because it is the hour of prayer?" "What!" cries the professional man, "suspend my important studies for unprofitable religious occupation? Not much!" "What!" cries the mechanic, "work hard all week and Sunday too?" "What shall we do for the hundred talents that are involved?" In such embarrassing situations the thing to do is what Amaziah did. He sent home the men of Ephraim, and he lost the hundred talents of silver. If your business stands between you and God, let it go! III. For I beg you to note that the ALTERNATIVE LIES BETWEEN TOTAL DEFEAT AND INCREASED GOOD. Amaziah was made to select between receiving the value of his invested money and suffering disaster in the prosecution of his scheme. He might do as he pleased, but he might know what to expect. That is the alternative placed before all men. Disobedience leads to defeat. Men may discard the commands of God, but not with impunity. Obedience to the Divine will is the only safeguard against temporal and spiritual disaster. It is a matter that enters into a man's private life. It does not concern those employments alone which are confessedly unrighteous, it is a law affecting the man who persists in a course when God has called him in another direction, as well as he who persists in iniquitous practices. In either case the safest thing to do is to give up the silver, without one hesitating thought. ( Lansing Burrows. ) Consequences A. K. H. Boyd. The subject brought before us in the text is the weighing of consequences. 1. In a certain sense it is the doing of a fool to disdain consequences; and it is the glory of a rational being that he can calculate, and weigh, and be guided by, consequences. 2. And yet there are cases in which to resolutely refuse to take into view what may be the consequences of our conduct, is heroism; is Christianity in its highest and noblest development. Such was the case with the three Jews in Babylon; Moses; Paul. 3. Amaziah's history will make it plain to us, when we should weigh consequences and be guided by them; and when we should disregard them, and refuse to take them into account at all. He was not wrong in naming the money loss to the prophet. He was wrong in regarding this difficulty as a fatal objection to his obeying God's command. He not only states his difficulty, but seems disposed to act upon it. 4. This brings us to the great principle which should guide all wise Christian people in regard to the consideration of consequences. Wherever we are sure that duty leads, wherever we are sure God bids us go, then that way we should go, whatever and however painful the consequences may be. In all other cases a prudent Christian man will weigh the consequences of what he may think of doing, and be guided by the consideration of them. 5. To disdain consequences is not to be done in a boasting, vainglorious spirit. The true proof of a man disdaining consequences is that he should disdain them, not when they are in the distance, coming, but when they are present realities; when they are come. 6. The prophet's reply to the king's difficulty is worthy of being laid to heart: "The Lord is able to give thee much more than this." This means that it is worth our while to obey God's will; that though at first we may lose by doing so, we shall gain more than we shall lose. This truly is not a disdaining of consequences; it is a fuller and truer weighing of them. It is to look further on: it is to throw eternity into the scale of duty and interest. ( A. K. H. Boyd. ) God's power to remunerate Henry Melvill, B.D. I. HOW COMMONLY THE QUESTION IS URGED, "What shall we do for the hundred talents?" We are not of those who would make light of the sacrifices which must be made by such as would live godly in Christ Jesus. Christ speaks of a "yoke," of "taking up the cross," of "forsaking all," of "cutting off the right hand," of "plucking out the right eye." So that the parallel is most exact between the circumstances of ourselves and those of Amaziah. 1. Consider the case of the young who are urged to the remembering of their Creator and the setting of their affections on things above. If by entreaty and warning we prevail on them to hesitate ere they launch on a course of disobedience to God's commands, the thought of all we ask them to surrender comes upon them with great power, and they feel as though it were unreasonable to summon them to such a sacrifice. And therefore their speech is virtually, "What shall we do for the hundred talents?" 2. Take again the case of the tradesman whose interest seems to demand the profanation of the Sabbath. In asking him to close his shop on the day that perhaps procures him more profit than can be wrung from all the rest of the week, you ask him to make what on mere human principles is scarcely a credible sacrifice. II. HOW SUFFICIENT AN ANSWER THERE IS IN THE STATEMENT, "The Lord is able to give thee much more than this." It is the apparent conflict between interest and duty which often induces disobedience to God. Duty and interest can never be really opposed. The righteousness of God's moral government requires that whatever He has made it our duty should also be our interest to perform. But still there is an apparent conflict. This world would cease to be a place of probation if it were always manifest that duty and interest lie in the same direction. When tempted to do wrong for the sake of present advantage, let us magnify the remunerating power of God. If David could say, "Thy Word have I hid in my heart, that I might not sin against Thee," no text can be more suitable than this one for the talisman of the merchant as he prosecutes the enterprises of commerce, "The Lord is able to give thee much more than this." ( Henry Melvill, B.D. ) The claims of duty Henry Melvill, B. D. The claims of duty are stronger even than those of affection. The tenderst tie on earth should never induce us to set them aside. The sense of duty which distinguished some of the patriots of ancient Rome was extraordinary. After the expulsion of King Tarquin, a conspiracy was formed for the purpose of effecting his return. It was found out by the authorities; and it was also found that Titus and Tiberius, the two sons of Brutus, the consul, were the principal conspirators. People naturally speculated as to how the consul would act in the matter; but he put an end to all controversy by condemning his two sons to death along with the rest; nay, on the day of execution, he commanded the sentence of the law to be carried out on them first of all. "But," you may say, "perhaps he did not love his sons as fathers generally do." On the contrary, the crowd who watched his countenance on the occasion could perceive that there was a terrible struggle within; so that they pitied the grief of the father no less than they admired the bravery of the patriot. Here, then, was a man who preferred duty to affection — the safety of his country to the life of his sons. ( Henry Melvill, B. D. ) Now it came to pass, after that Amaziah was come from the slaughter of the Edomites, that he brought the gods of the children of Seir . 