Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - 2 King 25:8 - 25:8
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. The people carried away to Babel (cf. Jer 52:12-27, and Jer 39:8-10). - In this section we have first a general account of the destruction of the temple and city (2Ki 25:8-10), and of the carrying away of the people (2Ki 25:11 and 2Ki 25:12), and then a more particular description of what was done with the metal vessels of the temple (2Ki 25:13-17), and how the spiritual and secular leaders of the people who had been taken prisoners were treated (2Ki 25:18-21).
2Ki 25:8-10
The destruction of Jerusalem, by the burning of the temple, of the king's palace, and of all the larger buildings, and by throwing down the walls, was effected by Nebuzaradan, the chief of the body-guard of Nebuchadnezzar, on the seventh day of the fifth month in the nineteenth year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. Instead of the seventh day we have the tenth in Jer 52:12. This difference might be reconciled, as proposed by earlier commentators, on the assumption that the burning of the city lasted several days, commencing on the seventh and ending on the tenth. But since there are similar differences met with afterwards (2Ki 25:17, 2Ki 25:19) in the statement of numbers, which can only be accounted for from the substitution of similar numeral letters, we must assume that there is a change of this kind here. Which of the two dates is the correct one it is impossible to determine. The circumstance that the later Jews kept the ninth as a fast-day cannot be regarded as decisive evidence in favour of the date given in Jeremiah, as Thenius supposes; for in Zec 7:3 and Zec 8:19 the fasting of the fifth month is mentioned, but no day is given; and though in the Talmudic times the ninth day of the month began to be kept as a fast-day, this was not merely in remembrance of the Chaldaean destruction of Jerusalem, but of the Roman also, and of three other calamities which had befallen the nation (see the statement of the Gemara on this subject in Lightfoot, Opp. ii. p. 139, ed. Leusden, and in Köhler on Zec 7:3), from which we see that the Gemarists in the most unhistorical manner grouped together different calamitous events in one single day. The nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar corresponds to the eleventh of Zedekiah (see at 2Ki 24:12). Nebuzaradan is not mentioned in Jer 39:3 among the Chaldaean generals who forced their way into the city, so that he must have been ordered to Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar after the taking of the city and the condemnation of Zedekiah, to carry out the destruction of the city, the carrying away of the people, and the appointment of a deputy-governor over those who were left behind in the land. This explains in a very simple manner how a month could intervene between their forcing their way into the city, at all events into the lower city, and the burning of it to the ground, without there being any necessity to assume, with Thenius, that the city of Zion held out for a month, which is by no means probable, for the simple reason that the fighting men had fled with Zedekiah and had been scattered in their flight. רַב־תַבָּחִים = הַטַּבָּחִים שַׂר in Gen 37:36; Gen 39:1, was with the Babylonians, as with the Egyptians, the chief of the king's body-guard, whose duty it was to execute the sentences of death (see at Gen 37:36). הַטַּבָּחִים answers to the הַכְּרֵתִי of the Israelites (2Sa 8:18, etc.). In Jer 52:12 we have מֶלֶךְ לִפְנֵי עָמַד instead of מֶלֶךְ עֶבֶד, without the אֲשֶׁר, which is rarely omitted in prose, and בִּירוּשָׁלַםִ instead of יְרוּשָׁלַםִ: he came into Jerusalem, not he forced a way into the real Jerusalem (Thenius). The meaning is not altered by these two variations.
2Ki 25:9-10
By the words, “every great house,” יר כָּל־בָּתֵּי אֵת is more minutely defined: not all the houses to the very last, but simply all the large houses he burned to the very last, together with the temple and the royal palaces. The victors used one portion of the dwelling-houses for their stay in Jerusalem. He then had all the walls of the city destroyed. In Jeremiah כֹּל is omitted before חֹומֹת, as not being required for the sense; and also the אֵת before טַבָּחִים רַב, which is indispensable to the sense, and has fallen out through a copyist's oversight.
2Ki 25:11-12
The rest of the people he led away, both those who had been left behind in the city and the deserters who had gone over to the Chaldaeans, and the remnant of the multitude. הֶֽהָמֹון יֶתֶר, for which we have הָאָמֹון יֶתֶר in Jer 52:15, has been interpreted in various ways. As אָמֹון signifies an artist or artificer in Pro 8:30, and הָעָם יֶתֶר has just preceded it, we might be disposed to give the preference to the reading הָאָמֹון, as Hitzig and Graf have done, and understand by it the remnant of the artisans, who were called וְהַמַּסְגֵּר הֶֽחָרָשׁ in 2Ki 24:14, 2Ki 24:16. But this view is precluded by Jer 39:9, where we find הַנִּשְׁאָרִים הָעָם יֶתֶר instead of הָאָמֹון יֶתֶר or הֶֽהָמֹון .י These words cannot be set aside by the arbitrary assumption that they crept into the text through a copyist's error; for the assertion that they contain a purposeless repetition is a piece of dogmatical criticism, inasmuch as there is a distinction drawn in Jer 39:9 between בָּעִיר הַנִּשְׁאָרִים הָעָם יֶתֶר הָעָם הַןִּ and הַנִּשְׁאָרִים הָעָם יֶתֶר. Consequently הָאָמֹון is simply another form for הֶֽהָמֹון (ה and א being interchanged) in the sense of a mass of people, and we have simply the choice left between two interpretations. Either בָּעִיר הַנִּשְׁאָרִים הָעָם יֶתֶר means the fighting people left in the city, as distinguished from the deserters who had fled to the Chaldaeans, and הָאָמֹון = הֶֽהָמֹון יֶתֶר in Jer 52:15, or הַנִּשְׁאָרִים הָעָם יֶתֶר in Jer 39:9, the rest of the inhabitants of Jerusalem; or בָּעִיר הנּשׁ הָעָם יֶתֶר is the people left in Jerusalem (warriors and non-warriors), and הֶֽהָמֹון יֶתֶר the rest of the population of the land outside Jerusalem. The latter is probably the preferable view, not only because full justice is thereby done to בָּעִיר in the first clause, but also because it is evident from the exception mentioned in 2Ki 25:12 that the deportation was not confined to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, but extended to the population of the whole land. The “poor people,” whom he allowed to remain in the land as vine-dressers and husbandmen, were the common people, or people without property, not merely in Jerusalem, but throughout the whole land. הָאָרֶץ דַּלַּת = עַם־הָאָרֶץ דַּלַּת (2Ki 24:14). Instead of מִדַּלַּת we have in Jeremiah מִדַּלֹּות: the plural used in an abstract sense, “the poverty,” i.e., the lower people, “the poor who had nothing” (Jer 39:10). Instead of the Chethîb לְגָבִים from גּוּב, secuit, aravit, the Keri has לְיֹגְבִים from יָגַב, in the same sense, after Jer 52:16.