2 Chronicles 25:14 Amaziah's apostacy W. H. Bennett, M.A. 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. ( W. H. Bennett, M.A. ) The thistle that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that was in Lebanon. 2 Chronicles 25:18 True and false union J. Lewis. Our parable thus distinguishes between true and false union. The true is inward and real; the false is outward and superficial. The true rests on the fitness of things and on eternal laws; the false relies on the capriciousness of human nature and the ebb and flow of circumstances. The false comes through conquest, coercion, and oppression; the true comes from God, righteousness and liberty. You will find these two kinds of union facing us in all relations of life. Take the history of Christianity in the world. 1. The aim of the Roman Catholic Church has been to create union among all Christians. But, while the aim has been good, the method employed has been bad. The union thus sought has been a false one because it has tried to coerce and compel men to acknowledge the Pope to be the one earthly vicar of Christ. 2. A similar policy has been that of the Established Church of England. As soon as the prayer-book was compiled a series of Acts of Parliament were passed — the Act of Uniformity, etc. — to compel all British subjects to conform to its teaching. An effort was made to establish union by Acts of Parliament. The effort with a right and noble aim has failed because based on false methods. 3. Dissenters have also erred in like manner. At the assembly of Westminster divines a number of eminent Christian men drew up a set of doctrines, which were to be the infallible guide for a section of the followers of Christ. If a carpenter has a certain number of boards to make he gets the wood that is necessary; he takes his measurements; he cuts and planes each board exactly to the size, and length, and breadth, and thickness that he desires; he joins the boards together and makes the box, or floor, or other article as the case may be. All are united to complete the one object intended. But it is impossible for us to apply the word "union" in this sense to intelligent, thinking human beings. You may cut, measure wood and inanimate objects as you please, but here you have to do with "creatures" in whom there is the "Divine gift of reason and free-will." If you wish to unite men under any government, religious or political, you must first appeal to their reason, and leave them free to act as that reason leads them. The only true basis of union among human beings is the "Presence of God" — in other words, righteousness, justice, liberty, and truth. For where righteousness, justice, liberty, and truth are, there God is. The members of a family are united not by bearing the same name, resembling each other in stature and features, but by doing what is right and just to each other, and by loving one another. The members of the Church of Christ are not united by repeating the same creed, by meeting in the same place of worship, by calling themselves by the same name, but by having hearts glowing with love to one Saviour, and by gladly serving their one Lord. The people of a nation are united together not by national prejudices and oppressive laws so much as by their common loyalty to a righteous and just government. ( J. Lewis. ).

25:1-13 Amaziah was no enemy to religion, but cool and indifferent friend. Many do what is good, but not with a perfect heart. Rashness makes work for repentance. But Amaziah's obedience to the command of God was to his honour. A firm belief of God's all-sufficiency to bear us out in our duty, and to make up all the loss and damage was sustain in his service, will make his yoke very easy, and his burden very light. When we are called to part with any thing for God and our religion, it should satisfy us, that God is able to give us much more than this. Convinced sinners, who have not true faith, always object to self-denying obedience. 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. 25:14-16 To worship the gods of those whom Amaziah had conquered, who could not help their own worshippers, was the greatest absurdity. If men would consider how unable all those things are to help them, to which they look whenever they forsake God, they would not be such enemies to themselves. The reproof God sent by a prophet was too just to be answered; themselves. The reproof God sent by a prophet was too just to be answered; but he was bidden not to say a word more. The secure sinner rejoices to have silenced his reprovers and monitors; but what comes of it? Those that are deaf to reproof, are ripening for destruction. 25:17-28 Never was a proud prince more thoroughly mortified than Amaziah by Joash king of Israel. A man's pride will bring him low, Pr 29:23; it goes before his destruction, and deservedly brings it on. He that exalteth himself shall be abased. He that goes forth hastily to strive, will not know what he shall do in the end thereof, when his neighbour has put him to shame, Pr 25:8. And what are we when we offer to establish our own righteousness, or presume to justify ourselves before the Most High God, but despicable thistles, that fancy themselves stately cedars? And are not various temptations, is not every corruption, a wild beast of the desert, which will trample on the wretched boaster, and tread his haughty pretensions to the dust? A man's pride shall bring him low; his ruin may be dated from his turning from the Lord.