2Ki 25:13-17
The brazen vessels of the temple were broken in pieces, and the brass, and smaller vessels of brass, silver, and gold, were carried away. Compare Jer 52:17-23, where several other points are mentioned that have been passed over in the account before us. The pillars of brass (see 1Ki 7:15.), the stands (see 1Ki 7:27.), and the brazen sea (1Ki 7:23.), were broken in pieces, because it would have been difficult to carry these colossal things away without breaking them up. On the smaller vessels used in the worship (2Ki 25:14) see 1Ki 7:40. In Jer 52:18 הַמִּזְרָקֹת are also mentioned. 2Ki 25:15 is abridged still more in contrast with Jer 52:19, and only הַמַּחְתֹּות and הַמִּזְרָקֹות are mentioned, whereas in Jeremiah six different things are enumerated beside the candlesticks. כֶּסֶף...זָהָב אֲשֶׁר, “what was of gold, gold, what was of silver, silver, the captain of the guard took away,” is a comprehensive description of the objects carried away. To this there is appended a remark in 2Ki 25:16 concerning the quantity of the brass of the large vessels, which was so great that it could not be weighed; and in 2Ki 25:17 a supplementary notice respecting the artistic work of the two pillars of brass. וגו הָעַמּוּדִים is placed at the head absolutely: as for the pillars, etc., the brass of all these vessels was not to be weighed. In Jer 52:20, along with the brazen sea, the twelve brazen oxen under it are mentioned; and in the description of the pillars of brass (Jer 52:21.) there are several points alluded to which are omitted in our books, not only here, but also in 1Ki 7:16. For the fact itself see the explanation given there. The omission of the twelve oxen in so condensed an account as that contained in our text does not warrant the inference that these words in Jeremiah are a spurious addition made by a later copyist, since the assumption that Ahaz sent the brazen oxen to king Tiglath-pileser cannot be proved from 2Ki 16:17. Instead of אַמָּה שָׁלֹשׁ we must read אַמֹּת הָמִשׁ, five cubits, according to Jer 52:22 and 1Ki 7:16. The עַל־הַשְּׂבָכָה at the end of the verse is very striking, since it stands quite alone, and when connected with וגו וְכָאֵלֶּה does not appear to yield any appropriate sense, as the second pillar was like the first not merely with regard to the trellis-work, but in its form and size throughout. At the same time, it is possible that the historian intended to give especial prominence to the similarity of the two pillars with reference to this one point alone.
2Ki 25:18-21
(cf. Jer 52:24-27). The principal officers of the temple and city, and sixty men of the population of the land, who were taken at the destruction of Jerusalem, Nebuzaradan sent to his king at Riblah, where they were put to death. Seraiah, the high priest, is the grandfather or great-grandfather of Ezra the scribe (Ezr 7:1; 1Ch 6:14). Zephaniah, a priest of the second rank (מִשְׁנֶה כֹּהֵן; in Jer. הַמִּשְׁנֶה כֹּהֵן: see at 2Ki 23:4), is probably the same person as the son of Maaseiah, who took a prominent place among the priests, according to Jer 21:1; Jer 29:25., and Jer 37:3. The “three keepers of the threshold” are probably the three superintendents of the Levites, whose duty it was to keep guard over the temple, and therefore were among the principal officers of the sanctuary.
2Ki 25:19-21
From the city, i.e., from the civil authorities of the city, Nebuzaradan took a king's chamberlain (סָרִיס), who was commander of the men of war. Instead of פָקִיד הוּא אֲשֶׁר we find in Jer 52:25 /הָיָה אֲשֶׁר, who had been commander, with an allusion to the fact that his official function had terminated when the city was conquered. “And five (according to Jeremiah seven) men of those who saw the king's face,” i.e., who belonged to the king's immediate circle, de intimis consiliariis regis, and “the scribe of the commander-in-chief, who raised the people of the land for military service,” or who enrolled them. Although הַסֹּפֵר has the article, which is omitted in Jeremiah, the following words הַצָּבָא שַׂר are governed by it, or connected with it in the construct state (Ewald, §290 d.). הַצָּבָא שַׂר is the commander-in-chief of the whole of the military forces, and וגו הַמַּצְבִּא a more precise definition of הַסֹּפֵר, and not of הַצָּבָא שַׂר, which needed no such definition. “And sixty men of the land-population who were found in the city.” They were probably some of the prominent men of the rural districts, or they may have taken a leading part in the defence of the city, and therefore were executed in Riblah, and not merely deported with the rest of the people. - The account of the destruction of the kingdom of Judah closes with יְהוּדָה וַיִּגֶּל in 2Ki 25:21, “thus was Judah carried away out of its own land;” and in 2Ki 25:22-26 there follows merely a brief notice of those who had been left behind in the land, in the place of which we find in Jer 52:28-30 a detailed account of the number of those who were carried away.